{"id": "277", "text": "My super fund and I would say many other funds give you one free switch of strategies per year.  Some suggest you should change from high growth option to a more balance option once you are say about 10 to 15 years from retirement, and then change to a more capital guaranteed option a few years from retirement. This is a more passive approach and has benefits as well as disadvantages. The benefit is that there is not much work involved, you just change your investment option based on your life stage, 2 to 3 times during your lifetime. This allows you to take more risk when you are young to aim for higher returns, take a balanced approach with moderate risk and returns during the middle part of your working life, and take less risk with lower returns (above inflation) during the latter part of your working life. A possible disadvantage of this strategy is you may be in the higher risk/ higher growth option during a market correction and then change to a more balanced option just when the market starts to pick up again. So your funds will be hit with large losses whilst the market is in retreat and just when things look to be getting better you change to a more balanced portfolio and miss out on the big gains. A second more active approach would be to track the market and change investment option as the market changes. One approach which shouldn't take much time is to track the index such as the ASX200 (if you investment option is mainly invested in the Australian stock market) with a 200 day Simple Moving Average (SMA). The concept is that if the index crosses above the 200 day SMA the market is bullish and if it crosses below it is bearish. See the chart below:  This strategy will work well when the market is trending up or down but not very well when the market is going sideways, as you will be changing from aggressive to balanced and back too often. Possibly a more appropriate option would be a combination of the two. Use the first passive approach to change investment option from aggressive to balanced to capital guaranteed with your life stages, however use the second active approach to time the change. For example, if you were say in your late 40s now and were looking to change from aggressive to balanced in the near future, you could wait until the ASX200 crosses below the 200 day SMA before making the change. This way you could capture the majority of the uptrend (which could go on for years) before changing from the high growth/aggressive option to the balanced option. If you where after more control over your superannuation assets another option open to you is to start a SMSF, however I would recommend having at least $300K to $400K in assets before starting a SMSF, or else the annual costs would be too high as a percentage of your total super assets."}
{"id": "294", "text": "US government bonds are where money goes when the markets are turbulent and investors are fleeing from risk, and that applies even if the risk is a downgrade of the US credit rating, because there's simply nowhere else to put your money if you're in search of safety. Most AAA-rated governments have good credit ratings because they don't borrow much money (and most of them also have fairly small economies compared with the US), meaning that there's poor liquidity in their scarce bonds."}
{"id": "330", "text": "\"As long as the losing business is not considered \"\"passive activity\"\" or \"\"hobby\"\", then yes. Passive Activity is an activity where you do not have to actively do anything to generate income. For example - royalties or rentals. Hobby is an activity that doesn't generate profit. Generally, if your business doesn't consistently generate profit (the IRS looks at 3 out of the last 5 years), it may be characterized as hobby. For hobby, loss deduction is limited by the hobby income and the 2% AGI threshold.\""}
{"id": "343", "text": "The only reason I can think of would be if you were convinced that you couldn't hold on to your money. Treasury Bonds are often viewed as very safe investments, and often used in some situations where cash isn't appropriate.. Also, they typically have a somewhat patriotic theme, helping your country to grow. In addition, many people don't really pay attention to the rate of the bonds, but are just investing in them. The more people investing in them, the lower the yields become. But the bottom line is, I would invest in a savings account any day over a negative interest rate... And it looks like I'm in good company as well, a quick study of reports seems to indicate that these are a very bad investment..."}
{"id": "589", "text": "So does a post-dated check have any valid use in a business or   personal transaction? Does it provide any financial or legal   protections at all? Yes, most definitely. You're writing a future date on the check, not past, to ensure that the check will not be deposited before that day. Keep in mind that this may change from place to place, since not every country has the same rules. In the US, for example, such trick would not work since the check may be presented any time and is not a limited obligation. However, in some other countries banks will not pay a check presented before the date written on it. While in the US the date on the check is the date on which it was (supposedly) written and as such is meaningless for obligation purposes, in many other countries the date on the check is the date on which the payment to be made, thus constitutes the start of the commitment and payment will not be made before that date. For example, in Canada: If you write a post-dated cheque, under the clearing rules of the   Canadian Payments Association (CPA), your cheque should not be cashed   before the date that is written on it. If the post-dated cheque is cashed early, you can ask your financial   institution to put the money back into your account up to the day   before the cheque should have been cashed."}
{"id": "1001", "text": "\"Not necessarily.  The abbreviation \"\"ESOP\"\" is ambiguous.  There are at least 8 variations I know of: You'll find references on Google to each of those, some more than others.  For fun you can even substitute the word \"\"Executive\"\" for \"\"Employee\"\" and I'm sure you'll find more.  Really. So you may be mistaken about the \"\"O\"\" referring to \"\"options\"\" and thereby implying it must be about options.  Or, you may be right.  If you participate in such a plan (or program) then check the documentation and then you'll know what it stands for, and how it works.  That being said: companies can have either kind of incentive plan: one that issues stock, or one that issues options, with the intent to eventually issue stock in exchange for the option exercise price. When options are issued, they usually do have an expiration date by which you need to exercise if you want to buy the shares. There may be other conditions attached. For instance, whether the plan is about stocks or options, often there is a vesting schedule that determines when you become eligible to buy or exercise. When you buy the shares, they may be registered directly in your name (you might get a fancy certificate), or they may be deposited in an account in your name. If the company is small and private, the former may be the case, and if public, the latter may be the case. Details vary. Check the plan's documentation and/or with its administrators.\""}
{"id": "1011", "text": "\"You will be filing the exact same form you've been filing until now (I hope...) which is called form 1040. Attached to it, you'll add a \"\"Schedule C\"\" form and \"\"Schedule SE\"\" form. Keep in mind the potential effect of the tax and totalization treaties the US has with the UK which may affect your filings. I suggest you talk to a licensed EA/CPA who works with expats in the UK and is familiar with all the issues. There are several prominent offices you can find by Googling.\""}
{"id": "1203", "text": "When you want to short a stock, you are trying to sell shares (that you are borrowing from your broker), therefore you need buyers for the shares you are selling.  The ask prices represent people who are trying to sell shares, and the bid prices represent people who are trying to buy shares. Using your example, you could put in a limit order to short (sell) 1000 shares at $3.01, meaning that your order would become the ask price at $3.01.  There is an ask price ahead of you for 500 shares at $3.00.  So people would have to buy those 500 shares at $3.00 before anyone could buy your 1000 shares at $3.01. But it's possible that your order to sell 1000 shares at $3.01 never gets filled, if the buyers don't buy all the shares ahead of you.  The price could drop to $1.00 without hitting $3.01 and you will have missed out on the trade. If you really wanted to short 1000 shares, you could use a market order.  Let's say there's a bid for 750 shares at $2.50, and another bid for 250 shares at $2.49.  If you entered a market order to sell 1000 shares, your order would get filled at the best bid prices, so first you would sell 750 shares at $2.50 and then you would sell 250 shares at $2.49. I was just using your example to explain things.  In reality there won't be such a wide spread between the bid and ask prices.  A stock might have a bid price of $10.50 and an ask price of $10.51, so there would only be a 1 cent difference between putting in a limit order to sell 1000 shares at $10.51 and just using a market order to sell 1000 shares and getting them filled at $10.50. Also, your example probably wouldn't work in real life, because brokers typically don't allow people to short stocks that are trading under $5 per share. As for your question about how often you are unable to make a short sale, it can sometimes happen with stocks that are heavily shorted and your broker may not be able to find any more shares to borrow. Also remember that you can only short stocks with a margin account, you cannot short stocks with a cash account."}
{"id": "1219", "text": "You can contribute to a Traditional IRA instead of a Roth.  The main difference is a contribution to a Roth is made with after tax money but at retirement you can withdraw the money tax free.  With a Traditional IRA your contribution is tax-deductible but at retirement the withdrawal is not tax free.  This is why most people prefer a Roth if they can contribute. You can also contribute to your work's 401k plan assuming they have one.  And you can always save for retirement in a regular account."}
{"id": "1699", "text": "\"The TWRR calculation will work even with negative values: TWRR = (1 + 0.10) x (1 + (-0.191) ) x (1 + 0.29) ^ (1/3) = 1.047 which is a 4.7% return. Your second question concerns the -19% return calculated for the second quarter.  You seem to think this return is \"\"way-off\"\".  Not really.  The TWRR calculates a return by accounting for cash that was added or deducted to/from the account.  So if I started with $100,000, added $10,000 to the account, and ended up with $110,000, what should be the return on my investment?  My answer would be 0% since the only reason my account balance went up was due to me adding cash to it.  Therefore, if I started with $100,000, added $10,000 in cash to the account, and ended up with $100,000 in my account, then my return would be a negative value since I lost the $10,000 that I deposited in the account. In the second quarter you started with $15,000, deposited $4,000, and ended with $15,750.  You essentially lost almost all of the $4,000 you deposited.  That is a significant loss.\""}
{"id": "1982", "text": "Left out, of course, is the fact that this is Argentina's eighth default, because its policymakers are complete nincompoops, and the fact that, instead of not paying anybody by complying with the ruling, it could probably have struck a deal with NML to pay them the principal and interest (or a bit less, if they were decent negotiators) by waiting until December when a bond clause expires that states Argentina can't willingly pay less to some creditors than others. The blame isn't all Argentina's, but there's a reason why this sort of stuff doesn't happen in literally any other country in Latin America on such a regular basis."}
{"id": "2003", "text": "\"While I haven't experienced being \"\"grad student poor\"\" myself (I went to grad school at night and worked full-time), I would shoot for 10-20% per month ($150-$300).  This depends of course on how much you currently have in savings.  If it isn't much, you might want to attempt a higher savings percentage (30-40%). If you can move to a less-expensive place, do that as soon as you can.  It's your largest expense; any place you can spend less on than $900 creates instance savings without having to sacrifice what you categorize as living expenses.\""}
{"id": "2018", "text": "\"As i see it, with a debit card, they   are taken kinda out of the game. They   are not lending money, it seems really   bad for them. Not exactly. It is true that they're not lending money, but they charge a hefty commission from the retailers for each swipe which is pure profit with almost no risk. One of the proposals considered (or maybe approved already, don't know) in Congress is to cap that hefty commission, which will really make the debit cards merely a service for the checking account holder, rather than a profit maker for the bank. On the other hand, it's   definitely good for individuals. I disagree with that. Debit cards are easier to use than checks, but they provide much less protection than credit cards. Here's what I had to say on this a while ago, and seems like the community agrees. But, why do we really need a credit   history to buy some of the more   expensive stuff Because the system is broken. It rewards people in debt by giving them more opportunities to get into even more debts, while people who owe nothing to noone cannot get a credit when they do need one. With the current system the potential creditor can only asses the risk of someone who has debt already, they have no way of assessing risks of someone with no debts. To me, all this credit card system   seems like an awfully nice way to make   loads of money, backed by governments   as well. Well, credit cards have nothing to do with it. It's the credit scores system that is broken. If we replace the \"\"card\"\" with \"\"score\"\" in your question - then yes, you're thinking correctly. That of course is true for the US, in other countries I have no knowledge on how the creditors assess the risks.\""}
{"id": "2064", "text": "8 hard inquiries spread over two years is not a negative factor, with a score of 750. Real question #1: How much of your credit limits are you currently using? Less than 30% of your credit limits is good. Less than 15% is even better, 10% is great You don't need to wait X amount of days after applying for a mortgage or a card to increase your chances of getting approved for something else. You do need to be conscious of how many hard pulls you have done in a reporting period though, but again as I said, 8 spread over two years is not a whole lot. Real question #2: What negative things do you have in your credit history? Young age, income, delinquent payments, bankruptcies, low limits? Some of these negative factors are catch-22's (low limits, young age = low limits because of age and young credit history)  but these contribute to how much institutions would be willing to lend you"}
{"id": "2286", "text": "If your uncle is looking to maintain life insurance coverage for specific shorter period of time he may want to look into hybrid life insurance. If you buy a hybrid universal life policy, the premium and death benefit can be guaranteed to last until any age. Since, most permanent policies focus on cash value accumulation it is hard for most people to find cheap whole life or affordable universal life. Consumers only looking for a longer duration have a more flexible choice with a new hybrid product that combines elements of both term life coverage and universal life. Hybrid universal  policies are much cheaper then other permanent coverage such as whole life coverage because they do not emphasize cash value accumulation. However, the premiums and death benefits can still be guaranteed to a specific age (i.e. 85, 90, 95, 100). So, premiums can be scaled to coordinate with your desired budget and the face amount required for your family. Typical universal life and whole life insurance contracts only allow for lifetime coverage. However, hybrid universal life offers a much smaller premium because the coverage can be dialed into a specific age. If the policyholder does live beyond the originally selected age, the death benefit will simply begin getting smaller, while the original premium will  continue to remain the same."}
{"id": "2519", "text": "\"The first thing I'd do is to find out your credit (FICO) score.  If you have a good one, try to get another card with a lower rate. Then call up the lender, point to your good score, and your alternatives. If you have a bad score, do nothing. \"\"Let sleeping dogs lie.\"\"\""}
{"id": "2528", "text": "This is essentially a reimbursement of your expense. Since you can deduct the expense, the fact that the reimbursement is taxable doesn't affect you much. You deduct your home office expenses on your annual tax return using form 8829. See the IRS site for more details. If you're asking about the UK tax, there may be some other considerations, but from the US tax perspective it is (nearly) a wash."}
{"id": "2633", "text": "\"This is analyst speak for \"\"the stock isn't going anywhere anytime soon\"\". Remember these guys are offering advice to the entire universe in a few lines, so the advice gets fortune cookie-like. When I look at these things, I care more about when the analyst changes their opinion more than what the opinion is. If you really trust this person, you should listen to the earnings call for the stock (or read the transcript) and listen for the questions asked by the analyst. Usually you'll be able to understand why the analyst feels the way he does.\""}
{"id": "2653", "text": "I would not sell unless the stock is starting to fall in price. If you are a long term investor you can review the weekly chart on a weekly basis to determine if the stock is still up-trending. Regarding HD below is a weekly chart for the last 4 years:  Basically if the price is making Higher Highs (HH) and Higher Lows (HL) it is up-trending. If it starts to make Lower Lows (LL) followed by Lower Highs (LH) then the uptrend is over and the stock could be entering a downtrend. With HD, the price has been up-trending but seems to now be hitting some headwinds. It has been making some HHs followed by some HLs throughout the last 2 years. It did make a LL in late August 2015 but then recovered nicely to make a new HH, so the uptrend was not broken. In early November 2016 it made another LL but this time it seems to be followed by a LH in mid-December 2016. This could be clear evidence that the uptrend may be ending. The final confirmation would be if the price drops below the early November low of $119.20 (the orange line). If price drops below this price it would be confirmation that the uptrend is over and this should be the point at which you should sell your HD shares. You could place an automatic stop loss order just below $119.20 so that you don't even need to monitor the stock frequently. Another indication that the uptrend may be in trouble is the divergence between the HHs of the price and the peaks of a momentum indicator (in this case the MACD). The two sloping red lines show that the price made HHs in April and August 2016 whilst the momentum indicator made LHs at these peaks in the price. As the lines are sloping in different directions it is demonstrating negative divergence, which means that the momentum of the uptrend is slowing down and can act as an early warning system to be more cautious in the near future. So the question you could be asking is when is a good time to sell out of HD (or at least some of your HD to rebalance)? Why sell something that is still increasing in price? Only sell if you can determine that the price will not be increasing anymore in the near to medium term."}
{"id": "2718", "text": "The Canada Revenue Agency does indeed put out just the guide you want. It's at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/rc4070/rc4070-e.html - you should always take a good look at URLs to make sure they're really from the government and not from some for-profit firm that will charge you to fill out forms for free services. It covers ways to structure your business (probably a sole proprietor in your case), collecting and submitting GST or HST, sending in payroll remittances (if you pay yourself a T4 salary), and income tax including what you can deduct. It's a great place to start and you can use it as a source of keywords if you want to search for more details."}
{"id": "2830", "text": "If you are tired of acting as the bank after selling your Real Estate and owner-financing the loan with a promissory note, we can offer a sound and painless exit strategy today. We can fund the purchase in as little as 15 business days. We at Cash Note USA buy Real Estate Promissory Notes Nationwide. We Purchase Owner Financed Mortgage, Land Contract, Contract For Deed, Deed Of Trust, Private Mortgages, Secured Notes, Business Notes, Commercial Notes and Partial Notes and many kinds of seller carry back mortgage notes. Convert Real Estate Note To Cash Now.Sell Your Mortgage Note Fast & get More Cash For Your Note. You will get a Fair Offer Within 24 Hours.Get your Note cashed today!    Cash Note USA is a note buyer all over the nation. Convert your mortgage payments into cash. Simple closing process. We buy Promissory Notes, Real Estate Trust Deeds, Seller Carry Back Notes, Land Contract, Contract for Deed, Privately Help Notes, Commercial Mortgage Notes & Business Promissory Notes.   Contact Us: Cash Note USA 1307 W.6th St.Suite 219N, Corona, CA 92882 888-297-4099 cashnoteusa@gmail.com http://cashnoteusa.com/"}
{"id": "2860", "text": "\"I'm not aware that any US bank has any way to access your credit rating in France (especially as you basically don't have one!). In the US, banks are not the only way to get finance for a home.  In many regions, there are plenty of \"\"owner financed\"\" or \"\"Owner will carry\"\" homes.  For these, the previous owner will provide a private mortgage for the balance if you have a large (25%+) downpayment.  No strict lending rules, no fancy credit scoring systems, just a large enough downpayment so they know they'll get their money back if they have to foreclose.  For the seller, it's a way to shift a house that is hard to sell plus get a regular income. Often this mortgage is for only 3-10 years, but that gives you the time to establish more credit and then refinance.  Maybe the interest rate is a little higher also, but again it's just until you can refinance to something better (or sell other assets then pay the loan off quick). For new homes, the builders/developers may offer similar finance. For both owner-will-carry and developer finance, a large deposit will trump any credit rating concerns.  There is usually a simplified foreclosure process, so they're not really taking much of a risk, so can afford to be flexible. Make sure the owner mortgage is via a title company, trust company, or escrow company, so that there's a third party involved to ensure each party lives up to their obligations.\""}
{"id": "2890", "text": "\"MBS is a fairly general term \"\"Mortgage Backed Securities\"\" which simply means that the bond is collateralized with mortgages.  Pass throughs are a type of MBS that is untranched: all bond holders of the deal are receiving the same interest and principal payments, there is no senior or subordinate class of bonds.   Agency passthroughs bond holders receive any principal and interest payments paid by the loans in the pool, minus a slice of the interest payment that pays billing and insurance fees (servicing and guarantee fees, usually a .5% slice of the mortgage interest rate).  On agency product (including Ginnies), if a loan defaults it will be bought out of the pool, with the bondholder receiving all of the expected principal and any interest due on the loan.  Agency deals with different classes of bonds are usually called REMICs.  Passthrough may also be split into  principal-only (PO) and interest-only (IO) pieces.   There is also a huge forward market in soon-to-be-issued passthroughs called the TBA market.  Ginnie Mae has two slightly different programs referred to as Ginnie I and Ginnie II.  Ginnie also has commercial and construction loan financial products.  Freddie and Fannie have the same type of financial products as Ginnie, but there are differences in the sort of loans that Ginnie has vs the other agencies, as well as subtle minor differences between the contract terms of the securities.  Ginnie is also more explicitly guaranteed by the federal government.  You may want to look at:  http://www.ginniemae.gov/index.asp (especially the \"\"For Investors\"\" and \"\"For Issuers\"\" sections.)  Wikipedia's MBS may be more clear than my description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage-backed_security#Types\""}
{"id": "2996", "text": "Yes, the borrower is responsible for paying back the full amount of the loan. Foreclosure gives the bank possession of the property, which they can (and do) sell. Any shortfall is still the borrower's responsibility. But, no, the bank can't sell the property for a dollar; they have to make a reasonable effort. Usually the sale is done through a sheriff's sale, that is, a more or less carefully supervised auction. Bankruptcy will wipe out the shortfall, and most other debts, but the downside is that most of the rest of your assets will also be sold to help pay off what you owe. Details of what you can keep vary from state to state. If you want to go this route, hire a lawyer."}
{"id": "3040", "text": "It is basically the same situation what US was when the crash happened. People took on debt without the means to pay, even with awful credit records. But the problem isn't the debt people take on themselves, but with the limited disposable income they have how efficiently can their debts be serviced. And how do banks who lend out money can recover their money. When banks lend money to all and sundry, they have to take care of defaults and that is when financial wizardry comes into play. In US people have the option to default on their debt and refinance it, so banks assumed default and tried to hedge their risks. If this is an option in Australia, be ready for a crash else not to worry about much. If banks continue lending expect higher inflation rates, higher interest rates and maybe a downgrade of bonds issued by the Australian government. Higher import costs and a boom in exports because of devalued Australian dollar."}
{"id": "3095", "text": "What is essential is that company you are selling is transparent enough. Because it will provide additional liquidity to market. When I decide to sell, I drop all volume once at a time. Liquidation price will be somewhat worse then usual. But being out of position will save you nerves for future thinking where to step in again. Cold head is best you can afford in such scenario. In very large crashes, there could be large liquidity holes. But if you are on upper side of sigmoid, you will be profiting from selling before that holes appear. Problem is, nobody could predict if market is on upper-fall, mid-fall or down-fall at any time."}
{"id": "3173", "text": "No. An employer is legally obliged to deduct taxes from your pay cheque and send them to the IRS. The only way round that is to either provide evidence of deductions that would reduce your tax bill to nothing, or to become self-employed."}
{"id": "3279", "text": "Most mutual funds underperform the stock market.  Of those that over-perform, much of the performance can be attributed to dumb luck.  Most mutual funds exist to generate fees from you, rather than make you wealthy.  In my opinion, if you want to invest in one, choose a no-load index fund, and you will outperform most other funds.  Better still get some good financial education and learn to manage your funds/investments yourself."}
{"id": "3315", "text": "I'll have to think it through, but at the very least unless your debt is a pure discount instrument and  you are using cash flows, some if that money IS getting paid during those 5 years. As in if you are using earnings, they pay p&i. Or if earnings and pure discount instruments, then amortized interest (I think, been a while).  You see the actual numbers and know what you are trying to do, but I'm a little lost. Are you building a discount model with a multiple terminal and using ev as the multiple? Are you using free cash flow to firm for the discounting? I'm guessing that's the case."}
{"id": "3763", "text": "Thanks to the online world, check ordering is much easier and less expensive.On our CheckOrdering.net website, we will show you the most effective way to check ordering.  You\u2019ll be able to order checks for personal or business use. you will not need to concern yourself with having someone else do this once arduous task."}
{"id": "3789", "text": "Based on the definitions I found on Investopedia, it depends on whether or not it is going against an asset or a liability.  I am not sure what type of accounting you are performing, but I know in my personal day-to-day dealings credits are money coming into my account and debits are money going out of my account. Definition: Credit, Definition: Debit"}
{"id": "4044", "text": "Just to offer another alternative, consider Certificates of Deposit (CDs) at an FDIC insured bank or credit union for small or short-term investments. If you don't need access to the money, as stated, and are not willing to take much risk, you could put money into a number of CDs instead of investing it in stocks, or just letting it sit in a regular savings/checking account. You are essentially lending money to the bank for a guaranteed length of time (anywhere from 3 to 60 months), and therefore they can give you a better rate of return than a savings account (which is basically lending it to them with the condition that you could ask for it all back at any time). Your rate of return in CDs is lower a typical stock investment, but carries no risk at all. CD rates typically increase with the length of the CD. For example, my credit union currently offers a 2.3% APY on a 5-year CD, but only 0.75% for 12 month CDs, and a mere 0.1% APY on regular savings/checking accounts. Putting your full $10K deposit into one or more CDs would yield $230 a year instead of a mere $10 in their savings account. If you go this route with some or all of your principal, note that withdrawing the money from a CD before the end of the deposit term will mean forfeiting the interest earned. Some banks may let you withdraw just a portion of a CD, but typically not. Work around this by splitting your funds into multiple CDs, and possibly different term lengths as well, to give you more flexibility in accessing the funds. Personally, I have a rolling emergency fund (~6 months living expenses, separate from all investments and day-to-day income/expenses) split evenly among 5 CDs, each with a 5-year deposit term (for the highest rate) with evenly staggered maturity dates. In any given year, I could close one of these CDs to cover an emergency and lose only a few months of interest on just 20% of my emergency fund, instead of several years interest on all of it. If I needed more funds, I could withdraw more of the CDs as needed, in order of youngest deposit age to minimize the interest loss - although that loss would probably be the least of my worries by then, if I'm dipping deeply into these funds I'll be needing them pretty badly.  Initially I created the CDs with a very small amount and differing term lengths (1 year increments from 1-5 years) and then as each matured, I rolled it back into a 5 year CD. Now every year when one matures, I add a little more principal (to account for increased living expenses), and roll everything back in for another 5 years. Minimal thought and effort, no risk, much higher return than savings, fairly liquid (accessible) in an emergency, and great peace of mind. Plus it ensures I don't blow the money on something else, and that I have something to fall back on if all my other investments completely tanked, or I had massive medical bills, or lost my job, etc."}
{"id": "4153", "text": "Congratulations on being in such good financial state.  You have a few investment choices. If you want very low risk, you are talking bonds or CDs. With the prime rate so low, nobody is paying anything useful for very low risk investments.  However, my opinion is that given your finances, you should consider taking on a little more risk. A good step is a index fund, which is designed to mirror the performance of a stock index such as the S&P 500. That may be volatile in the short-term, but is likely to be a good investment in the longer term. I am not a fan of non-index mutual funds; in general the management charge makes them a less attractive investment.  The next step up is investing in individual stocks, which can provide very big gains or very big losses.  The Motley fool site (www.fool.com) has a lot of information about investing overall."}
{"id": "4444", "text": "\"I'd answer it this way:  What do you want to do? I'd say any amount is acceptable from as low as $100.  When you look at the specific \"\"tree\"\" of investing paying $5 for a $100 seems unacceptable.  However when observing the \"\"forest\"\" what does it matter if you \"\"waste\"\" $5 on a commission?  Your friends (and maybe you) probably waste more than $5 multiple times per day.  For them buying a latte might empower them, if buying another share of HD, for a similar cost, empowers you than do it.  In the end who will be better off? Studies show that the more important part of building a significant investment portfolio is actually doing it.  Rate of return and the cost of investing pales in comparison to actually doing it.  How many of your peers are doing similar things?  You are probably in very rare company. If it makes you happy, it is a wonderful way to spend your money.\""}
{"id": "4845", "text": "This is a Short Diagonal Calender Put Spread Generally, you're writing that long dated one at the money, and buying the short dated one out of the money.  The maximum amount that can be made is if the stock breaks out strongly to the upside, and you keep the upfront credit minus whatever small amount it took to buy the April puts back.  You can also make money if it breaks strongly to the downside, but only if the credit when you opened your positions was more than $10. Example:  Now say the stock falls to $500 by the time of that march expiration. You'd make $90/share on the march put, and lose $100/share on the April put (or a little more; but that deep in the money, there won't be much premium on it). That's a loss of $10/share, or -$1000. So: I make a point of pointing this out because in that article I linked to the fact that your upfront credit needs to be greater than the strike spread in order to profit to the downside is not clearly mentioned."}
{"id": "4854", "text": "Nominal. What you say is true, but I'm guessing it would be too complicated to modelate. Plus, a shareholder of a very large company would not necessarily experience said loss if he/she sells the stock in small chunks at a time."}
{"id": "4976", "text": "Companies are required BY THE IRS to try to get everybody to contribute minimal amounts to the 401K's.  In the past, there were abuses and only the execs could contribute and the low paid workers were starving while the execs contributed huge amounts.   On a year-by-year basis, if the low-paid employees don't contribute, the IRS punishes the high paid employees.  Therefore, most employers provide a matching program to incentivize low-paid employees to contribute. This 9% limitation could happen in any year and it could have happened even before you got your pay raise, what matters is what the low-paid employees were doing at your company LAST YEAR."}
{"id": "5188", "text": "Basically you have 4 options: Use your cash to pay off the student loans. Put your cash in an interest-bearing savings account. Invest your cash, for example in the stock market. Spend your cash on fun stuff you want right now. The more you can avoid #4 the better it will be for you in the long term. But you're apparently wise enough that that wasn't included as an option in your question. To decide between 1, 2, and 3, the key questions are:  What interest are you paying on the loan versus what return could you get on savings or investment?  How much risk are you willing to take? How much cash do you need to keep on hand for unexpected expenses? What are the tax implications? Basically, if you are paying 2% interest on a loan, and you can get 3% interest on a savings account, then it makes sense to put the cash in a savings account rather than pay off the loan. You'll make more on the interest from the savings account than you'll pay on interest on the loan. If the best return you can get on a savings account is less than 2%, then you are better off to pay off the loan. However, you probably want to keep some cash reserve in case your car breaks down or you have a sudden large medical bill, etc. How much cash you keep depends on your lifestyle and how much risk you are comfortable with. I don't know what country you live in. At least here in the U.S., a savings account is extremely safe: even the bank goes bankrupt your money should be insured. You can probably get a much better return on your money by investing in the stock market, but then your returns are not guaranteed. You may even lose money. Personally I don't have a savings account. I put all my savings into fairly safe stocks, because savings accounts around here tend to pay about 1%, which is hardly worth even bothering. You also should consider tax implications. If you're a new grad maybe your income is low enough that your tax rates are low and this is a minor factor. But if you are in, say, a 25% marginal tax bracket, then the effective interest rate on the student loan would be more like 1.5%. That is, if you pay $20 in interest, the government will then take 25% of that off your taxes, so it's the equivalent of paying $15 in interest. Similarly a place to put your money that gives non-taxable interest -- like municipal bonds -- gives a better real rate of return than something with the same nominal rate but where the interest is taxable."}
{"id": "5219", "text": "Most US banks don't allow you the ability to draft a foreign currency check from USD. Though, I know Canadian banks are more workable. For instance, TD allows you to do this from CAD to many other currencies for a small fee. I believe even as a US Citizen you can quite easily open a TD Trust account and you'd be good to go. Also, at one time Zions bank was one of the few which lets US customers do this add-hoc. And there is a fee associated. Even as a business, you can't usually do this without jumping thru hoops and proving your business dealings in foreign countries. Most businesses who do this often will opt to using a payment processor service from a 3rd party which cuts checks in foreign currencies at a monthly and per check base. Your other option, which may be more feasible if you're planning on doing this often, would be to open a British bank account. But this can be difficult if not impossible due to the strict money laundering anti-fraud regulations. Many banks simply won't do it. But, you might try a few of the newer British banks like Tesco, Virgin and Metro."}
{"id": "5257", "text": "The different levels are somewhat related to levels of risk. Writing a covered call is pretty low risk, in the sense that if I buy the stock but sell a call, I now have a lower cost for the stock, and however low the stock drops, I'm still slightly better off than the regular stock buyer. Covered call writing is often used to generate premium income from a stock portfolio, and less as a tool for speculation. Buying a call or put is simpler in execution, but the risk of losing the entire amount spent (I actually avoid the word invested here) due to leverage involved isn't just a possibility \u2014 it can be pretty likely depending on the strike price. Put writing and uncovered (naked) call writing can entail even higher risk relative to the premium received \u2014 consider extreme moves in the underlying to understand the potential losses involved. The more sophisticated trades are presumed to take a bit more experience and tolerance for risk and each broker has its own set of criteria to allow the client to trade at each level."}
{"id": "5323", "text": "Since returning of capital is the most important, I would go to bankrate.com and find either an online bank savings account or MMA account.  By going to bankrate.com, you can find higher rates.  Sometimes you can find rates that are higher than a CD and are still FDIC insured.  I've found ally bank's raise your rate 2 year CD to always have the best rate.  In addition, if rates go up, you are able to raise the rate to the current rate."}
{"id": "5550", "text": "$300k gross is lunch money, even for many small brick and mortar businesses. Add in taxes (federal, state, county, city, sales tax, property tax, parking, licenses/ permits), rent, cost of goods, hired labor and that $300k turns into $0, if you're lucky."}
{"id": "5591", "text": "\"i deleted my comment that this was a reply to so I'll repost it.  It was:   >I don't know the answer, but I'm pretty sure this is incorrect.  You have to take into account the correlations of the securities across the three different markets.  It's definitely not as simple as dividing by three.  The reason why I don't think this is correct is because you can imagine an exchange in which there is only one other security, and the asset in question is perfectly correlated and therefore has a beta of 1.  You could then have a different exchange with thousands of securities where the asset has a beta of 0.3.  The  simple average method would produce a beta of .65, when it's probably true that the correct answer is closer to 0.3.  The solution is not generalizable so I don't think it can be right. It neglects the relative sizes of the exchanges and the correlation of the underlying assets with each other.  Which leads me to consider, perhaps the right thing to do is to calculate the returns across all three exchanges and the returns of the asset on all three exchanges, do a weighted average and use that variance/covariance to calculate the beta across all three exchanges.  I'm not sure what purpose, practically, such a beta would serve.  I think the correct answer is to take the beta of the asset with respect to the largest (most diversified) exchange.  Ultimately, using a basket of securities like the S&P 500 is just a proxy for \"\"the market\"\", whatever that means.  It doesn't truly represent the realm of possibilities for the diversified investor, but it's close enough  tl,dr: I say pick one exchange and go with it\""}
{"id": "6047", "text": "We have a lot of debt - at this point I don't even know how much This is your problem. Find out, and while you're at it find out how much income you have and also what your total expenditures are. You seem to be facing up to the problem, but not looking it in the eyes. You just need to take some time, and a little bravery, to get all your financial documentation together and lay it all out so you know what your situation actually is. Its not hard to do this, get a box and put all (old) bills and statements in that you can find, and at the end of a month, pick them out and write down the totals. Then work out your income and all that you've spent that month. This is known as a Statement of Affairs and there are calculators to help you. Then you can work out how much you need to pay off, and how much spare money you have to do this with. You can also start to cut down on all the really unnecessary stuff to increase your spare money that you can use to pay off the debts. Hopefully this won't take too long, and you can easily (if boringly) work the debt off over time. If it really is unsurmountable there are things you can do to help - firstly contacting your creditors and seeing what they can do to either part write off the debt, or freeze it as you pay it off (most creditors understand that if you're desperate enough to talk to them (!) then they may not see any of their debt back and are at least willing to help you pay them back). Generally though, it sounds like you are not in a total mess as you can pay it off. There are people in far worse states than you! But you really do need to be fully aware of your financial situation. Sit down and 'count your money' one lazy Sunday. There are links to help. Try the Motley Fool's guide, and its dealing with debt forum, both of which are very practical (if UK based, the Fool has a US site too, see for yourself if there's the same stuff on it, but this kind of thing tends to be fundamental to people of all nations)."}
{"id": "6068", "text": "The buyer can get another cosigner or you can sell the car to pay off the loan. These are your only options if financing cannot be obtained independently."}
{"id": "6349", "text": "There is no universal answer here; it depends on how much risk each person is taking, how you want to define the value of the business now and in the future, how much each person's contribution is essential to creating and sustaining the business, how hard it would be to get those resources elsewhere and what they would cost... What is fair is whatever you folks agree is fair. Just make sure to get it nailed down in writing and signed by all the parties, so you don't risk someone changing their minds later."}
{"id": "6503", "text": "WE're talking about companies. Cooperate companies.  What cooperate company is issuing bounced or fake checks to their employees that can also issue debit cards as payments? None.   You're trying to split hairs between personal cashed checks and pay roll checks. They aren't the same at all. Payroll checks don't require a 3 day waiting period before the balance is moved to your account, personal checks that don't have a history of bouncing do."}
{"id": "6595", "text": "A 401k is pretty good, but it's not magic. Personally, I'd consider a 30k salary with a 401k and a 2k employer match less valuable than a 36k salary, let alone a 48k salary. If worried about retirement savings simply set up that IRA and put in the full 5.5k allowance."}
{"id": "6666", "text": "People have asked a lot of good questions about your broader situation, tolerance for risk, etc, but I'm going to say the one-size-fits-most answer is: split some of your monthly savings (half?) into the VEU Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF and some into VTI Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF. This can be as automatic and hassle-free as the money market deposit and gives a possibility of getting a better return, with low costs and low avoidable risk."}
{"id": "6701", "text": "Don't know the name but it means you're long with conviction :P  Unlimited gains, maximum loss of 95$  + (8-6) = 97$.  Basically You are long @ 107  - -2 from 105 to 95.  You would have to be ULTRA bullish to initiate this strategy."}
{"id": "6703", "text": "What source said the Fed considers them retired? And you know $2 trillion of that is mortgage backed securities. No one seems to have told the homeowners their mortgages are forgiven as I haven't seen the block parties for that."}
{"id": "6881", "text": "While others have made a good case for how you may want to save and spend I just want to take a moment to comment on Acorn and Robinhood.  Having never used either of them, I would stick to the seasoned professionals for my long term investment relationship. I'm sure they have the right licensing and proper SIPC coverage etc, but I wouldn't, personally, trust my money to an entity that's almost entirely funded by venture capital.  I would stick to a company that exists and is profitable on it's own.  All of the major brokerage houses (Vanguard, Schwab, ETrade, Scottrade, etc) in the US give account holders access to a list of ETFs and Mutual Funds with zero load on deposits, no or low minimum account balances, no or low investment minimums, and no commissions.  With access to these no cost options, I wouldn't waste time with an entity that exists because of it's investor fund raising abilities."}
{"id": "6936", "text": "\"Hah!  Edit: to elaborate, markets are closed. Unless your firm made a bunch of moves before EOD Friday, there's very little they can do to avoid the bloodshed (if there is any after the vote on Sunday) come Monday morning. Not to mention most 401k funds have contractual limits placed on them in terms of how much they can do in terms of buy/sell actions in a given window of time - usually that's a good protection, however in \"\"outlier\"\" occurrences it's a really, really bad thing.  Now, if you're in it for the long haul (in your 20s-early 30s) it's no big deal (yes, you'd be better off in a panic if you divested, but short-term drops are somewhat built into the long-term model). If you're about to retire I'd be really, really nervous.\""}
{"id": "6990", "text": "You should check out existing resources like Investopedia for definitions, and ask questions if there is something you do not understand, instead of asking folks to spit out definitions. A good book for you to read might be Wall Street Words"}
{"id": "7243", "text": "Normally interest only mortgages are taken incase one planning to sell off the property after a few years and purchase of the property is for investment. In such a case instead of burdening oneself with a huge EMI, one opts for an interest only mortgage, and towards the end of the term, sell off the house at profit and repay back the entire principal.  I am not to sure if interest only mortgages are encouraged for properties you plan to live in. Although I do not know about the ING scheme, normally there is no prepayment option on interest only mortgages, its Bank way of earning a fixed income for the contracted period and thats the reason why the interest rates are lower than a regular mortgage. If you do the math, you may be paying more in total interest than on a regular mortgage."}
{"id": "7311", "text": "Which way would save the most money? Paying of the car today would save the most money.  Would you borrow money at 20% to put it in a savings account?  That's effectively what she is doing by not paying off the car. If it were me, I would pay off the car today, and add the car payment to my savings account each month.  If the car payment is $400, that's $1,500 a month that can be saved, and the $12k will be back in 8 months. That said - remember that this is your GIRLFRIEND, not a spouse.  You are not in control (or responsible for) her finances. I would not tell her that she SHOULD do this - only explain it to her in different ways, and offer advice as to what YOU would do.  Look together at how much has been paid in principal and interest so far, how much she's paying in interest each month now, and how much she'll pay for the car over the life of the loan.  (I would also encourage her not to buy cars with a 72-month loan, which I'm guessing is how she got here). In the end, though, it's her decision."}
{"id": "7391", "text": "Well, if you only own the option, you are only limited to loosing the premium. With futures, at least with the brokers I talked to, most of the time you need to sign a margin contract just to trade futures. I don't want to go into debt, and I don't think I would do too well to be fairly honest. I am a college student, and want to limit my risk, and so just trading the option would help me get access to the commodity markets without having to get margin like many brokers want me to do. I am not trying to do any hedging or anything (which I am aware you can do). All I want to do is do an inflation trade, and I believe commodities are the best way. To me honest, if I had my way I would just buy and hold, and that is the strategy I want to emulate closest, even though I know I can't hold it forever. Basically, I want to avoid debt, but still trade commodities."}
{"id": "7423", "text": "\"If you sell an asset for more than you paid for it, the excess amount realized is called a capital gain and is generally considered a form of income for tax purposes. Generally, one pays income tax on realized capital gains, unless the sale is exempt\u2014such as the sale of one's principal residence. Capital gains tax can also be avoided or deferred by holding assets in a tax-advantaged investment account like a TFSA or RRSP. When taxable, the effective income tax rate on capital gains income is half the normal rate due to the capital gains inclusion rate. Capital gains income is generally not considered to be employment, \"\"earned\"\", or \"\"working\"\" income. However, individuals who, say, trade stocks frequently and earn a substantial portion of their income that way may have their gains considered employment income and subject to regular income tax instead of the better rate. I suggest you contact Service Canada and ask them about the impact of a one-time sale of personal property that would result in a realized capital gain. While you would owe income tax on the capital gain, it might not have any impact on your disability benefits, because it would not be earned or employment income. You should also check with your private insurer; they may also consider the sale a capital gain and not employment income, however, only they would be able to tell you for sure whether it would have any possible effect on your benefits.\""}
{"id": "7540", "text": "Easier to copy paste than type this out. Credit: www.financeformulas.net Note that the present value would be the initial loan amount, which is likely the sale price you noted minus a down payment.   The loan payment formula is used to calculate the payments on a loan.   The formula used to calculate loan payments is exactly the same as the   formula used to calculate payments on an ordinary annuity. A loan, by   definition, is an annuity, in that it consists of a series of future   periodic payments. The PV, or present value, portion of the loan payment formula uses the   original loan amount. The original loan amount is essentially the   present value of the future payments on the loan, much like the   present value of an annuity. It is important to keep the rate per period and number of periods   consistent with one another in the formula. If the loan payments are   made monthly, then the rate per period needs to be adjusted to the   monthly rate and the number of periods would be the number of months   on the loan. If payments are quarterly, the terms of the loan payment   formula would be adjusted accordingly. I like to let loan calculators do the heavy lifting for me. This particular calculator lets you choose a weekly pay back scheme. http://www.calculator.net/loan-calculator.html"}
{"id": "7625", "text": "For now, park it in a mix of cash and short term bond funds like the Vanguard Short Term Investment Grade fund. The short term fund will help with the inflation issue. Make sure the cash positions are FDIC insured. Then either educate yourself about investing or start interviewing potential advisors. Look for referrals, and stay away from people peddling annuities or people who will not fully disclose how they get paid. Your goal should be to have a long-term plan within 6-12 months."}
{"id": "7748", "text": "\"For your first question, the general guidelines I've seen recommended are as follows: As to your second question, portfolio management is something you should familiarize yourself with.  If you trust it to other people, don't be surprised when they make \"\"mistakes\"\".  Remember, they get paid regardless of whether you make money.  Consider how much any degree of risk will affect you.  When starting out, your contributions make up most of the growth of your accounts; now is the time when you can most afford to take higher risk for higher payouts (still limiting your risk as much as possible, of course).  A 10% loss on a portfolio of $50k can be replaced with a good year's contributions.  Once your portfolio has grown to a much larger sum, it will be time to dial back the risk and focus on preserving your capital.   When choosing investments, always treat your porfolio as a whole - including non-retirement assets (other investment accounts, savings, even your house).  Don't put too many eggs from every account into the same basket, or you'll find that 30% of your porfolio is a single investment.  Also consider that some investments have different tax consequences, and you can leverage the properties of each account to offset that.\""}
{"id": "7814", "text": "\"If you are a \"\"small\"\" investor (namely, not an accredited investor), then the transaction costs (commissions) for purchasing the stocks while attempting to duplicate DJIA will defeat any benefit. My personal preference is to purchase mutual funds rather than ETFs.\""}
{"id": "7915", "text": ""}
{"id": "7951", "text": "~~Most checks don't.~~  Edit: I've definitely seen checks cashed way beyond 90-120 days. I don't have extensive knowledge of the rules though. Regardless, it's not like Floyd magically loses is pay if he doesn't cash the check in time."}
{"id": "7969", "text": "If you don't want to pay much attention to your investments, target date funds -- assuming you find one (like Vanguard's) with no management fees beyond those acquired from the underlying funds -- are usually a great choice: when the target date is far off, they invest almost entirely (usually 90% or so) in (mutual funds that in turn consist of many) stocks, with the remainder in bonds; as the date gets closer, the mix is automatically shifted to more bonds and less stocks (i.e. less risk, but less potential return too)."}
{"id": "8003", "text": "Knowing the log return is useful - the log return can help you to work out the annual return over the period it was estimated - and this should be comparable between stocks. One should just be careful with the calculation so that allowance for dividends is made sensibly."}
{"id": "8060", "text": "Sounds about right. From [Give Well](http://www.givewell.org/how-we-work/our-criteria/cost-effectiveness):  > As of November 2016, the median estimate of our top charities' cost-effectiveness ranged from ~$900 to ~$7,000 per equivalent life saved (a metric we use to compare interventions with different outcomes, such as income improvements and averting a death) ."}
{"id": "8063", "text": "Not sure if your question is on topic, but the investment is only $9 because that is maximum amount of money the merchant ever needed to start up the business. He put in $9, started turning a profit, and never looked back."}
{"id": "8126", "text": "Navy Federal Credit Union recently added this feature.  It is free for members  making a deposit to their personal checking account, though you have to be a member for at least 90 days to be eligible. I have an all-in-one printer with flatbed scanner and availed myself of the service a couple of days ago.  There wasn't any additional software involved as everything was done through the web browser, as shown the scan deposit demo.  The only problem I had was figuring out how to align the check for it to be scanned completely (had to place the check in the middle of the scanner, aligned lengthwise; that was more of a hassle to figure out that one would suppose). That was it.  I immediately received an e-mail confirmation that my deposit had been approved and processed. While Navy Federal's scan deposit FAQ is specific to them, of course, it is pretty comprehensive and gives one an idea of the general restrictions applied to the service."}
{"id": "8135", "text": "The charts suggest otherwise. Although most of the large gains were wiped out in 2008 and 2011, that doesn't include the substantial dividends you are likely to get with financials. They still returned a positive percentage and some outperformed benchmark indices over time.   But hey, don't let your bias get in the way."}
{"id": "8177", "text": "There are several ways that the issuers profit from CFDs. If the broker has trades on both sides (buy and sell) they can net the volumes off against each other and profit off the spread whilst using the posted margins to cover p&l from both sides. Because settlement for most securities is not on the same day that the order is placed they can also buy the security with no intention of taking delivery and simply sell it off at the end of day to pass delivery on to someone else. Here again they profit from the spread and that their volumes give them really low commissions so their costs are much lower than the value of the spread. If they have to do this rather than netting the position out the spreads will be wider.  Sometimes that may be forced to buy the security outright but that is rare and the spreads will be even wider so that they can make a decent profit."}
{"id": "8200", "text": "Capital is an Asset. Decreasing value of capital is the decreasing value of an asset. When you buy the forex asset * DR Forex Asset * CR Cash When you sell * DR Cash  * CR Forex Asset The difference is now accounted for Here is how: Gains (and losses) are modifications to your financial position (Balance sheet). At the end of the period you take your financial performance (Profit and Loss) and put it into your balance sheet under equity. Meaning that afterwards your balance sheet is better or worse off (Because you made more money = more cash or lost it, whatever). You are wanting to make an income account to reflect the forex revaluation so at the end of the period it is reflected in profit then pushed into your balance sheet. Capital gains directly affect your balance sheet because they increase/decrease your cash and your asset in the journal entry itself (When you buy and sell it). If making money this way is actually how you make you make an income it is possible to make an account for it. If you do this you periodically revalue the asset and write off the changes to the revaluation account. You would do something like *DR Asset *CR Forex Revaluation account; depending on the method you take. Businesses mostly do this because if the capital gains are their line of business they will be taxed on it like it is income. For simplicity just account for it when you buy and sell the assets (Because you as an individual will only recognise a profit/loss when you enter and exit). Its easier to think about income and expenses are extensions of equity. Income increases your equity, expenses decrease it. This is how they relate to the accounting formula (Assets = Liabilities + Owners Equity)"}
{"id": "8209", "text": "It was about a decade between splitting consulting off and the IPO, including 3 years of legal action to allow the consulting branch to become a fully independent entity, and the partners on each side were not exactly best friends during that time. Not exactly a quick money grab. (also please note that Andersen created a new consulting group *before* the IPO of what was then Andersen Consulting, and this was what lead directly to the lawsuit)"}
{"id": "8480", "text": "It is highly unlikely that this would be approved by a mortgage underwriter.   When the bank gives a loan with a security interest in a property (a lien), they are protected - if the borrower does not repay the loan, the property can be foreclosed on and sold, and the lender is made whole for the amount of the loan that was not repaid.   When two parties are listed on the deed, then each owns an UNDIVIDED 50% share in the property.  If only one party has pledged the property as surety against the loan, then in effect only 50% of the property is forecloseable.  This means that the bank is unable to recoup its loss.   For a (fictional, highly simplified) concrete example, suppose that the house is worth $100,000 and Adam and Zoe are listed on the deed, but Adam is the borrower for a $100,000 mortgage.  Adam owes $100,000 and has an asset worth $50,000 (which he has pledged as security for the loan), while Zoe owes nothing and has an asset worth $50,000 (which is entirely unencumbered).  If Adam does not pay the mortgage, the bank would only be able to foreclose on his $50,000 half of the property, leaving them exposed to great risk.   There are other legal and financial reasons, but overall I think you'll find it very difficult to locate a lender who is willing to take that kind of risk.  It's very complicated and there is absolutely no up-side.   Also - speaking from experience (from which I was protected because of the bank's underwriting rules) and echoing the advice offered by others on this site: don't bother trying.  Commingling assets without a contract (either implicit by marriage or explicit by, well a contract) is going to get you in trouble."}
{"id": "8542", "text": "Please either remove the $50 going to the 529 plan or move it into a ROTH IRA instead. You can always use your ROTH contributions to pay for college expenses in the future if you want to. I suspect you may not have enough saved up for retirement to have the luxury to help with college though."}
{"id": "8653", "text": "I use the forum seeking alpha. http://seekingalpha.com/"}
{"id": "8859", "text": "Welcome to the real world :-)  There really aren't all that many ways for ordinary employees to lower taxes.  You could put more in your 401k, buy a house (for the mortgage interest deduction, which lets you deduct some other things instead of taking standard deduction), or move to a different state to get rid of the state tax."}
{"id": "8891", "text": "There are two independent sets of terms we need to define in order to answer your question.  I am trying to understand the difference between Value, Blend, and Growth These are different categories of mutual funds: Value: discounted or undervalued stocks. This is often measured by a difference between the stock's price and the Net Asset Value (NEV). Growth: stocks that fund managers believe are poised for significant growth (increase in stock price and NEV). Blend: a blend of two categories of stocks. In this context it probably refers to a combination of growth and value stocks, but it just depends on the context.  I want to receive dividend and Growth These are ways to receive earnings from a stock or fund. Dividend: a direct cash payment from owning a stock or a fund. Stocks and funds who pay out 100% of their profits don't have any money leftover to grow themselves and either stagnate or shrink. Growth: an increase manifesting itself in capital gains. If a stock or fund pays out zero dividends, then all profits are invested back into the company for fund, increasing its value. If you intend to automatically reinvest dividends, then receiving dividends is essentially the same as receiving profit through capital gains. If you intend to sell stocks or funds periodically to get some extra spending cash, then receiving profits through capital gains is essentially the same as dividends."}
{"id": "9082", "text": "This is a gross simplification as there are a few different ways to do this. The principle overall is the same though. To short a stock, you borrow X shares from a third party and sell them at the current price. You now owe the lender X shares but have the proceeds from the sale. If the share price falls you can buy back those shares at the new lower price, return them to the lender and pocket the difference. The risk comes when the share price goes the other way, you now owe the lender the new value of the shares, so have to find some way to cover the difference. This happened a while back when Porsche made a fortune buying shares in Volkswagen from short sellers, and the price unexpectedly rose."}
{"id": "9116", "text": "ACWI refers to a fund that tracks the MSCI All Country World Index, which is  A market capitalization weighted index designed to provide a broad measure of equity-market performance throughout the world. The MSCI ACWI is maintained by Morgan Stanley Capital International, and is comprised of stocks from both developed and emerging markets.  The ex-US in the name implies exactly what it sounds; this fund probably invests in stock markets (or stock market indexes) of the countries in the index, except the US. Brd Mkt refers to a Broad Market index, which, in the US, means that the fund attempts to track the performance of a wide swath of the US stock market (wider than just the S&P 500, for example). The Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index, the Wilshire 5000 index, the Russell 2000 index, the MSCI US Broad Market Index, and the CRSP US Total Market Index are all examples of such an index. This could also refer to a fund similar to the one above in that it tracks a broad swath of the several stock markets across the world. I spoke with BNY Mellon about the rest, and they told me this: EB - Employee Benefit (a bank collective fund for ERISA qualified assets) DL - Daily Liquid (provides for daily trading of fund shares) SL - Securities Lending (fund engages in the BNY Mellon securities lending program) Non-SL - Non-Securities Lending (fund does not engage in the BNY Mellon securities lending program) I'll add more detail. EB (Employee Benefit) refers to plans that fall under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which are a set a laws that govern employee pensions and retirement plans. This is simply BNY Mellon's designation for funds that are offered through 401(k)'s and other retirement vehicles. As I said before, DL refers to Daily Liquidity, which means that you can buy into and sell out of the fund on a daily basis. There may be fees for this in your plan, however. SL (Securities Lending) often refers to institutional funds that loan out their long positions to investment banks or brokers so that the clients of those banks/brokerages can sell the shares short. This SeekingAlpha article has a good explanation of how this procedure works in practice for ETF's, and the procedure is identical for mutual funds: An exchange-traded fund lends out shares of its holdings to another party and charges a rental fee. Running a securities-lending program is another way for an ETF provider to wring more return out of a fund's holdings. Revenue from these programs is used to offset a fund's expenses, which allows the provider to charge a lower expense ratio and/or tighten the performance gap between an ETF and its benchmark."}
{"id": "9479", "text": "\"I don't think blanket answers are very helpful. You are asking the right question when you are young! You have a large number of investment options and Australia has the Superannuation system that you can extract significant tax value from. I've not attempted to grade these with regard to \"\"risk\"\", as different people will rate various things with different levels, depending on their experience and knowledge. Consider the following factors for you:-\""}
{"id": "9484", "text": "A fucking credit union.   Even if they use an all paper system and have no website, no phone app, and can only be contacted by fax or telephone, use a credit union.   Even if the only place you can get your money is a 45 minute drive to the next town, use a credit union.   Its not about finances, its about reclaiming basic human dignity in the world of American Finance."}
{"id": "9512", "text": "\"A suitable mix of index funds IS a great option if you don't want to spend a lot of time and effort micromanaging your money. If you find amusement in pushing numbers around, you may be able to do better. Notice: MAY. If you have multiple millions, you can hire someone of that sort to push the numbers around for you. They may do better for you. Notice: MAY. And remember that part of your additional gains have to go to pay them, which means they have to do better just to be worth having on staff in the first place. If you have more than that, there are some options available which smaller investors really can't get involved in. As one example: If you have enough money that you can lose $100K without especially noticing, you can get involved in venture capital and the like which require a large commitment AND are higher-risk but can yield higher returns. Anyone who's dismissing index funds as \"\"only for beginners\"\" is being foolish. But recommending them to beginners in particular is a good thing since they let you get into the market with fairly predictable risk/benefits without needing a massive investment in education and time.\""}
{"id": "9568", "text": "That may become complicated depending on the State laws. In some States (California for example), LLCs are taxed on gross receipts, so you'll be paying taxes on paying money to yourself. In other States this would be a no-op since the LLC is disregarded. So you need to check your State law. I assume the LLC is not taxed as a corporation since that would be really stupid of course, but if it is then it adds the complexity of the Federal taxes on top as well (corporate entity will pay taxes on your rent, and you'll pay taxes on your dividends to get the money back). The best option would be to take that property out of the LLC (since there's no point in it anyway, if you're the tenant)."}
{"id": "9597", "text": "If you can still work, I think a very good course of action would be to invest the majority of the money in low-cost index funds for many years. The reason is that you are young and have plenty of time to build a sizable retirement fund. How you go about this course of action depends on your comfort level with managing your money, taxes, retirement accounts, etc. At a minimum, open an investment account at any of the major firms (Schwab, Fidelity, for example). They will provide you with a free financial advisor. Ideally s/he would recommend something like: Open a retirement account and invest as much as you can tax-free or tax-deferred. Since you already received the money tax-free, a Roth IRA seems like a no-brainer. Pick some low-fee equity funds, like an S&P 500 Index fund, for a large chunk of the money. Avoid individual stocks if you aren't comfortable with them. Alternatively, get a recommendation for a fixed-fee financial planner that can help you plan for your future. Above all, don't spend beyond your means! You have an opportunity to fund a very nice future for yourself, especially if you are able to work while you are still so young!"}
{"id": "9676", "text": "\"First you must understand your Marginal Tax Rate (Tax Bracket)  The exemptions you claim are like saying to your employer \"\"tax me on $4050 less, or more\"\" for each change up or down of 1 exemption.  Say you look at the table (2016 tables at my main site) and see you are in the 15% bracket. And your refund is $2000. 2000/.15 is $13,333. So you want that $13K to not be taxed. Raising exemptions by 3 (3x4050 = 12,150) will get you close. $1822 closer to your goal.  For what it's worth, you can read through the instructions for the W4, of course. But this answer skips through the details and gets you to your goal.  One point to note, since the exemption is in whole numbers, and $4050 is it, you will get close, +/- $608 if in the 15% bracket, but to get dead on, you'd need a mid year adjustment. Not worth it. A refund of under $608 should be enough for a 15%er. ($1012 for a 25%er) If you ready want to nail the taxes to a closer accuracy, you can use the line requesting additional dollars be withheld.  Most W4 discussions miss this point.  The exact number withheld by your employer comes from an IRS document known as Circular E, but retrieved as Publication 15. It will help you confirm the validity of my dirty shortcut method.  What I do recommend is that you use a quick online tax calculator to do a dry run of you return, early in the year. If you see your withholding is off in either direction, best to adjust as soon as possible.  (The numbers here now reflect 2016's $4050 exemption, recent question on Money.SE have linked to this one, prompting me to update for 2016)\""}
{"id": "9814", "text": "\"Ever wonder why certain businesses won't accept certain credit cards? (The sign above the register saying \"\"Sorry, we don't accept AmericanExpress\"\"). It's because they don't want to pay that credit card company's transaction fees. One of the roles of the credit card company is to facilitate the transaction process between the customer (you) and the store. And now that using credit cards over cash or check is so ingrained in our culture, it creates extra work for the customer to make purchases at an establishment that is cash-only. Credit card companies know this, and so do businesses. So businesses will partner with credit card companies so that customers can use their cards. This way, everything is handled electronically (this can also benefit the business, since there's added security as they're not dealing with cash directly, and they don't have to manually count as much cash later). However a business may only budget a certain amount of their profits they want taken by credit card transactions. So if a company's fees are too high (say AmericanExpress, for example) and they are banking on you already having a Visa card, the company isn't going to go out of its way to provide the AmericanExpress option for you. If it were free for the business to use a credit card company's service at their stores, then they would all just provide the option for every card! So the credit card company making money is all contingent on you spending your money by using their credit card. You use the card, and the store pays the company for the transaction.\""}
{"id": "9845", "text": "Your tax bracket is determined by your total taxable income in a given year, where money drawn from a traditional-style deferred-tax 401k or IRA is taxable income. (Money drawn from a Roth account was taxed before deposit and is not taxed when withdrawn after the relevant date.) Your recent salary history has no effect on this, except salary in the same year -- and there is no advantage to be gained by taking a deliberate pay cut for its own sake."}
{"id": "10321", "text": "\"I just want to point out that this can happen anywhere, teachers with tenure who get into big trouble \"\"retire early\"\".  The whole country could do with a heaping helping of accountability. I've already seen unauthorized charges on my credit card, and I'm sure it'll continue for years to come.\""}
{"id": "10399", "text": "Where are they going to get money from? Their bonds are worthless because they have no viable way of ever paying back debt so why would anyone lend money to them. You, and Keynes think that you can fuel debt with more debt, but all this does is build a massive debt bubble that has to pop at some point. This is exactly what these nations did for years and now are beginning to realize that they can no longer issue debt."}
{"id": "10521", "text": "Groups of three or four students will jointly decide on a Fortune 500 business in the United States and research this business and its practices in the United States. ( we chose Apple) Beyond a business concentration, focus on components of a concentration for your paper: i.e. benefits, accountability in accounting practices, direct to consumer marketing et al. Other members do research on HR, Marketing, accounting, and I have to research on finance."}
{"id": "10549", "text": "\"Very interesting. I'm actually glad you mentioned term structure models, because that's something I'm interested in. But I don't think the distinction you draw between \"\"equilibrium\"\" and \"\"arbitrage free\"\" models makes sense with Black-Scholes.  My understanding was that the discrepancy between equilibrium and arbitrage-free term structure models arises because term structure models lack market completeness. In other words, when the market is incomplete (as it is with interest rates), you'll have a continuum of bond prices that are compatible with no arbitrage, and the exact price will depend on the market price for risk.   However, in Black-Scholes, the market price for risk term basically falls out of the equation because of market completeness. Or in other words, since we have market completeness, there's a *unique* martingale measure that gives the price for the option. So when you have market completeness, there should be no difference between an equilibrium and a no-arbitrage model - they're one and the same.\""}
{"id": "10710", "text": "As per the chart pattern when ever a stock breaks its 52 week high. This information may differ for penny stocks,small caps and mid cap stocks"}
{"id": "11075", "text": "In my experience they charge you coming and going. For example, if a brokerage firm is advertising that their commissions are only $7/trade, then that means you pay money to buy the stock, plus $7 to them, and later on if you want to sell that stock you must pay $7 to get out of the deal.  So, if you want to make any money on a stock (say, priced at $10) you would have to sell it at a price above $10+$7+$7=$24. That kind of sale could take a few years to turn a profit. However, with flat-rate fees like that it is advantageous to buy in bulk."}
{"id": "11082", "text": "\"You have what is called in the biz a \"\"thin file\"\".  Check with a Credit Union.  They will get you a secured card or maybe a straight credit card.  They usually will graduate you from a secured card to a real credit card in 12-18 months. Then you are on your way.   You should also sign up for Creditkarma to get your credit report updated every week.  They make their money on referring people to credit card companies so you might be able to kill two birds with one stone.\""}
{"id": "11184", "text": "\"The Dividend Discount Model is based on the concept that the present value of a stock is the sum of all future dividends, discounted back to the present. Since you said: dividends are expected to grow at a constant rate in perpetuity ... the Gordon Growth Model is a simple variant of the DDM, tailored for a firm in \"\"steady state\"\" mode, with dividends growing at a rate that can be sustained forever. Consider McCormick (MKC), who's last dividend was 31 cents, or $1.24 annualized. The dividend has been growing just a little over 7% annually. Let's use a discount, or hurdle rate of 10%. MKC closed today at $50.32, for what it's worth. The model is extremely sensitive to inputs. As g approaches r, the stock price rises to infinity. If g > r, stock goes negative. Be conservative with 'g' -- it must be sustainable forever.  The next step up in complexity is the two-stage DDM, where the company is expected to grow at a higher, unsustainable rate in the early years (stage 1), and then settling down to the terminal rate for stage 2. Stage 1 is the present value of dividends during the high growth period. Stage 2 is the Gordon Model, starting at the end of stage 1, and discounting back to the present. Consider Abbott Labs (ABT). The current annual dividend is $1.92, the current dividend growth rate is 12%, and let's say that continues for ten years (n), after which point the growth rate is 5% in perpetuity. Again, the discount rate is 10%. Stage 1 is calculated as follows: Stage 2 is GGM, using not today's dividend, but the 11th year's dividend, since stage 1 covered the first ten years. 'gn' is the terminal growth, 5% in our case. then... The value of the stock today is 21.22 + 51.50 = 72.72 ABT closed today at $56.72, for what it's worth.\""}
{"id": "11224", "text": "\"> When you make a mistake, the sooner you admit it, the better.  OK.  Then explain this statement:  \"\"You still pay taxes on \"\"tax deferred\"\" retirement plans - In fact, I would dare say that in most cases, people end up paying more in taxes, because they pay it as regular income rather than LTCG.\"\"  What is the account that you're referring to where you'd pay only LTCG?\""}
{"id": "11454", "text": "\"Assuming U.S. law, there are \"\"safe harbor\"\" provisions for exactly this kind of situation. There are several possibilities, but the most likely one is that if your withholding and estimated tax payments for 2016 totaled at least as much as your tax bill for 2015 there's no penalty. For the full rules, see IRS Publication 17.\""}
{"id": "11456", "text": "The short answer to your initial question is: yes. The option doesn't expire until the close of the market on the day of expiration. Because the option is expiring so soon, the time value of the option is quite small.  That is why the option, once it is 'in-the-money', will track so closely to the underlying stock price. If someone buys an in-the-money option on the day of expiration, they are likely still expecting the price to go up before they sell it or exercise it. Many brokers will exercise your in-the-money options sometime after 3pm on the day of expiration.  If this is not what you desire, you should communicate that with them prior to that day."}
{"id": "11633", "text": "\"Assuming you can understand and emotionally handle the volatility, a good indeed fund would be wise. These are low fee funds which perform as well as our better than most managed investments and since they don't cost as much, they typically out perform most other investment vehicles. The S&P 500 is traded as SPDR. Another option is the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which trades as DIA. Average returns over the long term are 10-12%. If you expect to need the money in the short term (5-8 years), you have a non trivial chance of needing to pull the money out when the market is down, so if that's unacceptable to you, choose something with a guarantee. If you're terrified of losing money in the short term, don't think you can handle waiting for the market to go up, especially when every news caster is crying hysterically that the End of Economic Life on Earth is here, then consider a CD at your bank. CDs return much lower rates (around 2% right now) but do not go down in value ever. However, you need to lock your money into them for months to years at a time. Some people might tell you to buy a bond fund. That's horrible advice. Bond funds get lower returns AND have no guarantee that you won't lose money on them, unlike aactual bonds. As you're new to investing, I encourage you to read \"\"The Intelligent Investor\"\" by Benjamin Gramm.\""}
{"id": "11654", "text": "\"You will need to file  a US income tax return, and declare all income world-wide.  Whether this results in any tax owed depends on your particular circumstances, and the effect of any tax treaties between the US and India. There are additional requirements for the filing of information on the amounts in foreign accounts held by \"\"US tax persons\"\".  Depending on the nature of these accounts, the complexity of the forms, and the penalties for non-compliance can be quite high... Short version:  Consult a professional well-qualified in US/India tax matters...\""}
{"id": "11791", "text": "I would apply extra cash left over at the end of the month as follows, in order of priority: Realize, though, that this is my take on priority. My experience has been that a liquidity crisis is much more stressful than having a mortgage or other debt -- illiquid wealth is almost useless when you need cash. So if you still have strong feelings about retiring that debt after considering the liquidity issue, go ahead and swap #3 and #4 above. Make plans to pay off the mortgage over the next 10 years. Find a mortgage payoff calculator and make extra monthly payments that keep you on a 10 year schedule. I'd strongly suggest making sure your retirement savings are on track, though. Time is on your side here, and your required monthly contribution will be low now while you're still in your 20s."}
{"id": "11884", "text": "The only way someone can take money out of your account using just your sort code and account number is if you set up a direct debit to pay them (or someone pretending to be you sets up the direct debit). Even with Paperless DD's this can take some time. Anyone who can process debit card transactions can take money from your account if they have your debit card number, expiry date and cvv number. Direct debits do not have an expiry date so they are normally used for paying automatic regular long term bills (like rent, rates, electricity etc). Note, anyone with an ordinary bank account can pay money into account,  using your sort code and account number."}
{"id": "11885", "text": "Collection agencies will eventually find you if you work for an employer that uses the credit bureaus for pre-employment screening, or you sign up for utilities or services that check your credit, or you enter into public record any other way (getting arrested, buying land, etc.). Such inquiries will put you on the grid where the collection agencies can find you and/or sue you. Two years out is about the point where they're looking for blood. The next time your friend applies for an apartment, utilities or cell phone service, she's going to get some calls."}
{"id": "12119", "text": "\"I think the math is wrong. Note that in Scenario #1, you are only out of pocket $1000, while in Scenario #2, you are out of pocket $1250;  the contribution and the tax you paid with respect to it. A better concept than tax rate is \"\"Retention Rate\"\".  This is the fraction of your money that the Feds let you keep.  And Growth Factor is the how much the investment grows. So In Scenario #1, you multiply $1000 by the investment Growth Factor and then by the retirement Retention Rate. And in Scenario #2, you multiply the same $1000 by the current Retention Rate and then by the Growth Factor. Since in your approximation, the two GFs are the same, there is no saving...\""}
{"id": "12140", "text": "Housing plus transportation should be about 40%, according to your given rule of thumb, and that's where yours are, so I think you're okay. Guidelines are not rules, and must be related to one's individual circumstances. That said, double-check that your transportation expenses are really zero."}
{"id": "12229", "text": ""}
{"id": "12318", "text": "\"> but the other countries are just decline stage.  I think you have a typo. Could you please explain what you mean?  If I understand correctly, you are saying that the US produces \"\"value\"\" and other countries do not. As the US has tended to run a high deficit since the Reagan era (i.e. it increases its debt every year) this seems a contentious statement.\""}
{"id": "12329", "text": "Your mortgage represents a negative cash flow of $X for N months. The typical mortgage prepayment doesn't reduce your next payment, but does reduce the length of the mortgage. If you look at the amortization table of a 30 year loan, you might see a payment of $1000 but only $50 going to principal. So if on day one you send an extra $51 or so to the bank, you find that in 30 years you just saved that $1000 payment. In effect, it was a long term bond or CD, yielding the post tax rate of the mortgage. Say your loan were 7%. At 7%, money doubles every 10 years or so. 30 years is 3 doubles or 8X. If I were to offer you $1000 and ask for $7500 in 30 years, you might accept it, with an agreement to buy me out if you refinanced. For me, that would be an investment. Just like buying a bond. In fact, there is a real return, as you see the cash flow at the end. The payments 'not made' are your payback.  Those who insist it's not an investment are correct in the strict sense of the word's definition, but pedantic for the fact in practice, the prepayment is a choice to be considered alongside other investment choices. When I have a mortgage, I am the mortgagor, the bank, the mortgagee. Same as a company issuing a bond, the Bank holds my bond and I'm making payments to them. They hold my bond as an investment. There is no question of that. In fact, they package these and sell them as CMOs, groups of mortgages. A pre-payment is me buying back the last coupon on my mortgage. I fail to see the distinction between me 'buying back' $10K in future coupons on my own loan or me investing $10K in someone else's loans.  The real question for me is whether this makes sense when rates are so low. At 4%, I'd say it's a matter of prioritizing any high rate debt and any other investments that might yield more. But even so, it's an investment yielding 4%.  Over the years, I've developed the priorities of where to put new money - The priorities are debatable. I have my opinion, and my reasons to back them up. In general, it's a balance between risk and return. In my opinion, there's something wrong with ignoring a dollar for dollar match on the 401(k) in most circumstances. Others seem to prefer being 100% debt free before saving at all. There's a balance that might be different for each individual. As I started, the mortgage is a fixed return, with no chance to just get it back if needed. If your cash savings is pretty high, and the choice is a .001% CD or prepay a 4% mortgage, I'd use some funds to pay it down. But not to the point you have no liquid reserves."}
{"id": "12382", "text": "I am a (small time!) Zopa user in the UK and have been for over a year. The rates that loans are accepted at on Zopa seem to me to be 0.5-1% higher than the best deals in the commercial market. The rates did used to be up at 8% even for A* short term, but now that bracket is getting about 5.5%. That's just talking about the rate offered to borrowers. My own return will be lower as there is a fee levied from Zopa (naturally) and there is the risk of default. In 13 months on the site with ~20 borrowers and ~200 payments I have not had any defaults. The total interest returned for 13 months on a staggered investment of \u00a3150 with all repayments re-loaned out has been \u00a39.33. So maybe 5.7% return? I expect that to go down a bit as I'm now loaning out at lower rates. Bear in mind also that interest from P2P lending is taxable income."}
{"id": "12488", "text": "easier access to your money That can be a disadvantage for some people. Based on the number of people who tap their 401K for non-retirement reasons, or just cash it in when they change jobs; making it painful to use before retirement age does keep some people from spending it too early. They need to be able to compartmentalize the funds in order to understand the difference between funds spending, saving and investing for retirement. Roth 401K One advantage that the 401K may have is  that you can in many plans invest the funds in a Roth 401K. This allows you to go beyond the Roth IRA limits. You are currently investing the maximum amount in your Roth IRA, so this could be a big advantage."}
{"id": "12614", "text": "Defined Benefit - the benefit you receive when you retire is defined e.g. $500 a month if you retire at age 65. It is up to the plan administrators to manage the pension fund, and ensure that there is enough money to cover the benefits based on the life expectancy of the retiree. Defined Contribution - the amount you contribute to the plan is defined. The benefit you receive at retirement depends on how well the investments do over the years."}
{"id": "12623", "text": "I would say your decision making is reasonable.  You are in the middle of Brexit and nobody knows what that means.  Civil society in the United States is very strained at the moment.  The one seeming source of stability in Europe, Germany, may end up with a very weakened government.  The only country that is probably stable is China and it has weak protections for foreign investors. Law precedes economics, even though economics often ends up dictating the law in the long run. The only thing that may come to mind is doing two things differently.  The first is mentally dropping the long-term versus short-term dichotomy and instead think in terms of the types of risks an investment is exposed to, such as currency risk, political risk, liquidity risk and so forth.  Maturity risk is just one type of risk. The second is to consider taking some types of risks that are hedged either by put contracts to limit the downside loss, or consider buying longer-dated call contracts using a small percentage of your money.  If the underlying price falls, then the call contracts will be a total loss, but if the price increases then you will receive most of the increase (minus the premium). If you are uncomfortable purchasing individual assets directly, then I would say you are probably doing everything that you reasonably can do."}
{"id": "12729", "text": "No, you can't claim personal expenses as business expenses. What is the alternative to paying someone to do your chores? Letting the chores go undone.  How does it affect your business if your household chores go undone? It doesn't; it only affects your personal life--that's why they are personal expenses."}
{"id": "12822", "text": "avoid corporation tax There aren't many avenues to save on corporation tax legally. The best option you can try is paying into a generous pension for yourself, which will save some corporation tax. Buying a house You can claim deduction for the mortgage payments, but profits on selling the house will require paying capital gains tax on the profit. You can rent it out, this will be decided between your mortgage provider and your company, but the rent will go towards as income.  Buying a car Not worth it. You will have to pay Class 1A NI contribution for benefits in kind. Any sane accountant will ask you to buy the car yourself and expense the mileage. Any income generated from the cash you have is taxable. Even the interest being paid on your money is taxable."}
{"id": "13209", "text": "You're technically 'allowed' to do other investments with your Roth, but you get taken to the cleaners by the financial 'services' community who wants to take a slice.  Non-securities investments from a Roth typically require a 'custodian' or other intermediary to handle your investment, e.g. buying silver coins and paying someone else to hold them. Buy these with cash and hold them yourself, assuming you trust yourself more than some stranger."}
{"id": "13596", "text": "You have two different operations going on: They each have of a set of rules regarding amounts, timelines, taxes, and penalties. The excess money can't be recharacterized except during a specific window of time.  I would see a tax professional to work through all the details."}
{"id": "13631", "text": "The answer provide by @mbhunter is correct, however there are contexts, shorting in spot market and carrying the position over settlement usually does not entail payment of dividend to the broker, one of the reason being post ex-date the price of the share downward adjusts to the extent of the dividend, so practically if you have shorted at 100 and post ex-date (assuming a dividend of 2 and no movement of the stock price), the price would slide to 98, the party who longed the stock @ 100 now is sitting on a price of 98 and received a dividend of 2 which equates to 100. The above is also contextual to the law of the country governing the exchange and the security exchange board regulations."}
{"id": "13656", "text": "The first thing I assess when looking at new credit cards is whether it has no annual fee, the second thing I look at is how long the interest free period is. I always pay my credit card off in full just before the due date. Any rewards program is a bonus. My main credit card is with CBA, I have a credit limit of $20K and pay no annual fee. I get a bonus point for every $ I spend on it, for which I exchange for store gift cards to help with my everyday spending. Approximately 3500 point would get me a $25 gift card. But my main reward with the card is the interest I save by keeping my own money in a Home Loan Offset account whilst I spend with the Bank's money. Then I pay the full amount off by the due date so I do not pay any interest on the credit card. I only use my credit cards for purchases I would usually make anyway and to pay bills, so my spending would be the same with or without a credit card. I can usually save over $500 each year off my Home Loan interest and get about $350 worth of gift cards each year. If I didn't have any Home Loans then I would keep my money in a high interest depost account so I would be increasing my interest payments each year. Sure you can probably get credit cards with more generous rewards programs, but how much are you paying each year in annual fees, and if you don't have an interest free period and you don't pay off all the amount due each month how much are you paying in interest on the card? This is what you need to way up when looking at rewards programs on offer. Nothing is for free, well almost nothing !"}
{"id": "13908", "text": "\"The \"\"par value\"\" is a technicality that you can ignore in this case, and it has nothing directly to do with the merger.  When a company issues stock, it puts a \"\"par value\"\" on the shares.  If it later issues more shares, they cannot be issued at less than par value. The rest of the notice seems to be as you said: If you hold until the merger takes effect, they are going to give you $25/share and your shares will be gone.  As always, you can try to sell on the open market before that time instead, although you can bet that not too many people are going to want to give you more than $25/share at this point.\""}
{"id": "13975", "text": "\"Imagine that, a car dealership lied to someone trusting.  Who would have thought. A big question is how well do you get along with your \"\"ex\"\"?  Can you be in the same room without fighting?  Can you agree on things that are mutually beneficial? The car will have to be paid off, and taken out of his name.  The mechanics on how to do this is a bit tricky and you may want to see a lawyer about it.    Having you being the sole owner of the car benefits him because he is no longer a cosigner on a loan.  This will help him get additional loans if he chooses, or cosign on his next gf's car. And of course this benefits you as you \"\"own\"\" the car instead of both of you. You will probably have to refinance the car in your name only.  Do you have sufficient credit?  Once this happens can you pay off the car in like a year or so? If you search this site a similar questions is asked about once per month.  Car loans are pretty terrible, in the future you should avoid them.  Cosigning is even worse and you should never again participate in such a thing. Another option is to just sell the car and start over with your own car hopefully paid for in cash.\""}
{"id": "14111", "text": "If you've already used TurboTax on your 2015 taxes, you can use the numbers TurboTax gave you as your reasonable estimate.  Line 4 is your estimate of total tax liability for 2015. This would be line 63 of form 1040. This is Federal income tax only, not Social Security tax.  Line 5 is the total of tax payments you made last year. You should be able to read this off your W-2 forms, Box 2. It corresponds to line 74 on the 1040.  Line 6 is the difference between lines 4 and 5. You can't claim a refund on the extension, so if line 5 is more than line 4, enter 0. Otherwise, subtract line 5 from line 4, and enter it in line 6. This is the amount you should send in with the form to minimize any penalty due with your taxes later.  The TurboTax software can generate this extension form automatically, I believe.  Also, don't forget to give a copy of this extension form to your tax preparer. He will need to know the amount you sent in."}
{"id": "14185", "text": "Your link is pointing to managed funds where the fees are higher, you should look at their exchange traded funds; you will note that the management fees are much lower and better reflect the index fund strategy."}
{"id": "14313", "text": "It is true that it may be somewhat of a loss. I would not lose any money with the other options as I have already made my money back but I would be at a loss as far as time investment goes. I agree number 1 is most logical but emotionally my heart is just not in it anymore that is why I put 2 and 3 in there too."}
{"id": "14364", "text": "Yes, you would have to report the gain. It is not relevant that you traded the stock previously, you still made a profit on the trade-at-hand. Imagine if for some reason this type of trade were exempt. Investors could follow the short term swings of volatile stocks completely tax-free."}
{"id": "14382", "text": "\"I can guarantee you that no one in IBanking and consulting is pulling in a 110k base. Even 75 is really pushing it in this market. 70k base is standard on the street and some bansk have been dropping it to 65. And you won't be working at a \"\"legit\"\" hedge fund or prop shop straight out of undergrad.   Source: I work in the industry.\""}
{"id": "14463", "text": "\"You really don't know how credit scoring works. Let's think about the purpose of a credit score: to assess whether you're a high default risk. A lender wants to know, in this order: Utilization factors into the solvency assessment. If you are at 100% utilization of your unsecured credit, you're insolvent -- you can't pay your bills. If you are at 0%, you're as solvent as you can be. Most people who use credit cards are somewhere in the middle. When a bank underwrites a large loan like a mortgage or car loan, they use your credit score an application information like income and employment history to figure out what kind of loan you qualify for. Credit cards are called \"\"revolving\"\" accounts for a reason -- you're supposed to use them to buy crap and pay your bill in full at the end of the month.  My advice to you:\""}
{"id": "14472", "text": "This is very insightful, I think. As an open question, consider what *downside* a nation (or bank) has to acknowledging bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. Obviously nations may lose some monetary control by endorsing bitcoin, but I don't know if there's much of a downside for banks considering bitcoin's easy conversion in to USD.   If anything, I feel like most of the problems for banks surrounding cryptos would be regulatory."}
{"id": "14538", "text": "Of course you don't need to take a mortgage - if you happen to have enough cash (or other assets) to pay your sister her share, or if she is willing to take it in installments over the next years. Mortgages are not needed to buy houses, but to pay for them - subtle difference. If you can pay - in whichever agreed way - without a mortgage, you won't need one."}
{"id": "14609", "text": "\"ITR-4 is for incorporated business. For freelancing, You can fill ITR 2 and declare the freelancing income as \"\"income from other source\"\". Refer to the Income Tax website for more details\""}
{"id": "14699", "text": "I suppose it depends on how liquid you need, and if you're willing to put forth any risk whatsoever.  The stock market can be dangerous, but there are strategies out there that will allow you to insure yourself against significant loss, while likely earning you a decent return.  You can buy and sell options along with stocks so that if the stock drops, your loss is limited, and if it goes up or even stays where it's at, you make money (a lot more than 1% annually). Of course there's risk of loss, but if you plan ahead, you can cap that risk wherever you want, maybe 5%, maybe 10%, whatever suits your needs.  And as far as liquidity goes, it should be no more than a week or so to close your positions and get your money if you really need it. But even so, I would only recommend this after putting aside at least a few thousand in a cash account for emergencies."}
{"id": "14732", "text": "\"You uncle is liable to pay \"\"Capital-Gains\"\" tax. Essentially the sale price less of cost would be treated as gains. The gains are taxed at 10% without indexation and 20% with Indexation.  The capital gains tax can be avoided if your uncle invests the gains into specified \"\"Infrastructure bonds\"\" or buys another property within a period of 3 years. The funds need to be kept in a separate \"\"Capital Gains\"\" account and not a regular savings account till you buy another property within 3 years.\""}
{"id": "14745", "text": "My assumption here is that you paid nearly 32K, but also financed about 2500 in taxes/fees.  At 13.5% the numbers come out pretty close.  Close enough for discussion. On the positive side, you see the foolishness of your decision however you probably signed a paper that stated the true cost of the car loan.  The truth in lending documents clearly state, in bold numbers, that you would pay nearly 15K in interest.  If you pay the loan back early, or make larger principle payments that number can be greatly reduced. On top of the interest charge you will also suffer depreciation of the car.  If someone offered you 31K for the car, you be pretty lucky to get it.  If you keep it for 4 years you will probably lose about 40% of the value, about 13K. This is why it is foolish for most people to purchase a new vehicle.  Not many have enough wealth to absorb a loss of this size.  In the book A Millionaire Next Door the author debunks the assumption that most millionaires drive new cars.  They tend to drive cars that are pretty standard and a couple of years old.  They pay cash for their cars. The bottom line is you singed documents indicating that you knew exactly what you were getting into.  Failing any other circumstances the car is yours.  Talking to a lawyer would probably confirm this. You can attempt to sell it and minimize your losses, or you can pay off the loan early so you are not suffering from finance charges."}
{"id": "14967", "text": "you'll need 25k to start or 2k in multiple accounts, that way you have access to margin, and don't have to worry about Pattern day trading limits. Be right more than you are wrong. Go up look for 3x potential up vs down risk. Compound daily.  you can't double a penny every day every day for a month it becomes to difficult. but you can do 1%/day or maybe better. 2k compounded 1% every day becomes 75k at the end of a year (but you'll likely have to take weekends off, or look for other markets)"}
{"id": "14989", "text": "I know this is heresy but if you have funds for significantly more   than 6 months of expenses (let's say 12 months), how risky would it be   to put it all into stock index funds? Quite risky as if you do need to dip into it, how fast could you get the cash? Also, do you realize the tax implications when you do sell the shares should you have an emergency? In the worst-case scenario, let's say you have a financial emergency   at the same time the stock market crashes and loses half its value.   You could still liquidate the rest and have sufficient funds for 6   months. Am I underestimating the risks of this strategy? That's not worst case scenario though. Worst case scenario would be another 9/11 where the markets are closed for nearly a week and you need the money but can't get the funds converted to cash in the bank that you can use. This is in addition to the potential wait for a settlement in the case of using ETFs if you choose to go that way. In the case of money market funds, CDs and other near cash equivalents these can be accessed relatively easily which is part of the point. A staggered approach where some cash is kept in house, some in accounts that can easily accessed and some in other investments may make sense though the breakdown would differ depending on how much risk people are willing to take. If it truly is an emergency fund then the odds of needing it should be   very slim, so why live with near zero return on that money? Something to consider is what is called an emergency here? For some people a sudden $1,000 bill to fix their car that just broke down is an emergency. For others, there could be emergency trips to visit family that may have gotten into accidents or gotten a diagnosis that they may pass away soon. Consider what do you want to call an emergency here as chances are you may not be considering all that people would think is an emergency. There is the question of what other sources of money do you have to cover should issues arise."}
{"id": "15169", "text": "\"The difference between dividend and growth in mutual funds has to do with the types of stocks the mutual fund invests in. Typically a company in the early stages are considered growth investments. In this phase the company needs to keep most of its profits to reinvest in the business. Typically once a company gets a significant size the company's growth prospects are not as good so the company pays some of its profits in the form of a dividend to the shareholders.  As far as which is the best buy is totally a personal choice. There will be times when one is better then the other. Most likely you will want to \"\"diversify\"\" and invest in both types.\""}
{"id": "15270", "text": "Your freelance income will not qualify you for the work-from-home deductions, for that you would need a T2200 form signed by your employer. But, you are allowed to be self employed as a sole-proprietorship while still being an employee of another company. If you take that route, you'll be able to write-off even more expenses than those you linked to. Things like a portion of your internet bill can be claimed, for example. But note that these deductions would only apply to offset the self-employment income, so if you're not earning very much from the freelance work, it might not be worth all the hassle. Filing taxes when self-employed is definitely more complicated, and many people will get professional tax preparation help - at least for the first time."}
{"id": "15385", "text": "I do this very thing, but with asset allocation and risk parity in mind. I disagree with the cash or bust answers above, but many of the aforementioned facts are valuable and I don't mean to undermine them in anyway. That said, let's look at two examples: Option 1: All-in For the sake of argument let's say you had $100k invested in the SPY (S&P 500 ETF) in early 2007, and you kept it there until today. Your lowest balance would have been about $51k, and at this point the possibility of you losing your job was probably at a peak. Today you would be left with $170k assuming no withdrawal. Option 2: Risk Parity BUT if you balanced your investments with a risk parity approach, using negatively correlated asset classes you avoid this dilemma. If you had invested 50% in XLP (Consumer Staples Sector ETF) and 50% in TLT ( Long Term Treasury ETF) your investments low point would have been $88k, and your lowest annual return would be +0.69%. Today you would be left with $214k assuming no withdrawals.  I chose option #2 and it hasn't failed me yet, even in 2016 so far the results are steady and reliably given the reward. My general opinion is simple: when you have money always grow it. Just be sure to cover your ass and prepare for rain. Backtesting for this was done at portfoliovisualizer.com, the one caveat to this approach is that inflation and a lack of international exposure are a risk here."}
{"id": "15473", "text": "I don't see any reason to worry about a check being deposited via cell phone. There isn't anything you can write on a check to make it physical deposit only or similar.  If you really want to keep your check from being read electronically you could always smudge the numbers but you run the risk of the bank not cashing it and possibly getting a return check fee."}
{"id": "15728", "text": "I trust the 401(k) was a traditional, pre tax account. There was no tax paid, and any withdrawals would be taxable. The account could go to zero, and there's no write off, sorry. I have to ask - were there any withdrawals along the way? What was it invested in that lost 90% of its value?  Edit - I'm sorry the OP came and went. It would be great to have closure on some of these issues. Here, I'm thinking as Duff said, malpractice, or perhaps a 401(k) that was 100% in company stock. Seems we'll never know."}
{"id": "15824", "text": "\"The danger of overdrawing the account via the use of a debit card, and the exorbitant fees that can result make me hesitant to use a debit card. The ability to cover all the transactions with one payment is why I use a credit card for these \"\"debit\"\" transactions.  Yes there is a risk of a late payment, but that can be easily avoided within the three week grace period. The ability to electronically transfer the money to pay off the card makes this even easier.\""}
{"id": "16175", "text": "\"The best strategy for RSU's, specifically, is to sell them as they vest. Usually, vesting is not all in one day, but rather spread over a period of time, which assures that you won't sell in one extremely unfortunate day when the stock dipped. For regular investments, there are two strategies I personally would follow: Sell when you need. If you need to cash out - cash out. Rebalance - if you need to rebalance your portfolio (i.e.: not cash out, but reallocate investments or move investment from one company to another) - do it periodically on schedule. For example, every 13 months (in the US, where the long term cap. gains tax rates kick in after 1 year of holding) - rebalance. You wouldn't care about specific price drops on that day, because they also affect the new investments. Speculative strategies trying to \"\"sell high buy low\"\" usually bring to the opposite results: you end up selling low and buying high. But if you want to try and do that - you'll have to get way more technical than just \"\"dollar cost averaging\"\" or similar strategies. Most people don't have neither time nor the knowledge for that, and even those who do rarely can beat the market (and never can, in the long run).\""}
{"id": "16187", "text": "The business and investment would be shown on separate parts of the tax return. (An exception to this is where an investment is related and part of your business, such as futures trading on business products)  On the business side of it, you would show the transfer to the stocks as a draw from the business, the amount transferred would then be the cost base of the investment.  For taxes, you only have to report gains or losses on investments."}
{"id": "16270", "text": "In Houston, Texas USA where I went to a private high school they had a half-semester class in personal finance, but it was optional and didn't give you any credits towards graduation. You are right though, it should be a standard class. After all, who doesn't need that information in their adult lives, and not everyone goes to college."}
{"id": "16626", "text": "\"Here's a number-crunching example of how the \"\"Zero interest rate\"\" offer is misleading. Suppose the offer is that a car \"\"costs $24,000.00 with zero percent financing over 24 months\"\"  or as an alternative, \"\"$3,000.00 off for cash\"\". Ignore the hype:  the quoted prices and the quoted interest rates.  Look at what really happens to two people who take advantage of the two offers, One person hands over $21,000.00 cash, and leaves with the new car. The second promises to make 24 payments of $1000.00, one a month, starting in one month's time, and also leaves with the same make and model new car. The two people have received exactly the same benefit, so the two payment schemes must have the same value. A mortgage program will tell you that paying off a $21,000.00 loan by making 24 monthly payments of $1000.00 requires an interest rate of 1.10% a month, or an effective annual rate of 14.03%.\""}
{"id": "16924", "text": "It depends on why the stocks crashed. If this happened because interest rates shot up, bonds will suffer also. On the other hand, stocks could be crashing because economic growth (and hence earnings) are disappointing. This pulls down interest rates and lifts bonds."}
{"id": "17081", "text": "Very true. Just open your eyes. We no longer have soup lines, they just pass out debit cards now. You want to see it first hand try a job as a grocery checker in middle america, that is if you can find one to begin with."}
{"id": "17208", "text": "See my comment for some discussion of why one might choose an identical fund over an ETF.  As to why someone would choose the higher cost fund in this instance ... The Admiral Shares version of the fund (VFIAX) has the same expense ratio as the ETF but has a minimum investment of $10K.  Some investors may want to eventually own the Admiral Shares fund but do not yet have $10K.  If they begin with the Investor Shares now and then convert to Admiral later, that conversion will be a non-taxable event.  If, however, they start with ETF shares now and then sell them later to buy the fund, that sale will be a taxable event. Vanguard ETFs are only commission-free to Vanguard clients using Vanguard Brokerage Services.  Some investors using other brokers may face all sorts of penalties for purchasing third-party ETFs.  Some retirement plan participants (either at Vanguard or another broker) may not even be allowed to purchase ETFs."}
{"id": "17215", "text": "The answer seems to depend on where you live.  Perhaps you already found this, but the summary from the IRS is: The insurance laws in some states do not allow a corporation to purchase group health insurance when the corporation only has one employee. Therefore, if the shareholder was the sole corporate employee, the shareholder had to purchase his health insurance in his own name. The IRS issued Notice 2008-1, which ruled that under certain situations the shareholder would be allowed an above-the-line deduction even if the health insurance policy was purchased in the name of the shareholder. Notice 2008-1 provided four examples, including three examples in which the shareholder purchased the health insurance and one in which the S corporation purchased the health insurance. Notice 2008-1 states that if the shareholder purchased the health insurance in his own name and paid for it with his own funds, the shareholder would not be allowed an above-the-line deduction. On the other hand, if the shareholder purchased the health insurance in his own name but the S corporation either directly paid for the health insurance or reimbursed the shareholder for the health insurance and also included the premium payment in the shareholder\u2019s W-2, the shareholder would be allowed an above-the-line deduction. The bottom line is that in order for a shareholder to claim an above-the-line deduction, the health insurance premiums must ultimately be paid by the S corporation and must be reported as taxable compensation in the shareholder\u2019s W-2. https://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/S-Corporation-Compensation-and-Medical-Insurance-Issues I understand this to mean that you can only get the deduction in your case (having purchased it in your own name) if your state does not allow your S-Corp to purchase a group health plan because you only have one employee. (I don't know specifically if Illinois fits that description or not.)  In addition, there are rules about reporting health insurance premiums for taxes for S-Corp share members that you should also check.  Personally, I think that it's complicated enough that advice from a CPA or other tax advisor specific to your situation would be worth the cost."}
{"id": "17488", "text": "Absolutely. The overhead for a product based business like that is particularly high. Service based businesses tend to have much better profit margins. But if she was running a plant nursery she has to pay huge heating costs, renting the area she operates in, not to mention inventory and employees. That $300k vanishes pretty fast. This article talking about disappearing middle class is a bad argument. This sounds much more about how the recession hurts a small business. Assuming of course it is the recession. I know a coffee shop near me that isn't doing that great and says the economy is hurting them bad. They apparently don't realize that being blatantly rude to their customers drives them away. There are often other sides to the story besides the economy, whether the fault of the business owner or some other factor outside their control that may not be covered in these kinds of posts."}
{"id": "17528", "text": "It's monopoly money.  Everybody treats it like that.  Of course it doesn't work.    It would be vastly different if you had you budget **plus**    (a) freedom of choice for the supplier, internal or external,    (b) your group could spend any budget surplus on whatever they wanted (well, for the office).    But that will never happen because company policy."}
{"id": "17680", "text": "The company struck a truce with Elliott. They elected 3 of Elliott's nominees to the board, agreed to annual board elections, and placed Elliott on the committee for the firm's CEO search (Elliott targeted their previous CEO trying to push change and he had to resign after sending a threatening letter to Elliott)."}
{"id": "17759", "text": "Yes -- you can refund the sales tax and adjust your return. Make sure you have a copy of your customer's reseller permit on file. If the item sold was for their own use (instead of resale), then sales tax is due, so you might want to check with the customer and ask them what they want to do."}
{"id": "17795", "text": "You should apply for 83(b) within 30 days. 10 months is too late, sorry."}
{"id": "17823", "text": "\"I'd suggest you start by looking at the mutual fund and/or ETF options available via your bank, and see if they have any low-cost funds that invest in high-risk sectors.  You can increase your risk (and potential returns) by allocating your assets to riskier sectors rather than by picking individual stocks, and you'll be less likely to make an avoidable mistake. It is possible to do as you suggest and pick individual stocks, but by doing so you may be taking on more risk than you suspect, even unnecessary risk.  For instance, if you decide to buy stock in Company A, you know you're taking a risk by investing in just one company.  However, without a lot of work and financial expertise, you may not be able to assess how much risk you're taking by investing in Company A specifically, as opposed to Company B.  Even if you know that investing in individual stocks is risky, it can be very hard to know how risky those particular individual stocks are, compared to other alternatives. This is doubly true if the investment involves actions more exotic than simply buying and holding an asset like a stock.  For instance, you could definitely get plenty of risk by investing in commercial real estate development or complicated options contracts; but a certain amount of work and expertise is required to even understand how to do that, and there is a greater likelihood that you will slip up and make a costly mistake that negates any extra gain, even if the investment itself might have been sound for someone with experience in that area.  In other words, you want your risk to really be the risk of the investment, not the \"\"personal\"\" risk that you'll make a mistake in a complicated scheme and lose money because you didn't know what you were doing.  (If you do have some expertise in more exotic investments, then maybe you could go this route, but I think most people -- including me -- don't.) On the other hand, you can find mutual funds or ETFs that invest in large economic sectors that are high-risk, but because the investment is diversified within that sector, you need only compare the risk of the sectors.  For instance, emerging markets are usually considered one of the highest-risk sectors.  But if you restrict your choice to low-cost emerging-market index funds, they are unlikely to differ drastically in risk (at any rate, far less than individual companies).  This eliminates the problem mentioned above: when you choose to invest in Emerging Markets Index Fund A, you don't need to worry as much about whether Emerging Markets Index Fund B might have been less risky; most of the risk is in the choice to invest in the emerging markets sector in the first place, and differences between comparable funds in that sector are small by comparison.  You could do the same with other targeted sectors that can produce high returns; for instance, there are mutual funds and ETFs that invest specifically in technology stocks. So you could begin by exploring the mutual funds and ETFs available via your existing investment bank, or poke around on Morningstar.  Fees will still matter no matter what sector you're in, so pay attention to those.  But you can probably find a way to take an aggressive risk position without getting bogged down in the details of individual companies.  Also, this will be less work than trying something more exotic, so you're less likely to make a costly mistake due to not understanding the complexities of what you're investing in.\""}
{"id": "17923", "text": "Passive implies following an index. Your question seems to ask about a hypothetical fund that starts, say, as an S&P fund, but as the index is adjusted, the old stocks stay in the fund. Sounds simple enough, but over time, the fund's performance will diverge from the index. The slight potential gain from lack of cap gains will be offset by the fund being unable to market itself.  Keep in mind, the gains distributed each year are almost exclusively long term, taxed at a favorable rate."}
{"id": "18001", "text": "You are wildly over-estimating your taxes.  First, remember that your business expenses reduce your gross income.  Second, remember that taxes are progressive, so your flat 35% only applies if you're already making a high salary that pushed you into the higher brackets of US and CA. I think the deeper problems are: 1) you are expecting a super early start-up (with no finished product) to pay you the same as a steady job, including health insurance, and 2) you are expecting Kickstarter to independently fund the venture. The best source of funding is yourself.  If you believe in this venture and in your game design abilities, then pay for most of the costs out of your own savings.  Cut your expenses to the extent you can. You may want to wander over to startups.SE to get more perspective and ideas on your business plan."}
{"id": "18065", "text": "\"I looked into the \"\"We buy houses\"\" people when I was trying to sell my house a few years back.  The amount they are normally willing to pay is far below value.  If I was going to take that little, I would just set the price at that amount and sell it to somebody, maybe making a young couple really happy getting into a house they couldn't otherwise afford.\""}
{"id": "18200", "text": "The best thing is to diversify across multiple currencies. USD and EUR seem reliable. But not 100% reliable to keep all your investments in this types of currencies. Invest part of your savings in USD, part - in EUR, and part in your home country's currency. Apart from investing I recommend you to have certain sum in cash and certain on your bank account."}
{"id": "18257", "text": "Never co-sign a loan for someone, especially family  Taking out a loan for yourself is bad enough, but co-signing a loan is just plain stupid. Think about it, if the bank is asking for a co-signer its because they are not very confident that the applicant is going to be paying back the loan. So why would you then step up and say I'll pay back the loan if they don't, make me a co-signer please. Here is a list of things that people never think about when they cosign a loan for somebody.  Now if you absolutely must co-sign a loan here is how I would do it. I, the co-signer would be the one who makes the payments to ensure that the loan was paid on time and I would be the one collecting the payment from the person who is getting the loan. Its a very simple way of preventing some of the worst situations that can arise and you should be willing to make the payments anyway after all thats what it means to cosign a loan. Your just turning things around and paying the loan upfront instead of paying after the applicant defaults and ruins every ones credit. (Source: user's own blog post Never co-sign a loan for someone, especially family)"}
{"id": "18388", "text": "You should pull your credit report from all the credit reporting agencies annually to make sure only the accounts you know of are being reported."}
{"id": "18436", "text": "Dollar cost averaging is an great way to diversify your investment risk.  There's mainly 2 things you want to achieve when you're saving for retirement: 1) Keep your principal investment; 2) Grow it.  The best methods recommended by most financial institutions are as follows:  1) Diversification;  2) Re-balance. There are a lot of additional recommendations, but these are my main take away.  When you dollar cost average, you're essentially diversifying your exchange risk between the value of the funds you're investing.   Including the ups and downs of the value of the underlying asset, may actually be re-balancing.  Picking your asset portfolio: 1) You generally want to include within your 401k or any other invest, classes of investments that do not always move in total correlation as this allows you to diversify risk; 2) I'm making a lot of assumptions here - since you may have already picked your asset classes.  Consider utilizing the following to tell you when to buy or sell your underlying investment: 1) Google re-balance excel sheet to find several examples of re-balance tools to help you always buy low and sell high;   2) Enter your portfolio investment; 3) Utilize the movement to invest in the underlying assets based on market movement; and 4) Execute in an emotionless way and stick to your plan.  Example -  Facts 1) I have 1 CAD and 1 USD in my 401k.  Plan I will invest 1 dollar in the ratio of 50/50 - forever.   Let's start in 2011 since we were closer to par: 2010 - 1 CAD (value 1 USD) and 1 USD (value 1 USD) = 50/50 ratio 2011 start  - 1 CAD ( value .8 USD) and 1 USD (value 1 USD) = 40/60 ratio 2011 - rebalance - invest 1 USD as follows purchase .75 CAD (.60 USD) and purchase .40 USD = total of 1 USD reinvested 2011 end - 1.75 CAD (value 1.4USD) and 1.4 USD (value 1.4 USD) - 50/50 ratio As long as the fundamentals of your underlying assets (i.e. you're not expecting hyperinflation or your asset to approach 0), this approach will always build value over time since you're always buying low and selling high while dollar averaging.  Keep in mind it does reduce your potential gains - but if you're looking to max gain, it may mean you're also max potential loss - unless you're able to find A symmetrical investments.  I hope this helps."}
{"id": "18539", "text": "Here are the general guidelines on what you should report and pay - but the overall rule is that if it's not a business-related cost then you can't claim it. In your example, a client meeting may warrant a claim for 'entertaining clients' which could be claimed as a business cost - but buying yourself a coffee to get out of the house isn't a business cost."}
{"id": "18551", "text": "Subprime Auto Loan Defaults on the Rise  [https://youtu.be/4XrdNmgon2c] Jul 30, 2017  Bill Black the white collar criminologist says It is a very severe problem for consumers who are going to lose not only their cars, but their credit ratings"}
{"id": "18671", "text": "Despite a fair number of views, no one besides @mbhunter answered, so I'll gather the findings of my own research here. Hopefully, this will help others in similar situations. If you spot any errors, please let me know!"}
{"id": "18727", "text": "Will 2 millions dollars check to be cash? Will a bank convert a check to cash?  In my experience, no.  Even for small checks.   Unless you happen to have a VERY good relationship with your banker (read as: have an existing large bank balance.)   The exception is if you go to the bank the check is drawn on.   But even then, I doubt they'll cash a $2M dollar check. Can you deposit a $2M dollar check?  Most definitely. How long will 2 millions dollars check to be cash? Depends on your bank's policies, relationship with you, and the origination of the check.  You'll need to talk to the exact bank in question to find out.  Some guidelines from my own experiences: Out of country checks will take quite awhile, say 4 weeks, even for trivial amounts.  I'm not sure what a $2M size would do.   Beyond that situation, it will likely depend on whether you have more money than the check's worth in your bank accounts.  If so, they may be willing to give you cash in a few days.  Or if you only want some of the money as cash in a few days, that might be possible. If the bank couldn't cash for him, will the bank give him some of cash   for example, $500,000 for now, and the rest wait to be cash at later   time like 24 hours or 1 week? Unless you already have a lot of money in your relationship with the bank, I think it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY they will let you have ANY of the money in 24 hours.  You MIGHT get some of it in a week.   The issue will be that such a large check will be viewed as having a high chance of being fraudulent, so they will want to be exceptionally conservative."}
{"id": "18792", "text": "\"You are confining the way you and the other co-founders are paid for guaranteeing the loan to capital shares. Trying to determine payments by equity distribution is hard. It is a practice that many small companies particularly the ones in their initial stage fall into. I always advise against trying to make payments with equity, weather it is for unpaid salary or for guaranteeing a loan such as your case. Instead of thinking about a super sophisticated algorithm to distribute the new shares between the cofounders and the new investors, given a set of constraints, which will most probably fail to make the satisfactory split, you should simply view the co-founders as debt lenders for the company and the shareholders as a capital contributor.  If the co-founders are treated as debt lenders, it will be much easier to determine the risk compensation for guaranteeing the loan because it is now assessed in monetary units and this compensation is equal to the risk premium you see fit \"\"taking into consideration the probability of default \"\". On the other hand, capital contributors will gain capital shares as a percentage of the total value of the company after adding SBA loan.\""}
{"id": "18805", "text": "The CBOE had a great article on this. I will search for it and edit. The normal dividends are not adjusted. Which is why you see early exercise of just out of the money options sometimes. To get that dividend. A special dividend, say a $50 stock with $1/yr dividend but now has a $3 one time dividend would likely result in an option strike adjustment."}
{"id": "18844", "text": "This is either laundering money or laundering non-money.  All the other answers point out how a cheque or bank transfer will take days to actually clear.  That is a red herring! There are lots of ways to illegally transfer real money out of existing accounts.  Stolen cheque books, stolen banking details (partly in connection with stolen smartphones and credit cards) and cards, money transfers from other people duped in a similar manner as you are: it is much easier to steal money than invent it, and it takes quite longer until stolen rather than invented money will blow up at the banks. All of those payments will likely properly clear but not leave you in actual legal possession of money.  People will notice the missing money and notify police and banks and you will be on the hook for paying back all of it. Cheques and transfers from non-existing accounts, in contrast, tend to blow up very fast and thus are less viable for this kind of scam as the time window for operating the scam is rather small. Whether or not the cheque actually clears is about as relevant of whether or not the Rolls Royce you are buying for $500 because the owner has an ingrown toe nail and cannot press down the accelerator any more has four wheels. Better hope for the Rolls to be imaginary because then you'll only be out of $500 and that's the end of it.  If it is real, your trouble is only starting."}
{"id": "18850", "text": "The IRS Guidance pertaining to the subject.  In general the best I can say is your business expense may be deductible.  But it depends on the circumstances and what it is you want to deduct. Travel Taxpayers who travel away from home on business may deduct related   expenses, including the cost of reaching their destination, the cost   of lodging and meals and other ordinary and necessary expenses.   Taxpayers are considered \u201ctraveling away from home\u201d if their duties   require them to be away from home substantially longer than an   ordinary day\u2019s work and they need to sleep or rest to meet the demands   of their work. The actual cost of meals and incidental expenses may be   deducted or the taxpayer may use a standard meal allowance and reduced   record keeping requirements. Regardless of the method used, meal   deductions are generally limited to 50 percent as stated earlier.    Only actual costs for lodging may be claimed as an expense and   receipts must be kept for documentation. Expenses must be reasonable   and appropriate; deductions for extravagant expenses are not   allowable. More information is available in Publication 463, Travel,   Entertainment, Gift, and Car Expenses. Entertainment Expenses for entertaining clients, customers or employees may be   deducted if they are both ordinary and necessary and meet one of the   following tests: Directly-related test: The main purpose of the entertainment activity is the conduct of business, business was actually conducted   during the activity and the taxpayer had more than a general   expectation of getting income or some other specific business benefit   at some future time.   Associated test: The entertainment was associated with the active conduct of the taxpayer\u2019s trade or business and occurred directly   before or after a substantial business discussion. Publication 463 provides more extensive explanation of these tests as   well as other limitations and requirements for deducting entertainment   expenses. Gifts Taxpayers may deduct some or all of the cost of gifts given in the   course of their trade or business. In general, the deduction is   limited to $25 for gifts given directly or indirectly to any one   person during the tax year. More discussion of the rules and   limitations can be found in Publication 463. If your LLC reimburses you for expenses outside of this guidance it should be treated as Income for tax purposes. Edit for Meal Expenses: Amount of standard meal allowance.   The standard meal allowance is   the federal M&IE rate. For travel in 2010, the rate for most small   localities in the United States is $46 a day. Source IRS P463 Alternately you could reimburse at a per diem rate"}
{"id": "18900", "text": "The only consequence I could see is that they have your money until they pay you back. I'd just do what JoeTaxpayer says and get it back."}
{"id": "18939", "text": "Average rates of return usually assume compounding, so your formula would be for annual compounding ,or for continuous compounding."}
{"id": "18950", "text": "I don't know the term sole trader but usually the trade off is a corporation allows for shield from liability (i.e. creditors) more flexibility with respect to personal tax management, but higher operating costs (incorporation, financial statements, etc).  I always incorporate."}
{"id": "19107", "text": "\"Envelope budgeting is pretty simple. It's easy enough that you can teach it to children, and flexible enough you can use it as an adult.   The general idea is that you take your cash money (no bank accounts involved in the simple version), and stick it in envelopes marked for what it's supposed to be for. So for example, you get paid, you cash your paycheck and you put $100 in an envelope marked food.  Now when you go out to eat, you go get the money out of your food envelope, and spend it on food.  When your food envelope is empty you go hungry.   In the simple version you have envelopes for things like \"\"food\"\", \"\"candy\"\", \"\"toys\"\", \"\"games\"\". etc. (simple version is usually taught to kids.)  So you want a $60 game, and your game envelope only has $5. Well you can't get the game. You need to add more money to the game envelope. You need to eat so you have to put money there, but maybe you don't need toys. So you can divert some incoming money from toys to games. Sure it's still going to take a while to get to $60, but now with some simple kid friendly math you can see how long, and more importantly, you can make decisions on what is more important. Candy or Toys? In the adult version things are much the same. We just have more envelopes. We have Rent, Car Payment, Gas, Food, Electric. Then we need some envelopes for \"\"savings\"\" and \"\"retirement\"\". etc. Now when you get your Paycheck you prioritize your money and you stuff it in the envelopes. How much you put in each envelope is easy. Enough to pay for that thing. Savings and Retirement meet different goals. You want $6,000 savings. Well just like that game in the kid version, you're not going to get there all at once.  But you can see and make decisions on what is most important. You want $1,000,000 to retire on. Sure, but that envelope is going to take a while to fill up.  At it's core, the important parts are that: Let me explain the rent example, as it's the oddest.  You get $500 a week, and you need $1000 for rent.  This means you're spending from your envelopes. During week 1 and 2 you're spending last months week 3 and 4.  You DO NOT do: This is important because if you lose your paycheck in week 3 or 4 you are homeless.  Finally, in general, you stick stuff in savings envelope. And you want to reach a savings envelope goal of 6 months of your average pay checks. Once you reach this goal, then you're in good shape, and a job loss doesn't mean you're homeless. You can always just pull from savings.  It's important when using these envelopes to understand that you only make the decision of what is more important when you're sticking money in, not when you're taking money out, and that you only work with the money you have right now today (in your hand). Now what you think you're going to get tomorrow.  Money in the bank can be split into virtual envelopes. Money in savings can be in any vehicle, but generally you want a short term emergency envelope (savings account) and a long term envelope (CDs for example). Take a look at YNAB.com they used to provide free lessons in using their software to manage an envelope system.  And the I know it's going to get comments section.  The rent v.s. homeless is a real example. You should not take money from, say, the food envelope, to cover the rent. This may seem silly, but if you're doing that then you made poor decisions when deciding where the money goes. Use the emergency fund envelope to cover the rent, and next time put less money into food. It's this \"\"rule\"\" that makes envelope budgeting work well. You may be homeless, but you can eat, drive to work, put gas in your car, and pay your bills. Taking money from different envelopes usually results in a spiral, where you attempt to do the sensible thing, but in the end, you're worse off.  Migrating to envelope budgeting (in the strict sense) is hard. The best way I have taught people to do it is to only envelope budget an increasing part of their income until their envelopes are full enough for one month. That means that you might only envelope budget 10% of your income at first. But unless your situation is such that you can cover all your bills with one paycheck, it's not going to be possible to transition without breaking the \"\"don't take money from other envelope\"\" rules.\""}
{"id": "19184", "text": "I agree with this. I like to buy stocks that are priced low according to value investing principles but set limits to sell if the stock happens to get priced at a point that exceeds X% annualized return, for instance 15% or 30% depending on preference. If the price goes up, I cash out and find the next best value stock and repeat. If the price does not go up, then I hold it which is fine because I only buy what I'm comfortable with holding for the long term. I tend to prefer stocks that have a dividend yield in the 2-6% range so I can keep earning a return.  Also I too like the look of MCD.  GE looks good as well, from this perspective."}
{"id": "19245", "text": "You're not subject to the US tax laws, and since the income is not US-sourced, it is not subject to withholding. Your employer doesn't need any form, but if they insist - you can provide them a W8-BEN to certify your non-resident status. Keep in mind that if you do come to the US, the money you earn while in the US is US-sourced and subject to the US taxes and withholding, even if you're non-resident."}
{"id": "19794", "text": "Systems to research that may help you out: Less Accounting and Wave are great because they can import data from banks / credit cards. I know you said your bank doesn't export it but it seems like something as a small business you would want."}
{"id": "19999", "text": "You need the Present Value, not Future Value formula for this. The loan amount or 1000 is paid/received now (not in the future). The formula is $ PMT = PV (r/n)(1+r/n)^{nt} / [(1+r/n)^{nt} - 1] $  See for example http://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/financial/loan-calculator.php With PV = 1000, r=0.07, n=12, t=3 we get PMT = 30.877 per month"}
{"id": "20036", "text": "That's really not something that can be answered based on the information provided. There are a lot of factors involved: type of income, your wife's tax bracket, the split between Federal and State (if you're in a high bracket in a high income-tax rate State - it may even be more than 50%), etc etc. The fact that your wife didn't withdraw the money is irrelevant. S-Corp is a pass-through entity, i.e.: owners are taxed on the profits based on their personal marginal tax rates, and it doesn't matter what they did with the money. In this case, your wife re-invested it into the corp (used it to pay off corp debts), which adds back to her basis. You really should talk to a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) to learn how S-Corps work and how to use them properly. Your wife, actually, as she's the owner."}
{"id": "20054", "text": "See the Mortgage Professor's calculators (#3). Go to bankrate and look up rates so you know what to punch in to those calculators."}
{"id": "20076", "text": "The shareholders have a claim on the profits, but they may prefer that claim to be exercised in ways other than dividend payments. For example, they may want the company to invest all of its profits in growth, or they may want it to buy back shares to increase the value of the remaining shares, especially since dividends are generally taxed as income while an increase in the share price is generally taxed as a capital gain, and capital gains are often taxed at a lower rate than income."}
{"id": "20140", "text": "\"Not sure what your needs are or what NIS is:  However here in the US a good choice for a single fund are \"\"Life Cycle Funds\"\". Here is a description from MS Money: http://www.msmoney.com/mm/investing/articles/life_cyclefunds.htm\""}
{"id": "20261", "text": "\"A \"\"balance transfer\"\" is paying one credit card with another.  You probably get offers in the mail to do this all of the time.  As other posters have noted, however, this usually comes with finance fees rather than the rewards that you get for normal purchases because it's written into your credit card agreement as a different class of transaction with different rules. I'm not sure if it's urban legend or true, but I have heard stories that suggest there were some \"\"loop holes\"\" in the earliest credit card reward plans that allowed for something like what you want.  I doubt that any plan ever allowed exactly what you've written, but I've heard stories about people buying gift cards from merchants and then using the gift cards to pay their bill.  This loop hole (if it ever existed) is closed now, but it would have allowed for essentially infinite generation of rewards at no cost to the cardholder.  The banks and credit card companies have a lot of years of experience at this sort of thing now, so the threshold for you finding something that works and conforms with the cardholder agreement is pretty small.\""}
{"id": "20335", "text": "\"The textbook answer would be \"\"assets-liabilities+present discounted value of all future profit\"\".  A&L is usually simple (if a company has an extra $1m in cash, it's worth $1m more; if it has an extra $1m in debt, it's worth $1m less). If a company with ~0 assets and $50k in profit has a $1m valuation, then that implies that whoever makes that valuation (wants to buy at that price) really believes one of two things - either the future profit will be significantly larger than $50k (say, it's rapidly growing);  or the true worth of assets is much more - say, there's some IP/code/patents/people that have low book value but some other company would pay $1m just to get that. The point is that valuation is subjective since the key numbers in the calculations are not perfectly known by anyone who doesn't have a time machine, you can make estimates but the knowledge to make the estimates varies (some buyers/sellers have extra information), and they can be influenced by those buyers/sellers; e.g. for strategic acquisitions the value of company is significantly changed simply because someone claims they want to acquire it. And, $1m valuation for a company with $500m in profits isn't appropriate - it's appropriate only if the profits are expected to drop to zero within a couple years; a stagnant but stable company with $500m profits would be worth at least $5m and potentially much more.\""}
{"id": "20504", "text": "that's just it, though - they are splitting up the 1%! and in most cases, especially vanguard, they are splitting up far less.  ETFs don't have 12b-1 fees. explaining why you're experiencing different returns for ETFs will almost certainly involve something other than their expense. again, this is especially true for vanguard. they have the cheapest ETFs around (though i think schwab beats them on a few now).  i can only guess at the full compensation structure. betterment likely earns money on cash reserves and  securities hypothecation (i guess?). they also charge a small fee from what i understand. finance is very slim these days.  i guess i'm wondering what your ultimate question is. if it's the inter corporate compensation structure, above is my best guess. if it's about performance, then we need to compare the ETFs you are looking at. if it's about the fees on funds, i think we covered that!  as an advisor, it's my experience that very specific inquiries about fees have a deeper concern. people hear a lot about being overcharged so cost is a very standard place for clients to initially look when trying to compare performance of portfolios or securities."}
{"id": "20529", "text": "I meant bitcoin. The issuer is the designer of the currency, which I have stated multiple times, has structural issues. The exchanges are the banks, which have been shown to be susceptible to hacking. Bitcoin is also a fiat currency, just like every other currency, just one with no faith or guarantees behind it and no one to hold accountable when things go sideways. No thanks."}
{"id": "20539", "text": "\"Note that it isn't always clear that \"\"turning it all into an annuity\"\" is the right answer. Annuities are essentially insurance policies -- you're paying them a share of your income to guarantee a specific payout. If you outlive the actuarial tables, that may be a win. If the market crashes, that may be a win. But I'm increasingly hearing the advice that staying in investments (albeit in a very conservative position) may pay better longer. There are tools which will do monte-carlo modelling based on what the market has done in the past. You give them  your estimate of how much in today's dollars would be needed to \"\"maintain your lifestyle\"\", and they'll tell you how much savings you need -- and what form you might want to keep those savings in -- to have good odds of being able to live entirely off the earnings and never touch the capital My employer makes such a tool available to us, and in fact Quicken has a simpler version built into it; it's nice that the two agree.\""}
{"id": "20844", "text": "In all honesty, the best solution I've come across is Microsoft's now defunct Money."}
{"id": "20880", "text": ">Falls Church VA   Falls Church is an independent city. It has no county to levy taxes.  The FY2017 budget shows a 1% city and 4% restaurant tax. Then you've got 4.3% VA state tax, and 0.7% Northern Virginia regional tax.  Totaling 10%."}
{"id": "20988", "text": "I'll point out that you don't actually have to pay your income taxes on time, just make sure to file on time.  You will be charged interest (currently 5% ann., compounded daily).  This is no big deal, I know plenty of people who do this. Note that if they pay you interest you have to report it on your taxes, but if you pay them it's not deductible."}
{"id": "20994", "text": "\"This functionality is widely available, not only on brokerage sites, but also financial management and even financial information sites.  For instance, two of the latter are Google Finance and Yahoo Finance.  If you are logged in, they let you create \"\"portfolios\"\" listing your stocks and, optionally, the size of your holdings in that stock (which you don't need if you are just \"\"watching\"\" a stock).  Then you can visit the site at any time and see the current valuations.\""}
{"id": "21313", "text": "An oxymoron is something that contradicts itself. Inside trading is sharing information that isn't public. How the fuck do you think these hedge funds and investment banks can offer almost 50% returns during these times in our economy??? Oh yea it's called inside trading. Reason why it's an oxymoron is because trading information is considered ilegal yet that what everyone does on the market, rules are made to give off fear but past that it's all open roads and deep pockets.    And if you really don't believe that stock market isn't rigged then there is no reason for me to explain myself on that because it would be like taking to a wall. And I thank you for being one of those people that thinks it's not rigged because you help my portfolio look good from your dumb investments."}
{"id": "21468", "text": "\"If you've already got emergency savings sufficient for your needs, I agree that you'd be better served by sending that $500 to your student loan(s). I, personally, house the bulk of my emergency savings in CDs because I'm not planning to touch it and it yields a little better than a vanilla savings account. To address the comment about liquidity.  In addition to my emergency savings I keep plain vanilla savings accounts for miscellaenous sudden expenses.  To me \"\"emergency\"\" means lost job, not new water pump for my car; I have other budgeted savings for that but would spend it on a credit card and reimburse myself anyway so liquidity there isn't even that important.   The 18 month CDs I use are barely less liquid than vanilla savings and the penalty is just a couple months of the accrued interest.  When you compare a possible early distribution penalty against the years of increased yield you're likely to come out ahead after years of never touching your emergency savings, unless you're budgeted such that a car insurance deductible is an emergency expense. Emergency funds should be guaranteed and non-volatile.  If I lose my job, 90 days of accrued interest isn't a hindrance to breaking open some of my CDs, and the process isn't so daunting that I'd meaningfully harm my finances. Liquidity in 2017 and liquidity in whatever year a text book was initially written are two totally different animals.  My \"\"very illiquid\"\" brokerage account funds are only one transaction and 3 settlement days less liquid than my \"\"very liquid\"\" savings account.  There's no call the bank, sell the security, wait for it to clear, my brokerage cuts a check, mail the check, cash the check, etc.  I can go from Apple stock on Monday to cash in my hand on like Thursday.  On the web portal for the bank that holds my CDs I can instantly transfer the funds from a CD to my checking account there net of a negligible penalty for early distribution.  To call CDs illiquid in 2017 is silly.\""}
{"id": "21688", "text": "> If you're saddled with a ton of debt and also don't have a degree to show for it, I'd say it's much more likely you're going to have trouble paying it off.  This is how generational poverty continues."}
{"id": "21695", "text": "\"I believe money market \"\"funds\"\" (ie a mutual fund) would pay dividends, and you would get a 1099-DIV. A money market \"\"account\"\" however is probably actually a bank account, and you would get a 1099-INT for that. It depends how the broker has set it up. I have one of each with different brokers.  If your \"\"money market\"\" statements mention anything about FDIC coverage, it is likely an \"\"account\"\" (ie a bank account) and will pay interest, not dividends.\""}
{"id": "21846", "text": "You're right. That's pretty much it. You get a deduction for any medical expenses above 10% of your Adjusted Gross Income. You also have to itemize your deductions; claiming the standard deduction won't do."}
{"id": "21883", "text": "\"Insufficient funds will cause a check to bounce. If there is evidence that you \"\"kited\"\" the check deliberately, that's a potential fraud charge. If the vendor accepts that you were just stupid/careless, you'll probably just have to pay a penalty processing fee in addition to making good the payment.  It is your responsibility to track your account balance and not write bad checks. If the timing could be bad, don't write the check yet. If you insist on paying with money you may not have, talk to your bank about setting up overdrafts to draw from another account, or automatic overdraft loans... or use a credit card rather than paying by check.\""}
{"id": "21957", "text": "\"I don't understand the OP's desire \"\" I'd love to have a few hundred dollars coming in each month until I really get the hang of things. \"\"  When growing your wealth so that it will be large enough in retirement to throw off enough profits to live on ... you must not touch the profits generated along the way.  You must reinvest them to earn even more profits.  The profits you earn need not show up as 'cash'.  Most investments also grow in re-sale value. This growth is called capital gains, and is just-as/more important than cash flows like interest income or dividends.    When evaluating investing choices, you think of your returns as a percent of your total savings at any time.  So expecting $100/month equals $1,200/year would require a $12,000 investment to earn 10%/yr. From the sounds of it the OP's principal is not near that amount, and an average 10% should not be expected by an investment with reasonable risk. I would conclude that 'There is no free lunch'.  You need to continually save and add to your principal.  You must invest to expect a reasonable return (less than 10%) and you must reinvest all profits (whether cash or capital gains). Or else start a business - which cannot be compared to passive investing.\""}
{"id": "22067", "text": "You keep a copy of the dashed check, and tell him to pound sand. If he contacts you again, you tell him that you will charge him with fraud. By accepting the check and cashing it, he acknowledged the debt is paid."}
{"id": "22425", "text": "\"From IRS Publication 970 Tax Benefits for Education Note: Qualified tuition programs (QTPs) are also called \"\"529 plans.\"\"  Changing the Designated Beneficiary There are no income tax consequences if the designated beneficiary of   an account is changed to a member of the beneficiary's family. See   Members of the beneficiary's family , earlier.  Members of the beneficiary's family. For these purposes, the beneficiary's family includes the   beneficiary's spouse and the following other relatives of the   beneficiary. regarding ownership changes: Rollovers Any amount distributed from a QTP isn't taxable if it is rolled over   to another QTP for the benefit of the same beneficiary or for the   benefit of a member of the beneficiary's family (including the   beneficiary's spouse). An amount is rolled over if it is paid to   another QTP within 60 days after the date of the distribution. Don't report qualifying rollovers (those that meet the above criteria)   anywhere on Form 1040 or 1040NR. These aren't taxable distributions. Example. When Aaron graduated from college last year, he had $5,000 left in his   QTP. He wanted to give this money to his younger brother, who was in   junior high school. In order to avoid paying tax on the distribution   of the amount remaining in his account, Aaron contributed the same   amount to his brother's QTP within 60 days of the distribution. So it appears that as far as the IRS in concerned the rollover could be done to change ownership as long as the beneficiary was in the same family. It is possible that there could be a state tax issue with the change of ownership, if it changed from a plan in state A to one in state B; and state A treated the original contributions as a tax deduction. So check the guidelines for the specific 529 plan.\""}
{"id": "22469", "text": "It is very likely that the fund paid out a dividend in the form of reinvested shares.  This happens with many funds, especially as we come to the end of the year. Here's a simplified example of how it works.  Assume you invested $1000 and bought 100 units at $10/unit.  Ignoring the daily price fluctuations, if the fund paid out a 20% dividend, you would get $200 and the unit price would drop to $8/unit.  Assuming you chose to reinvest your dividends, you would automatically purchase another $200 worth of units at the new price (so 25 more units).  You would now have 125 units @ $8/unit = $1000 invested. In your example, notice that you now have more shares than you originally purchased, but that the price dropped significantly.  Your market value is above what you originally invested, so there was probably also a bit of a price increase for the day.  You should see the dividend transaction listed somewhere in your account. Just to confirm, I did a quick search on ICENX and found that they did indeed pay a dividend yesterday."}
{"id": "22998", "text": "You can put it in a CD, or use a CD investment service like http://www.jumbocdinvestments.com/ (no affiliation)."}
{"id": "23097", "text": "\"It's correct.   Be sure of your personal opportunity cost and not that you're letting the tax tail wag the dog just to score \"\"tax free\"\".  Your upside is $3,700 (single) or $7,000 (married) in taxes saved until you're out of the 0% zone.  Is that worth not receiving an income? Even if your savings are such that you don't need to work for income for a fiscal year, how would this affect the rest of your career and lifetime total earning prospects?  Now, maybe: Otherwise, I'd hope you have solid contacts in your network who won't be fazed by a resume gap and be delighted to have a position open for you in 2019 (and won't give you the \"\"mother returning to the workforce\"\" treatment in salary negotiations).\""}
{"id": "23121", "text": "\"In Canada, for example, they are expected or required to find out. They call it, The \u201cKnow Your Client\u201d rule, part of which is knowing your \"\"Investment knowledge and experience\"\". They say it is, \"\"to ensure their advice is suitable for you\"\". I have always been given that kind of form to fill in, when opening an account.\""}
{"id": "23142", "text": "\"What he said was:  >Short term returns show \"\"fat tails\"\" in their distribution.  This means that in the short run, rare events in the stock market, like huge up and downswings, happen much more often than you would expect given the circumstances.  >Long term returns converge towards a gaussian distribution.   This means that long term changes in stock prices show about the level of swings you would expect to see.  >The authors think there's a connection between this and the \"\"long memory\"\" of >volatility (i.e. that the autocorrelation of absolute volatilities also has a fat tail).  Auto-correlation is the idea that an event is closely related, or depends upon, a previous event.  It shouldn't be a surprise that prices can depend on previous prices.  (Contrast this with a coin toss.  Each time you toss the coin, the result is independent of any previous result.)  Normally, you would use an estimate of auto-correlation to test the randomness of your time series.  Unless you have good reason to do otherwise, you use the standard normal (or Gaussian) distribution to do so.  Some previous study, or perhaps this one, may have found that the distribution of their auto-correlation estimates for volatility (change in prices)  is not normally distributed, but rather that extreme values happen more often than would be expected (fat tail).  These guys find a correlation between the short term return fat tails, the normally  distributed long term returns, and a previous finding that the auto-correlation of volatility may have fat tails, and they think that these things could be more than simply coincidence.\""}
{"id": "23217", "text": "It was not 100% clear if you have held all of these stocks for over a year.  Therefore, depending on your income tax bracket, it might make sense to hold on to the stock until you have held the individual stock for a year to only be taxed at long-term capital gains rates.  Also, you need to take into account the Net Investment Income Tax(NIIT), if your current modified adjusted income is above the current threshold.  Beyond these, I would think that you would want to apply the same methodology that caused you to buy these in the first place, as it seems to be working well for you. 2 & 3. No.  You trigger a taxable event and therefore have to pay capital gains tax on any gains.  If you have a loss in the stock and repurchase the stock within 30 days, you don't get to recognize the loss and have to add the loss to your basis in the stock (Wash Sales Rules)."}
{"id": "23446", "text": "Ex-Dividend Price Behavior of Common Stocks would be a study from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and University of Minnesota if you want a source for some data. Abstract This study examines common stock prices around ex-dividend dates. Such   price data usually contain a mixture of observations - some with and   some without arbitrageurs and/or dividend capturers active. Our theory   predicts such mixing will result in a nonlinear relation between   percentage price drop and dividend yield - not the commonly assumed   linear relation. This prediction and another important prediction of   theory are supported empirically. In a variety of tests, marginal   price drop is not significantly different from the dividend amount.   Thus, over the last several decades, one-for-one marginal price drop   have been an excellent (average) rule of thumb."}
{"id": "23609", "text": "\"Margin trades let you post a margin of a certain proportion of the value of the trade as collateral against the price of a trade and pay off the difference between the current price and the price that you bought at. Any losses incurred are taken from the margin so the margin has to be maintained as prices change. In practice this means that when the price moves significantly from the buying price a \"\"margin call\"\" is triggered and the buyer has to increase their posted margin. The vast majority of the foreign exchange trades done every day are margin trades as (effectively) are all spread bets. Margins get reset overnight whether or not a call has occurred.\""}
{"id": "23747", "text": "\"IRS Pub 554 states (click to read full IRS doc):  \"\"Do not file a federal income tax return if you do not meet the filing requirements and are not due a refund. ... If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, you must file a return if your gross income for the year was at least the amount shown on the appropriate line in Table 1-1 below. \"\" You may not have wage income, but you will probably have interest, dividend, capital gains, or proceeds from sale of a house (and there is a special note that you must file in this case, even if you enjoy the exclusion for primary residence)\""}
{"id": "24046", "text": "\"The OP does not explain \"\"what we pay for processing the transaction (cost of debiting the customer)\"\".  Who exactly do you pay?  Someone else, or your own employees/contractors?  I will assume that $0.10 is paid to your own employees. Dr $10cash from money people give you Cr $10 liability to them because it is their money in your accounts. Dr $0.10 cash payment of paycheques or supplier invoices Cr $0.10 income statement Operating Eexpense  Dr 0.20 liability to depositors for fees they pay, resulting in $9.80 remaining liability for their money you still have. Cr 0.20 income statement Fee Revenues\""}
{"id": "24138", "text": "You're going to have a huge problem getting approved for anything as long as you have an unpaid bill on your report. Pay it and make sure its reported as paid in full - ASAP. Once that settled, your credit will start to improve slowly. Can't do anything about that, it will take time. You can make the situation improve a bit faster by lending money to yourself and having it reported regularly on your report. How? Easy. Get a secured credit card. What does it mean? You put X amount of money in a CD and the bank will issue you a credit card secured by that CD. Your credit line will be based on the amount in that CD, and you'll probably pay some fees to the bank for the service (~$20-50/year, shop around). You might get lucky and find a secured card without fees, if you look hard enough. Secured cards are reported as revolving credit (just as any other credit card) and are easy to get because the bank doesn't take the risk - you do.  If you default on your payments - your CD goes to cover the debt, and the card gets cancelled. But make absolutely sure that you do not default. Charge between 10% and 30% of the credit limit each month, not more. Pay the balance shown on your credit card statement in full every month and by the due date shown on your monthly statement.  It will take a while, but you would typically start noticing the improvement within ~6-12 months. Stop applying for stuff. Not store cards, not car loans, you're not going to get anything, and will just keep dragging your scores down. Each time you have a pull on your report, the score goes down. A lot of pulls, frequent pulls - the score goes down a lot. Lenders can see when one is desperate, and no-one wants to lend money to desperate people.  Optimally lenders want to lend money to people who doesn't need loans, but in order to keep the business running they'll settle for slightly less - people who don't usually need loans, and pay the loans they do have on time. You fail on both, as you're desperate for a loan and you have unpaid bills on your report."}
{"id": "24188", "text": "How do ETF makers like Direxion make money? Since the contents of the ETF are known, why would anyone pay a premium to buy the basket of securities that it is composed of? Couldn't I just assemble the ETF myself for free?"}
{"id": "24459", "text": "\"You'd have to check the rules for your broker to make sure that the term is being used in its usual sense, but the typical answer to your question is \"\"no.\"\"  A GTC will execute during market hours.  You would need to explicitly specify extended hours if you want to execute outside of market hours (which your broker may or may not support).\""}
{"id": "24563", "text": "Purchasing an option to sell the stock is probably the safest bet. This gives you reasonable leverage, and your risk is limited to the cost of the option. Say the stock currently sells for $100 per share. You think it will drop to $80 per share in the next two weeks and the market thinks the price will be stable. Now, consider an option to sell one share of that stock for $95 any time within the next two weeks. The market would consider that option nearly worthless, since in all likelihood, you would lose out by exercising it (since you could just sell the share on the market for a price expected to be higher than that). You might be able to acquire that option for $5. Now, say you're right and within two weeks, the price drops to $80. Now you can purchase a share for $80, exercise the option to sell it for $95, and pocket $15. That would make you a $10 profit on a $5 investment. If you're wrong, you just let the option lapse and are out $5. No problem. In reality, you would buy a number of such options. And you wouldn't actually buy a share and exercise the option, you would just sell the option back to its issuer for $15."}
{"id": "24723", "text": "\"Well it depends. I doubt the professor is looking for the \"\"basic\"\" answer as you described it. He's mostly likely looking for the above answers (i.e. the Rf is used to value a call in the B-S model).   Like in all classes, you need to know what the prof is really looking for, because many questions can be interpreted many different ways and unfortunately most teachers aren't clear in asking what they want.\""}
{"id": "24883", "text": "\"I just wanted to give you a different perspective, as I own a house (purchased with a mortgage), with my girlfriend. I think it can be done safely and fairly, but you do need to involve legal help to do it right. There really is nothing to be terrified about, the extra cost to set this up was almost irrelevant in the bigger picture of legal costs around purchasing and the documents describing the ownership scheme are quite straightforward. Maybe it's a UK thing, but it seems rather commonplace here.  We've chosen to hold this as \"\"tenants in common\"\" and use a trust deed for this when we purchased. We had a solicitor write the trust deed and it clearly states what percentage of the house is owned by either party and exactly what the steps would be taken, should we decide to end the trust (e.g. in case of a split-up). This includes things like the right to buy out the other person before selling on the market etc.  We also had to make wills separately to indicate what should happen with our percentage of the property in case one of us died as with this type of ownership it doesn't automatically go to the other person.  Finally we're both on the mortgage, which I guess is the main difference versus your situation. But again, you could get legal advice as to how this should best be handled.\""}
{"id": "25172", "text": "The transaction will be taxable in India. You will have to pay Capital Gains tax. I am assuming that you purchased the house while you were Indian Resident for tax purposes. As such its needs more paper work to get the money back to US. Consult a CA in India who will help with the paperwork. You haven't mentioned your tax status in US, one you update it, someone will post a US tax aspects of the transaction."}
{"id": "25381", "text": "Many states require that USE tax be paid on items purchased out of state and the subsequently brought to your home state. The vendor has the responsibility to collect based upon the shipping destination. It is the buyers responsibility to declare and pay taxes on purchases where the vendor is not required to collect them for your state(like when you purchase it out of state). So if you have an item shipped out of state to avoid sales tax and then bring it to your home state then you are required to pay sales tax in your home state as well.  Some states (Florida for 1) allow for the reduction in sales tax owed by the amount paid in out of state sales taxes.  Some states (Like CT) exempt purchases under a certain amount. Federation of Tax Administrators website has links to state revenue services where you can check the tax requirements for your (and other) states.    Other State Links"}
{"id": "25391", "text": "In the United States, post-dating a check, on its own, has no valid use. It can be cashed at any time at the discretion of the bank. You would need to send a notice of postdating to your bank describing the check. This doesn't prevent the recipient of cashing the check, but it does prevent your bank from charging your account until the date you specify NOTE: This may be considered a form of stop payment, and you may be subject to the fees noted by your institution.  Source: [Uniform Commercial Code - Article 4A \u00a7 4-401] (c) A bank may charge against the account of a customer a check that is otherwise properly payable from the account, even though payment was made before the date of the check, unless the customer has given notice to the bank of the postdating describing the check with reasonable certainty. [...] If a bank charges against the account of a customer a check before the date stated in the notice of postdating, the bank is liable for damages for the loss resulting from its act. The loss may include damages for dishonor of subsequent items under Section 4-402."}
{"id": "25431", "text": "* Absolutely agree with /u/IsAnAlpaca  * You /must/ not agree to this without seeing his balance sheet. * That means assets and liabilities, but also ask for the last 12 months' cash flow * Inability or unwillingness to provide any of those things is a HUGE no-go red flag."}
{"id": "25543", "text": "I had $70K in credit card at one point.  Limited income, starting a business - it's the only credit available. (yes, all paid off now)."}
{"id": "25762", "text": "You are not required to file a tax return in Canada if you have no taxable income. If you do not file a return you may be requested to by Canada Revenue Agency, and then you'll need to file one. There are hundreds of thousands of Canadian residents who do not file tax returns. The Minister who overlooks the CRA may assess any amount of taxes on any resident whether they file a return or not. There are penalties for failing to file a return or filing late. The penalties are based on a percentage of the taxes owed. If you owe no taxes, then the penalties are meaningless."}
{"id": "26051", "text": "Our mortgage provider actually took the initiative to send us a refinance package with no closing costs to us and nothing added to the note; took us from a 30-year-fixed ~6.5% note to a 15-year-fixed ~5% note, and dropped the monthly payment in the process.  You might talk to your existing lender to see if they would do something like that for you; it gives them a chance to keep your business, and it cuts your costs."}
{"id": "26252", "text": "The basic problem here is that you need to have money to invest before you can make a profit from it.  Now if you have say $500K or more, you can put that in mutual funds and live modestly off the profits.  If you don't have that $500K to start out with, you're either looking at a long time frame to accumulate it - say by working a job for 30+ years, and contributing the max to your 401k - or are playing the market trying to get it.  The last is essentially gambling (though with somewhat better odds than casinos or horse racing), and puts you up against the Gambler's Ruin problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_ruin You also, I think, have a very mistaken idea about the a typical investor's lifestyle.  Take for instance the best known one, Warren Buffet.  No offence to him, but from everything I've read he lives a pretty boring life.  Spends all day reading financial reports, and what sort of life is that? As for flying places being exciting, ever tried it?  I have (with scientific conferences, but I expect boardrooms are much the same), and it is boring.  Flying at 30,000 ft is boring, and if it's a commercial flight, unpleasant as well.  A conference room in London, Paris, or Milan is EXACTLY the same as a conference room in Podunk, Iowa.  Even the cities outside the conference rooms are much of a muchness these days: you can eat at McDonalds in Paris or Shanghai.  Only way to find interest is to take time from your work to get outside the conference rooms & commercial districts, and then you're losing money."}
{"id": "26263", "text": "Get in touch with a reliable company if you are looking for a range of small business financing solutions. Such companies offer consolidation loans to help smaller businesses take care of their previous obligations and this way manage their finances better"}
{"id": "26292", "text": "In my opinion, the average investor should not be buying individual stocks. One reason why is that the average investor is not capable of reading financial statements and evaluating whether a stock is overpriced or underpriced. As such, they're often tempted to make buy/sell decisions based solely on the current value of a stock as compared to the price at which they bought it. The real reasons to buy (or sell) a stock is the expectation of future growth of the company (or continued profit and expected dividends). If you aren't able to analyze a company's financial statements and business plan, then you really aren't in a position to evaluate that company's stock price. So instead of asking whether to sell based on a recent drop in stock price, you should be investigating why the stock price is falling, and deciding whether those reasons indicate a trend that you expect to continue.  If you buy and sell stocks based solely on recent trends in the stock price, you probably will end up buying stocks that have recently risen and selling stocks that have recently fallen. In that case, you are buying high and selling low, which is a recipe for poor financial outcomes."}
{"id": "26335", "text": "\"Modern portfolio theory dramatically underestimates the risk of the recommended assets.  This is because so few underlying assets are in the recommended part of the curve.  As investors identify such assets, large amounts of money are invested in them.  This temporarily reduces measured risk, and temporarily increases measured return.  Sooner or later, \"\"the trade\"\" becomes \"\"crowded\"\".  Eventually, large amounts of money try to \"\"exit the trade\"\" (into cash or the next discovered asset).  And so the measurable risk suddenly rises, and the measured return drops. In other words, modern portfolio theory causes bubbles, and causes those bubbles to pop. Some other strategies to consider:\""}
{"id": "26655", "text": "\"even though they're only asking for 1/2 the money and have excellent credit that the mortgage company may not lend it to them if I'm over priced Yes. If the house's value, as determined by the appraisal, is less than the sale price, the bank will not finance the loan. Appraisals and the appraisal process have become much tighter since the Frannie and Freddie debacle. This fact is true regardless of amounts or credit history. Though this is happens somewhat rarely; typically if a seller and buyer agree to a price, this price is a reasonable value -- after all, that is nearly the definition of \"\"market value\"\". So, yes, it is true (and always true, for any financed purchase), but that shouldn't really affect your decision. If you try to sell for more than the appraisal, you will just lower the price to the appraised amount.\""}
{"id": "26790", "text": "If I sell it for $50 can I write off the $50 loss. Only if you can establish that it is a normal part of your business and that you did not get $50 worth of use out of it.  That's the technical, legal argument.  As a practical matter, it's unlikely that they'll ding you for selling something after using it, as they won't know.  If they did catch you, you would be in trouble.  You can't deduct loss due to personal use.   The larger problem is that if you sell one TV for a $50 loss, they aren't going to believe that you are in the business of selling TVs.  If you sell a larger amount for a loss, then they still are unlikely to believe that you are in business.  If you sell a large amount for an overall gain, they are unlikely to notice that you took a loss on one TV.  They could only notice that if they were already auditing you, as that wouldn't be visible in your tax forms."}
{"id": "26820", "text": "The dividend is what represents your ownership in the CU.  The APY is a calculated figure that will help you compare apples to apples the return of the investment from many vendors and many types. (I think you CU might have had two different people writing that portion of the website, because the comparisons pages don't make that clear, and the pages don't layout the same way.)"}
{"id": "26837", "text": "They're probably talking about flipping houses. The conventional wisdom when flipping is to purchase the property with a mortgage or other loan on day-0. Do the work to rehabilitate it. Get it listed for re-sale promptly (this step has varying strategies) with a profitable price but one that will make it move. Have the house sold on or before the first payment would be due. This is anywhere from 30 to 60 days. The flipper then never has to make a payment on the mortgage or loan, the costs of rehabilitating the home are recovered promptly (potentially before any loan, credit card payments, or invoices are due), and there is a profit. This also assumes that either a 100% loan or some other mechanism is used to address closing costs and fees. This model fits the premise of the infomercial in that you make money investing in real estate but never have to tie up any of your own money in the process."}
{"id": "27037", "text": "Series I Savings Bonds would be another option that have part of their return indexed to inflation though currently they are yielding 1.64% through April 30, 2016 though some may question how well is that 3% you quote as an inflation rate. From the first link: Series I savings bonds are a low-risk savings product. While you own   them they earn interest and protect you from inflation. You may   purchase electronic I bonds via TreasuryDirect or paper I bonds with   your IRS tax refund. As a TreasuryDirect account holder, you can   purchase, manage, and redeem I bonds directly from your web browser. TIPS vs I Bonds if you want to compare these products that are rather safe in terms of avoiding a nominal loss. This would be where a portion of the funds could go, not all of them at once."}
{"id": "27425", "text": "A Mortgage Backed Security or MBS is the security.  It's not an entity, it's essentially a contract.  As an investment they function more or less the same way a bond does. There is nothing wrong with the concept behind a Mortgage Backed Security.  Functionally securities like these allows banks and other institutions to lend to high-risk borrowers.  You package small slices of a wide range of risk from a large number of mortgages and the investor sill receive something similar to the average of the rates being charged.  Essentially from a big pool of mortgages of varying risk you will create a different big pool of bonds that can be sold to investors based on some sort of expected return.  For a frame of reference on a much smaller scale look at peer to peer lending sites like LendingClub and Prosper.  The idea is lots of people of varying risk profiles make requests for loans of varying amounts.  You bring your $2,500 and invest $25 in to 100 different loans.  This way even if a few default you will still eek out a profit.  It also allows you to include riskier borrowers without materially impacting your expected return."}
{"id": "27495", "text": "There are a couple reasons for having a Traditional or Roth IRA in addition to a 401(k) program in general, starting with the Traditional IRA: With regards to the Roth IRA: Also, both the Traditional and Roth IRA allow you to make a $10,000 withdraw as a first time home buyer for the purposes of buying a home. This is much more difficult with the 401(k) and generally you end up having to take a loan against the 401(k) instead. So even if you can't take advantage of the tax deductions from contributions to a Traditional IRA, there are still good reasons to have one around. Unless you plan on staying with the same company for your entire career (and even if you do, they may have other plans) the Traditional IRA tends to be a much better place to park the funds from the 401(k) than just rolling them over to a new employer.  Also, don't forget that just because you can't take deductions for the income doesn't mean that you might not need the income that savings now will bring you in retirement. If you use a retirement savings calculator is it saying that you need to be saving more than your current monthly 401(k) contributions? Then odds are pretty good that you also need to be adding additional savings and an IRA is a good location to put those assets because of the other benefits that they confer. Also, some people don't have the fiscal discipline to not use the money when it isn't hard to get to (i.e. regular savings or investment account) and as such it also helps to ensure you aren't going to go and spend the money unless you really need it."}
{"id": "27987", "text": "Foreclosure is at a high level the bank declaring that the debtor cannot pay their promissory note (their debt).  This is shortly followed by default, which is the removal of debtors rights to the property.  After the debtor has defaulted, he either chooses to voluntarily remove himself and his belongings from the property, or is forcibly evicted.  In the US eviction is carried out by local law enforcement, such as the sheriff's office.   The bank is now the sole owner of the property, and proceeds to sell it, in an attempt to recoup their investment.  If the bank cannot recoup their investment by selling the house, the rest may be converted to unsecured debt against the debtor.  If the bank chooses to forgive the remaining debt, the debtor may have a tax liability for cancellation of debt.  Also the debtor may also be liable for any appreciation the house did before it was sold, but this likely to be nontaxable if the house in question is the debtor's primary residence.  They also send the credit bureaus the notice of foreclosure, which is how your credit score is hurt. Private Mortgage Insurance or Lenders Mortgage Insurance will pay the lender some amount back to cover their losses. See Also:"}
{"id": "28083", "text": "Depending on jurisdiction, the fact that you made some payments might give you an ownership share in the house in your own right. What share would be a complex question because you might need to consider both the mortgage payments made and maintenance. Your sister might also be able to argue that she was entitled to some recompense for the risk she describes of co-signing, and that's something that would be very hard to quantify, but clearly you would also be entitled to similar recompense in respect of that, as you also co-signed. For the share your mother owned, the normal rules of inheritance apply and by default that would be a 50-50 split as JoeTaxpayer said. You imply that the loan is still outstanding, so all of this only applies to the equity previously built up in the house prior to your mother's death. If you are the only one making the ongoing payments, I would expect any further equity built up to belong solely to you, but again the jurisdiction and the fact that your sister's name is on the deeds could affect this. If you can't resolve this amicably, you might need to get a court involved and it's possible that the cost of doing so would outweigh the eventual benefit to you."}
{"id": "28116", "text": "VaR and Stressed VaR are kind of mandatory market risk measurement techniques for anyone with a banking licence in Europe. This doesn't stop you from doing other stuff as well, but you need to have the basics (Basel 2 accord) and you must backtest to check your model. The big problem is that doesn't really account for what happens during a liquidity squeeze.  Other measures may be used at portfolio level, but it is the basic VaR stuff that is churning away after hours."}
{"id": "28168", "text": "Find a good financial advisor that is willing to teach you and not just interested in making a commission on your net worth. Talk to them and talk some more. Go slow and don't make impulsive buying decisions. If you don't understand it then don't buy it. Think long term - how do I turn this 250K into 2.5M? Congrats on the savings!"}
{"id": "28172", "text": "You have made a good start because you are looking at your options. Because you know that if you do nothing you will have a big tax bill in April 2017, you want to make sure that you avoid the underpayment penalty. One way to avoid it is to make estimated payments. But even if you do that you could still make a mistake and overpay or underpay. I think the easiest way to handle it is to reach the safe harbor. If your withholding from your regular jobs and any estimated taxes you pay in 2016 equal or exceed your total taxes for 2015, then even if you owe a lot in April 2017 you can avoid the underpayment penalty. If you AGI is over 150K you have to make sure your withholding is 110% of your 2015 taxes. Then set aside what you think you will owe in your bank account until you have to pay your taxes in April 2017. You only have to adjust your withholding to make the safe harbor. You can make sure easily enough once your file this years taxes. You only have to make sure that you reach the 100% or 110% threshold. From IRS PUB 17 Who Must Pay Estimated Tax If you owe additional tax for 2015, you may have to pay estimated tax   for 2016. You can use the following general rule as a guide during the year to   see if you will have enough withholding, or if you should increase   your withholding or make estimated tax payments.  General rule.    In   most cases, you must pay estimated tax for 2016 if both of the   following apply. You expect to owe at least $1,000 in tax for 2016, after subtracting your withholding and refundable credits. You expect your withholding plus your refundable credits to be less than the smaller of: a. 90% of the tax to be shown on your 2016 tax return, or b. 100% of the tax shown on your 2015 tax return (but see Special rules for farmers, fishermen, and higher income taxpayers , later).   Your 2015 tax return must cover all 12 months. Reminders Estimated tax safe harbor for higher income taxpayers. If your 2015   adjusted gross income was more than $150,000 ($75,000 if you are   married filing a separate return), you must pay the smaller of 90% of   your expected tax for 2016 or 110% of the tax shown on your 2015   return to avoid an estimated tax penalty."}
{"id": "28191", "text": "\"Without knowing what the balances are, I associate \"\"uncomfortable\"\" with high, as in tens of thousands.   What I would do: is 1) cut up the cards and stop using them, and 2) have some balance transfer offers in hand the next time you call to negotiate with the companies.  Essentially, you will have to convince them that they will have to explain one of two things to their boss: why they lowered your rate or why you left. They can collect less interest from you or no interest from you.  It's up to them.  If they don't offer you something that's in the ballpark of your balance transfer offer, then bid them goodbye and complete the balance transfer. As far as paying them off, the top two modes of repayment are lowest balance first (aka snowball) or high interest rate first.  Both methods are similar in that you pay minimums on all but the method's focus point.  Whether it is lowest balance or highest interest rate, you pay ALL of your extra money on the lowest balance or the highest interest debt until it is gone and then you move onto the next one in the list. For what it's worth, I prefer the lowest balance method, you see progress faster.\""}
{"id": "28291", "text": "\"If you want a ~12% rate of return on your investments.... too bad. For returns which even begin to approach that, you need to be looking at some of the riskiest stuff. Think \"\"emerging markets\"\". Even funds like Vanguard Emerging Markets (ETF: VWO, mutual fund, VEIEX) or Fidelity Advisor Emerging Markets Income Trust (FAEMX) seem to have yields which only push 11% or so.  (But inflation is about nil, so if you're used to normal 2% inflation or so, these yields are like 13% or so. And there's no tax on that last 2%! Yay.) Remember that these investments are very risky. They go up lots because they can go down lots too. Don't put any money in there unless you can afford to have it go missing, because sooner or later you're likely to lose something half your money, and it might not come back for a decade (or ever). Investments like these should only be a small part of your overall portfolio. So, that said... Sites which make investing in these risky markets easy? There are a good number, but you should probably just go with vanguard.com. Their funds have low fees which won't erode your returns. (You can actually get lower expense ratios by using their brokerage account to trade the ETF versions of their funds commission-free, though you'll have to worry more about the actual number of shares you want to buy, instead of just plopping in and out dollar amounts). You can also trade Vanguard ETFs and other ETFs at almost any brokerage, just like stocks, and most brokerages will also offer you access to a variety of mutual funds as well (though often for a hefty fee of $20-$50, which you should avoid). Or you can sign up for another fund providers' account, but remember that the fund fees add up quickly.  And the better plan? Just stuff most of your money in something like VTI (Vanguard Total Stock Market Index) instead.\""}
{"id": "28314", "text": "It's important to understand that, in general, security transactions involve you and a relatively unknown entity with your broker standing in the middle.  When you sell through Schwab, Schwab needs to receive the funds from the other side of the transaction.  If Schwab gave you access to the funds immediately, it would essentially be a loan until the transaction settles after funds and securities change hands.   If Schwab made funds available to you as soon as they were received, it might still be two days until the money is received; because the other side also has three days. Guaranteed one day settlement would have to include receipt of funds from the buyer in one day and Schwab can't control that. You need to remember this transaction likely includes at least one party in addition to you and Schwab.  Here's the SEC page related to the three day settlement period,  About Settling Trades in Three Days:  T+3"}
{"id": "28346", "text": "\"Bitcoin payments involve by far the lowest fees.  For pure bitcoin-to-bitcoin transfers you have the option of not paying any fee at all, while if you want to avoid the risk (currently very small) of miners ignoring your transaction you can pay a small transaction fee.  Currently no more than 0.0005 BTC is ever required ($0.01 at $20/BTC). Bitcoin also does not support \"\"chargebacks\"\", which is an advantage for the merchant (no risk that Paypal will freeze your account, as it did in with a Burning Man nonprofit), but more risk for the consumer. Popular sites for exchanging bitcoins with other currencies charge rates of 0.65% or less.  The primary barrier is that it typically takes a few days to get funds into your account from bank accounts etc.  Given the volatility of the bitcoin exchange rate you may want to treat bitcoin like cash, and only keep a small amount on-hand. A variety of shopping cart interfaces are supported. The obvious downside is that only a small fraction of users would be likely to go through the steps to use this option since bitcoin is new and immature, so your investment in adding support may be hard to pay off.  On the other hand, just advertising that you accept bitcoin payments would give you a bit of free advertising. Another downside is the risk of government intervention.  In NPR's 2011 story a law professor said it was \"\"legal for now\"\" in the US, but that could change. I'd say that given the sizable current fees and other barriers to international commerce and micro-payments, if bitcoin doesn't succeed, something else will.\""}
{"id": "28348", "text": "\"Basically, unless you are an investment professional, you should not be investing in a venture in a developing country shown to you by someone else. The only time you should be investing in a developing country is if a \"\"lightbulb\"\" goes off in your head and you say to yourself, \"\"With my engineering background, I can develop this machine/process/concept that will work better in this country than anywhere else in the world.\"\" And then run it yourself. (That's what Michael Dell, a computer repairman, did for \"\"made to order\"\" computers in the United States, and \"\"the rest is history.\"\") E.g. if you want to invest in \"\"real estate\"\" in a developing country, you might design a \"\"modular home\"\" out of local materials, tailored to local tastes, and selling for less than local equivalents, based on a formula that you know better than anyone else in the world. And then team up with a local who can sell it for you. Whatever you do, don't \"\"invest\"\" and revisit it in 10-15 years. It will be gone.\""}
{"id": "28590", "text": "There is a great 3rd party application out there that I use (I am a broker) along with my internal analysts and other 3rd party sources.  VectorVest has a LOT of technical information, but is very easy to use.  It will run any kind of screen you like, including low 52 week numbers.  (No, I don't get anything for recommending them.)"}
{"id": "28599", "text": "Not really reasonable because you can't hold a gift card in your IRA, but clever idea none the less. I'm sure a few smaller investors would take advantage of that in a taxable account if it was remotely possible."}
{"id": "28661", "text": "I never understood why anyone would overdraft their checking account, until a conversation with a bank teller recently who told me that most young folks these days don't bother to balance their checkbooks anymore or to even bother with a checkbook at all -- they just check their available balance to see how much is in their checking account (totally ignoring any checks or other charges that may have been made against their account but have not yet been debited).        It's hard to believe that young people can be that stupid, but apparently some are."}
{"id": "28764", "text": "You would report it as business income on Schedule C.  You may be able to take deductions against that income as well (home office, your computer, an android device, any advertising or promotional expenses, etc.) but you'll want to consult an accountant about that. Generally you can only take those kinds of deductions if you use the space or equipment exclusively for business use (not likely if it's just a hobby).  The IRS is pretty picky about that stuff."}
{"id": "29073", "text": "When you buy a bond - you're giving a loan to the issuer. The interest rate on the bond is the interest rate on the loan. Usually (and this is also the case with the treasury bonds), the rate is fixed for the term of the loan. Thus, if the market rate for similar loans a year later is higher, the rate for the loan you gave - remains the same."}
{"id": "29184", "text": "\"Does the bolded sentence apply for ETFs and ETF companies? No, the value of an ETF is determined by an exchange and thus the value of the share is whatever the trading price is. Thus, the price of an ETF may go up or down just like other securities. Money market funds can be a bit different as the mutual fund company will typically step in to avoid \"\"Breaking the Buck\"\" that could happen as a failure for that kind of fund. To wit,   must ETF companies invest a dollar in the ETF for every dollar that an   investor deposited in this aforesaid ETF? No, because an ETF is traded as shares on the market, unless you are using the creation/redemption mechanism for the ETF, you are buying and selling shares like most retail investors I'd suspect. If you are using the creation/redemption system then there are baskets of other securities that are being swapped either for shares in the ETF or from shares in the ETF.\""}
{"id": "29300", "text": "It is true that with a job that pays you via payroll check that will result in a W-2 because you are an employee, the threshold that you are worried about before you have to file is in the thousands. Unless of course you make a lot of money from bank interest or you have income tax withheld and you want it refunded to you. Table 2 and table 3 in IRS pub 501, does a great job of telling you when you must.  For you table 3 is most likely to apply because you weren't an employee and you will not be getting a W-2. If any of the five conditions listed below applied to you for 2016, you must file a return. You owe any special taxes, including any of the following. a. Alternative minimum tax. (See Form 6251.)    b. Additional tax on a   qualified plan, including an individual retirement arrangement (IRA),   or other tax\u00adfavored account.  (See Pub. 590\u00adA, Contributions to   Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs); Pub. 590\u00adB, Distributions   from  Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs); and Pub. 969, Health   Savings Accounts and Other Tax\u00adFavored Health  Plans.) But if you are   filing a return only because you owe this tax, you can file Form 5329   by itself.   c. Social security or Medicare tax on tips you didn't   report to your employer (see Pub. 531, Reporting Tip Income) or on    wages you received from an employer who didn't withhold these taxes   (see Form 8919).    d. Write\u00adin taxes, including uncollected social   security, Medicare, or railroad retirement tax on tips you reported to   your  employer or on group\u00adterm life insurance and additional taxes on   health savings accounts. (See Pub. 531, Pub. 969,  and the Form 1040   instructions for line 62.)   e. Household employment taxes. But if you   are filing a return only because you owe these taxes, you can file    Schedule H (Form 1040) by itself. f. Recapture taxes. (See the Form   1040 instructions for lines 44, 60b, and 62.) You (or your spouse if filing jointly) received Archer MSA, Medicare Advantage MSA, or health savings account  distributions. You had net earnings from self\u00ademployment of at least $400. (See Schedule SE (Form 1040) and its instructions.) You had wages of $108.28 or more from a church or qualified church\u00adcontrolled organization that is exempt from employer  social   security and Medicare taxes. (See Schedule SE (Form 1040) and its   instructions.) Advance payments of the premium tax credit were made for you, your spouse, or a dependent who enrolled in coverage  through the Health   Insurance Marketplace. You should have received Form(s) 1095\u00adA showing   the amount of the advance  payments, if any. It appears that item 3: You had net earnings from self\u00ademployment of at least $400. (See Schedule SE (Form 1040) and its instructions.) would most likely apply. It obviously is not too late to file for 2016, because taxes aren't due for another month. As to previous years that would depend if you made money those years, and how much."}
{"id": "29323", "text": "For most people, the longer you have until retirement, the more beneficial a Roth IRA becomes.   As you get closer to retirement, your income should be higher than what you earn now, pushing you to pay a higher tax rate than what you are currently at, even if tax rates don't change.    You said you were fairly young.   Let's assume you've got 35 years until retirement. Assume you make $50K right now, and earn a 4% raise each year.  When you retire, a common goal is to live off of 80% of your pre-retirement income.   80% of your pre-retirement income will be $157K/year based on 4% raises and 35 years until retirement.  I can't predict future tax rates, but it is likely to be a higher tax rate than what you are paying now. Say you invest $300.00 per month for 35 years at 9% interest (S&P 500 lifetime average is 10.5%).   In 35 years, you'll have contributed $126,000.   The account will be worth about $890,000.  That means that you'll have $764,000 of gain. If you invested in a 401k, you'll pay taxes on every withdrawal from your $890,000 account, at your retirement rate.  If you invested in a Roth, you'll pay taxes on your contributions of $126,000 and not pay taxes on the gains. This grants you some immunity from tax law changes or even large withdrawals to buy a house, boat, etc. during retirement.  All of the taxes paid will be at your rate when investing."}
{"id": "29372", "text": "\"Lets say you owed me $123.00 an wanted to mail me a check. I would then take the check from my mailbox an either take it to my bank, or scan it and deposit it via their electronic interface. Prior to you mailing it you would have no idea which bank I would use, or what my account number is. In fact I could have multiple bank accounts, so I could decide which one to deposit it into depending on what I wanted to do with the money, or which bank paid the most interest, or by coin flip. Now once the check is deposited my bank would then \"\"stamp\"\" the check with their name, their routing number, the date, an my account number. Eventually an image of the canceled check would then end up back at your bank. Which they would either send to you, or make available to you via their banking website. You don't mail it to my bank. You mail it to my home, or my business, or wherever I tell you to mail it. Some business give you the address of another location, where either a 3rd party processes all their checks, or a central location  where all the money for multiple branches are processed. If you do owe a company they will generally ask that in the memo section in the lower left corner that you include your customer number. This is to make sure that if they have multiple Juans the money is accounted correctly. In all my dealings will paying bills and mailing checks I have never been asked to send a check directly to the bank. If they want you to do exactly as you describe, they should provide you with a form or other instructions.\""}
{"id": "29397", "text": "\"But I have been having a little difficulty to include the expenditure in my monthly budget as the billing cycle is from the 16th to 15th of the next month and my income comes in at the end of the month. Many companies will let you change the statement date if you want, so one way to do this would be to request your bank to have statements due at the end of the month or first of month. You can call and ask, this might resolve your problem entirely. How can I efficiently add the credit card expenditure to my monthly budget? We do this using YNAB, which then means our monthly budget is separate from our actual bank accounts. When we spend, we enter the transaction into YNAB and it's \"\"spent.\"\" Additionally, we just pay whatever our credit card balance is a day before the end of the month so it is at $0 when we do our budget discussion at the end of each month.\""}
{"id": "29502", "text": "You pay taxes on any gains you make after selling, so if you buy and hold you won't pay taxes (and you should hold for more than a year so that it gets taxed at the long-term rate, not the short-term rate). I like ETFs, there are some good ones Vanguard offers that are fairly broad, or you can use something like www.Betterment.com which invests in a diversified portfolio of ETFs (and includes things like automatic re-balancing and tax-loss harvesting)."}
{"id": "29761", "text": "\"There has been almost no inflation during 2014-2015. do you mean rental price inflation or overall inflation? Housing price and by extension rental price inflation is usually much higher than the \"\"basket of goods\"\" CPI or RPI numbers. The low levels of these two indicators are mostly caused by technology, oil and food price deflation (at least in the US, UK, and Europe) outweighing other inflation. My slightly biased (I've just moved to a new rental property) and entirely London-centric empirical evidence suggests that 5% is quite a low figure for house price inflation and therefore also rental inflation. Your landlord will also try to get as much for the property as he can so look around for similar properties and work out what a market rate might be (within tolerances of course) and negotiate based on that. For the new asked price I could get a similar apartment in similar condos with gym and pool (this one doesn't have anything) or in a way better area (closer to supermarkets, restaurants, etc). suggests that you have already started on this and that the landlord is trying to artificially inflate rents. If you can afford the extra 5% and these similar but better appointed places are at that price why not move? It sounds like the reason that you are looking to stay on in this apartment is either familiarity or loyalty to the landlord so it may be time to benefit from a move.\""}
{"id": "29817", "text": "\"You may be considered a resident for tax purposes. To meet the substantial presence test, you must have been physically present in the United States on at least: 31 days during the current year, and       183 days during the 3 year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before. To satisfy the 183 days requirement, count:           All of the days you were present in the current year, and           One-third of the days you were present in the first year before the current year, and           One-sixth of the days you were present in the second year before the current year. If you are exempt, I'd check that ending your residence in Germany doesn't violate terms of the visa, in which case you'd lose your exempt status. If you are certain that you can maintain your exempt status, then the income would definitively not be taxed by the US as it is not effectively connected income: You are considered to be engaged in a trade or business in the United States if you are temporarily present in the United States as a nonimmigrant on an \"\"F,\"\" \"\"J,\"\" \"\"M,\"\" or \"\"Q\"\" visa. The taxable part of any U.S. source scholarship or fellowship grant received by a nonimmigrant in \"\"F,\"\" \"\"J,\"\" \"\"M,\"\" or \"\"Q\"\" status is treated as effectively connected with a trade or business in the United States. and your scholarship is sourced from outside the US: Generally, the source of scholarships, fellowship grants, grants, prizes, and awards is the residence of the payer regardless of who actually disburses the funds. I would look into this from a German perspective. If they have a rule similiar to the US for scholarships, then you will still be counted as a resident there.\""}
{"id": "30070", "text": "I often sell covered calls, and if they are in the money, let the stock go. I am charged the same fee as if I sold online ($9, I use Schwab) which is better than buying back the option if I'm ok to sell the stock.  In my case, If the option is slightly in the money, and I see the options are priced well, i.e. I'd do another covered call anyway, I sometimes buy the option and sell the one a year out.  I prefer to do this in my IRA account as the trading creates no tax issue."}
{"id": "30155", "text": "If you're trying to teach them the value of money and quantifying the dollar difference between prices, one very effective way to do this is by using bar charts. For instance, if a toy is $5, and movie they really want to see is $10, and a vacation they want to go on costs $2000, it can be a useful tool to help explain how the relative costs work."}
{"id": "30163", "text": "You bought a rental property in 2001. Hopefully you paid fair value else other issues come into play.  Say you paid $120K. You said you have been taking depreciation, which for residential real estate is taken over 27.5 years, so you are about halfway through. Since you don't depreciate land, you may have taken a total $50K so far.  With no improvements, and no transaction costs, you have $50K in depreciation recapture, taxed at a maximum 25% (or your lower, marginal rate) and a cap gain of the 5-10K you mentioned. Either can be offset by losses you've been carrying forward if you suffered large stock losses at some point."}
{"id": "30324", "text": "\"The time value of money is very important in understanding this issue.  Money today is worth more than money next year, two years from now, etc. It's a well understood economics concept, and well worth reading about if you have some, well, time. Not only is money literally worth more now than later due to inflation, but there is the simple fact that, assuming you have money for the purpose of doing something, being able to do that thing today is better than doing that same thing tomorrow.  \"\"A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush\"\" gets to this rather directly; having it now is better than probably having it later.  Would you rather have a nice meal tonight, or eat beans and rice tonight and then have the same nice meal next year? That's why interest exists, in part: you're offered some money now, for more money later; or in the case of buying a bond, you're offered more money later for some money now.  The fact that people have different discount rates for money later is why the loan market can exist: people with more money than they can use now have a lower discount for future money than people who really need money right now (to buy a house, to pay their rent, whatever).   So when choosing to buy a bond, you look at the money you're going to get, both over the short term (the coupon rate) and the long term (the face value), and you consider whether $80 now is worth $100 in 20 years, plus $2 per year.  For some people it is - for some people it isn't, and that's why the price is as it is ($80).  Odds are if you have a few thousand USD, you're probably not going to be interested in this - or if you have a very long term outlook; there are better ways to make money over that long term.  But, if you're a bank needing a secure investment that won't lose value, or a trust that needs high stability, you might be willing to take that deal.\""}
{"id": "30352", "text": "I like precious metals and real estate. For the OP's stated timeframe and the effects QE is having on precious metals, physical silver is not a recommended short term play. If you believe that silver prices will fall as QE is reduced, you may want to consider an ETF that shorts silver.  As for real estate, there are a number of ways to generate profit within your time frame. These include: Purchase a rental property. If you can find something in the $120,000 range you can take a 20% mortgage, then refinance in 3 - 7 years and pull out the equity.  If you truly do not need the cash to purchase your dream home, look for a rental property that pays all the bills plus a little bit for you and arrange a mortgage of 80%. Let your money earn money. When you are ready you can either keep the property as-is and let it generate income for you, or sell and put more than $100,000 into your dream home. Visit your local mortgage broker and ask if he does third-party or private lending. Ask about the process and if you feel comfortable with him, let him know you'd like to be a lender. He will then find deals and present them to you. You decide if you want to participate or not. Private lenders are sometimes used for bridge financing and the loan amortizations can be short (6 months - 5 years) and the rates can be significantly higher than regular bank mortgages. The caveat is that as a second-position mortgage, if the borrower goes bankrupt, you're not likely to get your principal back."}
{"id": "30391", "text": "\"Let's not trade insults. I understand defined benefit plans better than you think. Of course offering a lump-sum payout NOW is better for the company. If you think of the lifetime value of the pension, then yeah, it's \"\"worse\"\" for the recipient... but exactly like lottery winners, this is just a question of my personal discount rate. Maybe I want/need that money now, and value it more now than I would in 10/20/30 years. So it's a question for each individual to decide.\""}
{"id": "30557", "text": "Yes, as long as you write a call against your stock with a strike price greater than or equal to the previous day's closing price, with 30 or more days till experation there will be no effect on the holding period of your stock. Like you mentioned, unqualified covered calls suspend the holding period of your stock.  For example you sell a deep in the money call (sometimes called the last write) on a stock you have held for 5 years, the covered call is classified as unqualified, the holding period is suspened and the gain or loss on the stock will be treated as short-term. Selling out of the money calls or trading in an IRA account keeps things simple. The details below have been summarized from an article I found at investorsguide.com.  The article also talks about the implications of rolling a call forward and tax situations where it may be advantageous to write unqualified covered calls (basically when you have a large deferred long term loss). http://www.investorguide.com/article/12618/qualified-covered-calls-special-rules-wo/ Two criterion must be met for a covered call to be considered a qualified covered call (QCC). 1) days to expiration must be greater than 30 2) strike price must be greater than or equal to the first available in the money strike price below the previous day's closing price for a particular stock.  Additionally, if the previous day's closing price is $25 or less, the strike price of the call being sold must be greater than 85% of yesterday's closing price. 2a) If the previous day's closing price is greater than 60.01 and less than or equal to $150, days to experation is between 60-90, as long as the strike price of the call is greater than 85% of the previous days close and less than 10 points in the money, you can write a covered call two strikes in the money 2c) If the previous day's closing price is greater than $150 and days till expiration is greater than 90, you can write a covered call two strikes in the money."}
{"id": "30563", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.philly.com/philly/business/vanguard-got-everything-it-ever-wanted-now-what-20170717.html) reduced by 89%. (I'm a bot) ***** > I think it's safe to say that 40 years after Vanguard founder John Bogle set out to convince investors that low-cost indexing is better, Vanguard has won the argument.  > As Bloomberg News reported last week, Vanguard is facing "a rise in customer complaints such as accounting errors and longer wait times on phone calls." No one should take for granted that Vanguard will be able to handle its surging popularity.  > Vanguard is the best thing that ever happened to investors.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6o5kzr/vanguard_got_everything_it_ever_wanted_now_what/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~170145 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **Vanguard**^#1 **investors**^#2 **year**^#3 **During**^#4 **fund**^#5\""}
{"id": "30610", "text": "I'm not familiar with US tax law in particular, but the general principle around the world tends to be that interest-free or low-interest loans are taxed as gifts of the difference between a commercial interest charge and the actual interest charged. You could also forgive ($13,000 - waived interest) of the loan each year. Also, remember that there's a lifetime exemption (covering inheritance as well) of $1,000,000 which can be used for any amounts over the $13,000."}
{"id": "30770", "text": "How will going from 75% Credit Utilization to 0% Credit Utilization affect my credit score? might answer your question if US based.  In the US, what counts is what shows on the bill. I've run $20K through a card with a $10K limit, but still ended the month under $2K by making extra payments. As long as you stay ahead of the limit by making mid-cycle payments, I see no issue with this strategy. If you keep running $30K/mo through a card with a $10K limit, the bank will eventually catch this and raise your limit as you will have proven you are more credit worthy."}
{"id": "30774", "text": "The biggest challenge with owning any individual stock is price fluctuation, which is called risk. The scenarios you describe assume that the stock behaves exactly as you predict (price/portfolio doubles) and you need to consider risk. One way to measure risk in a stock or in a portfolio is Sharpe Ratio (risk adjusted return), or the related Sortino ratio. One piece of advice that is often offered to individual investors is to diversify, and the stated reason for diversification is to reduce risk. But that is not telling the whole story. When you are able to identify stocks that are not price correlated, you can construct a portfolio that reduces risk. You are trying to avoid 10% tax on the stock grant (25%-15%), but need to accept significant risk to avoid the 10% differential tax ($1000). An alternative to a single stock is to invest in an ETF (much lower risk), which you can buy and hold for a long time, and the price/growth of an ETF (ex. SPY) can be charted versus your stock to visualize the difference in growth/fluctuation. Look up the beta (volatility) of your stock compared to SPY (for example, IBM). Compare the beta of IBM and TSLA and note that you may accept higher volatility when you invest in a stock like Tesla over IBM. What is the beta of your stock? And how willing are you to accept that risk? When you can identify stocks that move in opposite directions, and mix your portfolio (look up beta balanced portolio), you can smooth out the variability (reduce the risk), although you may reduce your absolute return. This cannot be done with a single stock, but if you have more money to invest you could compose the rest of your portfolio to balance the risk for this stock grant, keep the grant shares, and still effectively manage risk. Some years ago I had accumulated over 10,000 shares (grants, options) in a company where I worked. During the time I worked there, their price varied between $30/share and < $1/share. I was able to liquidate at $3/share."}
{"id": "30912", "text": "Withdrawals from a traditional 401(k) plan are always treated as cash income and the taxable portion is taxed at ordinary income tax rates, even if the money was held in stocks within the 401(k) plan and the amount withdrawn is equal to whatever capital gains you made by selling the stock within the 401(k) plan. If your plan permits you to take the distribution as stock shares (transferred to your taxable brokerage account), then, for tax purposes, it is treated as if you took a distribution of cash equal to the market price of the shares as of the day of the distribution and promptly bought the same number of shares in your brokerage account.  And yes, if the 401(k) plan assets in your ex-employer's plan consists solely of pretax contributions and the earnings thereon, then the entire distribution is ordinary taxable income regardless of whether you sold the stock within the 401(k) plan or took a distribution of stock from the plan and promptly (or after a few days) sold it. The capital gains or losses (if any) from such a sale are, of course, outside the 401(k) plan and taxable accordingly. Finally, the 10% penalty for premature withdrawal from a traditional 401(k) will also apply if you are not 59.5 years of age or older (or maybe 55 since you are separated from service), and it will be computed on the entire distribution."}
{"id": "31377", "text": "\"In the UK there is a School Rewards System used in many schools to teach kids and teens  about finance and economy. In the UK there is a framework for schools called \"\"Every Child Matters\"\" in which \u2018achieving economic well-being\u2019 is an important element. I think is important to offer to offer a real-life vehicle for financial learning beyond the theory.\""}
{"id": "31462", "text": "\"In asnwer to your questions: As @joetaxpayer said, you really should look into a Solo 401(k). In 2017, this allows you to contribute up to $18k/year and your employer (the LLC) to contribute more, up to $54k/year total (subject to IRS rules). 401(k) usually have ROTH and traditional sides, just like IRA. I believe the employer-contributed funds also see less tax burden for both you and your LLC that if that same money had become salary (payroll taxes, etc.). You might start at irs.gov/retirement-plans/one-participant-401k-plans and go from there. ROTH vs. pre-tax: You can mix and match within years and between years. Figure out what income you want to have when you retire. Any year you expect to pay lower taxes (low income, kids, deductions, etc.), make ROTH contributions. Any year you expect high taxes (bonus, high wage, taxable capital gains, etc.), make pre-tax payments. I have had a uniformly bad experience with target date funds across multiple 401(k) plans from multiple plan adminstrators. They just don't perform well (a common problem with almost any actively managed fund). You probably don't want to deal with individual stocks in your retirement accounts, so rather pick passively managed index funds that track various markets segments you care about and just sit on them. For example, your high-risk money might be in fast-growing but volatile industries (e.g. tech, aerospace, medical), your medium-risk money might go in \"\"total market\"\" or S&P 500 index funds, and your low-risk money might go in treasury notes and bonds. The breakdown is up to you, but as an 18 year old you have a ~50 year horizon and so can afford to wait out anything short of another Great Depression (and maybe even that). So you'd want generally you want more or your money in the high-risk high-return  category, rebalancing to lower risk investments as you age. Diversifying into real estate, foreign investments, etc. might also make sense but I'm no expert on those.\""}
{"id": "31465", "text": "\"Honestly, I wonder if the other answerers aren't overthinking it. Their answers are detailed and correct, but what your coach may be saying is this: When you have bought a stock, on cash or margin, and you are watching it rise you are evaluating when you sell on the price of the stock you are seeing. In reality, you should look at the bid (price buyers will give you for the stock) and ask (price sellers will charge you for the stock) prices. If the stock is going up, odds are the price of the stock is very close to the ask price because it is purchases that are driving it up, but that's not what you're going to get when you sell. You're going to get something around the bid price. If the spread between the two is large (i.e. a volatile stock) this could be many cents or more lower than the ask price. Therefore, what your coach may mean by \"\"Selling on Ask\"\" is you're using the stock price when it's equal or close to the ask price to decide when to sell, instead of letting the stock peak and drop (when its price will approach the bid price) or letting the trailing bid offers catch up to your desired sell point and selling then (i.e. letting the stock point grow PAST your sell point, dragging the bid price up with it). Just a thought, but that sounds like a term a coach would come up with to mean selling and getting less than you thought you were going to from the sale. (I know it's a necro reply, but the Interwebs are immortal and people come via Google... I did)\""}
{"id": "31565", "text": "The days are long gone when offered mortgages were simply based on salary multiples. These days it's all about affordability, taking into account all incomes and all outgoings. Different lenders will have different rules about what they do and don't accept as incomes; these rules may even vary per-product within the same lender's product list.  So for example a mortgage specifically offered as buy-to-let might accept rental income (with a suitable void-period multiplier) into consideration, but an owner-occupier mortgage product might not. Similarly, business rules will vary about acceptance of regular overtime, bonuses, and so on. Guessing at specific answers: #1 maybe, if it's a buy-to-let product, Note that these generally carry a higher interest rate than owner-occupier mortgages; expect about 2% more #2 in my opinion it's extremely unlikely that any lender would consider rental income from your cohabiting spouse #3 probably yes, if it's a buy-to-let product"}
{"id": "31603", "text": "The balance is the amount due."}
{"id": "31665", "text": "You can but there is no point trading CFD's seeing you may still lose more than your investment due to slippage"}
{"id": "31863", "text": "Profit = Sale price - Basis Basis = Purchase price - any depreciation taken, including expensing it."}
{"id": "31954", "text": "\"I think Swenson's insight was that the traditional recommendation of 60% stocks plus 40% bonds has two serious flaws: 1) You are exposed to way too much risk by having a portfolio that is so strongly tied to US equities (especially in the way it has historically been recommend). 2) You have too little reward by investing so much of your portfolio in bonds. If you can mix a decent number of asset classes that all have equity-like returns, and those asset classes have a low correlation with each other, then you can achieve equity-like returns without the equity-like risk. This improvement can be explicitly measured in the Sharpe ratio of you portfolio. (The Vanguard Risk Factor looks pretty squishy and lame to me.) The book the \"\"The Ivy Portfolio\"\" does a great job at covering the Swenson model and explains how to reasonably replicate it yourself using low fee ETFs.\""}
{"id": "32009", "text": "\"So many complicated answers for a straight forward question. First to this point \"\"I am failing to see why would a person get an IRA, instead of just putting the same amount of money into a mutual fund...\"\" An IRA can be invested in a mutual fund.  The IRA benefit over standard mutual fund is pre-tax contribution lowering your current tax liability. The advantage of an IRA over a 401k is control.  Your employer controls where the 401k is invested, you control where your IRA is invested.  Often employers have a very small number of options, because this keeps their costs with the brokerage low. 401k is AMAZING if you have employer matched contributions.  Use them to the maximum your employer will match.  After that OWN your IRA.  Control is key when it comes to your money. On IRA's. Buy ROTH first.  Contribute the calendar maximum.  Then get a traditional.  The benefit of ROTH is that you already paid taxes on the contribution so your withdrawal is not taxed AND they do not tax the interest earned like they do on a standard mutual fund.\""}
{"id": "32022", "text": "The closer the contribution is to the December 31st date, the more profitable that specific contribution is, only taking into consideration the 5% discount. On your case, the first contribution that beats your student loans interest rate is the August one, where you get about 9% annual return, the remaining contributions go up from there."}
{"id": "32064", "text": "That might happen if this incident leads to a deflationary demand for consumer credit instruments in the US to approaching Third World penetration levels. Ironic, as the consumer credit industry is spending gigadollars trying to spark the same consumer credit frenzy in those countries.  The demographics are already primed for turning away from consumer credit, as the Millennials are already increasingly predisposed against credit as they age."}
{"id": "32172", "text": "\"Mutual funds generally make distributions once a year in December with the exact date (and the estimated amount) usually being made public in late October or November. Generally, the estimated amounts can get updated as time goes on, but the date does not change. Some funds (money market, bond funds, GNMA funds etc) distribute dividends on the last business day of each month, and the amounts are rarely made available beforehand. Capital gains are usually distributed once a year as per the general statement above. Some funds (e.g. S&P 500 index funds) distribute dividends towards the end of each quarter or on the last business day of the quarter, and capital gains once a year as per the general statement above. Some funds make semi-annual distributions but not necessarily at six-month intervals. Vanguard's Health Care Fund has distributed dividends and capital gains in March and December for as long as I have held it. VDIGX claims to make semi-annual distributions but made distributions three times in 2014 (March, June, December) and has made/will make two distributions this year already (March is done, June is pending -- the fund has gone ex-dividend with  re-investment today and payment on 22nd). You can, as Chris Rea suggests, call the fund company directly, but in my experience, they are reluctant to divulge the date of the distribution (\"\"The fund manager has not made the date public as yet\"\") let alone an estimated amount. Even getting a \"\"Yes, the fund intends to make a distribution later this month\"\" was difficult to get from my \"\"Personal Representative\"\" in early March, and he had to put me on hold to talk to someone at the fund before he was willing to say so.\""}
{"id": "32324", "text": "\"The obvious disadvantage of paying loans off more slowly is that you will pay a lot more in total interest... Which means less savings and less disposable income on the long term. Unless you are doing something with the money which produces more income than the interest costs you, this is very much \"\"penny wise, pound foolish\"\". If you aren't making money by paying that money, all you can do is loose money at the slowest rate you can afford. You do that by paying off the loan as quickly as you can afford to do so. It's up to you to look seriously at your finances and decide what your real needs are, how you're going to meet them, and how much you can afford beyond that while still paying off the loans as quickly as possible. Sloppiness now will cost you much more than you expect layer, due to the compounding you will have missed out on. Really.  See the questions about how to start saving/investing for answers that discuss how to prioritize your money. There are some steps you should be taking ASAP if you haven't already done so.\""}
{"id": "32576", "text": "In regards to the legal recourse, no there is none.  Also, despite your frustrations with Citi, it may not be their fault.  Mortgage companies are now forced to select appraisers (essentially at random) through 3rd party Appraisal Resource Companies (ARCs).  This randomization mandate from the government was issued in order to combat fraud, but it is really causing more trouble for homeowners because it took away appraiser accountability.  Basically, there's nothing we can do to fire an appraiser anymore.  I've had appraiser do terrible jobs, just blatantly wrong, and have gone the distance with the dispute process only to find they won't change the value.  My favorite real-life example came from an appraiser who got the bedroom count wrong (4 instead of 5); yet he took pictures of 5 bedrooms.  The one he excluded he stated it shouldn't count because it didn't have a closet.  Problem is, it DID have a closet.  I had the homeowner take pictures of all of the closets in his house, and send them in.  He still refused to change the count.  After close to 2 months of the dispute process, the ARC came in and changed the count, but did not chagne the value, stating that the room count didn't increase the sqft, and there would be no adjustment in value.  I was floored.  The only solution we had was to wait for the appraisal to expire, then order it again; which we did.  The new appraiser got the count right, and surprisingly (not really), it came in at the right value... In regards to the value necessary to avoid MI, they are likely using 80%, but it's not based on your current balance vs the value, it's based on the new loan amount (which will include costs, prepaids, skipped mortgage payments, etc) vs the value. Here are your options: Get a new appraisal.  If you are confident the value is wrong, go somewhere else and get a new appraisal. Restructure the loan.  Any competent Loan Officer would have noticed that you are very close to 80%, and should have offer you the option of splitting the mortgage into a 1st and 2nd loan.  Keeping the first loan at 80%, and taking out a 2nd for the difference would avoid MI. Best Regards, Jared Newton"}
{"id": "32744", "text": "You are not missing something basic.  Putting money in the bank will cost you in terms of purchasing power.  The same thing has been true in the US and other places for a long time now.  The real interest rate is negative--there is too much aggregate wealth being saved compared to the number of profitable lending opportunities.  That means any truly risk-free investment will not make as much money as you will lose to inflation.   If the real interest rate appears to be positive in your home country it means one of the following is happening: Capital controls or other barriers are preventing foreigners from investing in your home country, keeping the interest rate there artificially high Expected inflation is not being measured very accurately in your home country Inflation is variable and unpredictable in your home country, so investors are demanding high interest rates to compensate for inflation risk.  In other words, bank accounts are not risk-free in your home country. If you find any securities that are beating inflation, you can bet they are taking on risk.  Investing in risky securities is fine, but just understand that it's not a substitute for a risk-free bank account.  Part of every interest rate is compensation for the time-value-of-money and the rest is compensation for risk.  At present, the global time-value-of-money is negative."}
{"id": "32833", "text": "In addition to the issues discussed in BrenBarn's answer, I think you need to consider your medium term saving needs and existing savings. In particular, do you have a sufficient rainy day fund, a fund you will spend if things go wrong? For example, if you are dependent on a vehicle that is not covered by a guarantee or service plan, you should have enough money saved for a couple of major repairs. Depending on how secure your job is, whether it carries sick leave and long term disability, and how easy or difficult it would be to find another job in the event e.g. of your employer going bankrupt due to a downturn in your industry, you should have months to years of minimal living expenses in your rainy day fund. If you don't have those things covered, you should urgently save as much as you can until they are covered. If you do, then the next savings priority is to put money by for retirement. Of course, if all goes well the rainy day fund will ultimately get folded into retirement, but it needs to exist now, in a form you can access quickly."}
{"id": "32855", "text": "CDs or money market funds. Zero-risk for the CD and ultra-low risk for the money market account; better return than most savings accounts."}
{"id": "33157", "text": "\"I am a tax lawyer and ALL the RESPONSES ABOVE are 1/2 Correct but also 1/2 Wrong and in tax law this means 100% WRONG (BECAUSE ANY PART INCORRECT UNDER TAX LAW will get YOU A HUGE PENALY and/or PRISON TIME by way of the IRS!  So in ESSENCE ALL the above answers are WRONG! Let me enlighten you to the correct answer in 5 parts, as people that do not practice tax law may understand (but you still probably will not understand, if you are NOT a Lawyer). 1) All public companies are corporations (shown by Ltd.), 2) only Shareholders of Public companies (ie, traded on the NYSE stock market) are never liable for debts of a bankrupt company, due to the concept of limited liability. 2) now Banks may ask a sole proprietorship (who wants to incorp. for example) to give collateral, such as owners stocks/bonds or his/her house, but then of course the loanee can tell the Bank No Thanks and find a lender that may charge higher interest rates but lend money to his company with little to NO collateral. 3) Of course not all companies are publicly traded and these are called private companies. 4)\"\"limited liability\"\" has nothing to do directly with subsequent shareholders (the above answer is inaccurate!), it RELATES rather to INITIAL OWNERS INVESTMENT in their company, limiting the amount of owner loss if the company goes bankrupt. 5) Share Face-value is usually never related to this as shares are sold at market value in real life instances (above or below face-value), or the most money Investments Banks or owners can fetch for the shares they sell (not what the stock's face-value is set at upon issuance). Never forget, stocks are sold in our Capitalistic System to whomever pays the most, as it is that Buyer who gets to purchase the stock!\""}
{"id": "33287", "text": "As Victor says, you pay tax on net profit. If this is a significant source of income for you, you should file quarterly estimated tax payments or you're going to get hit with a penalty at the end of the year."}
{"id": "33602", "text": "\"http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc503.html says you can deduct \"\"Any prior year's state or local income tax you paid during the year.\"\" So I would say as long as you have good records, you can deduct the excess refund you had to pay back in the year in which you paid it. Whether or not your return was amended shouldn't affect whether or not it is deductible.\""}
{"id": "33628", "text": "\"For MCD, the 47\u00a2 is a regular dividend on preferred stock (see SEC filing here). Common stock holders are not eligible for this amount, so you need to exclude this amount. For KMB, there was a spin-off of Halyard Health. From their IR page on the spin-off: Kimberly-Clark will distribute one share of Halyard common stock for   every eight shares of Kimberly-Clark common stock you own as of the   close of business on the record date. The deal closed on 2014-11-03. At the time HYH was worth $37.97 per share, so with a 1:8 ratio this is worth about $4.75. Assuming you were able to sell your HYH shares at this price, the \"\"dividend\"\" in the data is something you want to keep. With all the different types of corporate actions, this data is extremely hard to keep clean. It looks like the Quandl source is lacking here, so you may need to consider looking at other vendors.\""}
{"id": "33673", "text": "\"One of the things that you have to be aware of is a little gotcha in the credit utilization rate. They, or at least the credit company I worked for, used the \"\"high balance\"\" in figuring the credit utilization, not the ending balance. For example, say you had a single card with a $2000 credit limit and used it to charge everything during the month. Say that the high balance was $1900 and you paid it down to zero at the end of the month. The company would calculate your credit utilization at 95%. This is not good and not really fair, but that was the way it was done. Increasing the credit limit helps, but you can also usually make interim payments, say as a paycheck comes in, during the month, if you have an online account.\""}
{"id": "33912", "text": "There isn't any place you can put $300 and turn it into significant passive income. What you need to do instead is manage the active (work) income that you have so that your money goes farther, freeing income up for reducing debt and investing.  Investing $300 one time won't add up to much, but investing $100 a month will turn into wealth over time. Making a monthly budget is the key to managing your income.  In the process, you'll find out where your income is going, and you can be intentional about how much you want to spend on different things in your life.  You can allocate some of your income to paying down debt and investing, which is what you need to do to get ahead. For some general guidelines on what to do with your money first, read this question: Oversimplify it for me: the correct order of investing.  For more specifics on creating a budget, eliminating debt, and building wealth, I recommend the book The Total Money Makeover by Dave Ramsey."}
{"id": "34458", "text": "This is not correct information. The plan sponsor is the fiduciary and potentially any advisor or consultant. The recordkeeper or even the custodian of the assets is a directed trustee, and follows the instructions provided by the plan sponsor. Fidelity or whatever recordkeeper is being used is not in the business of determining if company stock is a prudent investment in the plan. That, again is the job of the plan sponsor and the plans investment committee and possibly an advisor.  The plan sponsor in this case is most certainly eliminating the stock as an option in the plan to pre-empt a stock loss lawsuit brought on by plan participants or plantiffs attorneys."}
{"id": "34467", "text": "You could just commingle your funds.  That way, she also learns how to keep track of things and how to figure things out, rather just learning to have the guy at the brokerage hand her an account statement which she blindly accepts. It might cause some tax problems though if the money grows to be substantial."}
{"id": "34550", "text": "\"Their \"\"genius idea\"\" saved me more than 50 bucks last week when I bought a new ultra book and photoshop 6 student edition for my wife from Fry's Electronics and found out that Fry's would match their prices. Best Buy was cheaper than Fries, pigs must be flying somewhere..\""}
{"id": "34887", "text": "\"Paying yourself through a corporation requires an analysis of a variety of issues. First, a salary paid to yourself creates RRSP contribution room as well as CPP contributions.  Paying yourself a dividend achieves neither of those. By having a corporation, you will have to file a corporate (T2) tax return.  The corporation is considered a separate legal entity from you.  As an individual, you will still need to file a personal (T1) tax return. Never just \"\"draw\"\" money out of a corporation.  This can create messy transactions involving loans to shareholders.  Interest is due on these amounts and any amounts not paid within one calendar year are considered as wages by Canada Revenue and would need to be reported as income on your next T1 return. You should never withhold EI premiums as the sole owner of a corporation.  You are considered exempt from these costs by CRA.  Any amounts that have been remitted to CRA can be reclaimed by submitting a formal request. The decision on whether to take a salary or dividends normally requires some detailed analysis.  Your accountant or financial advisor should be able to assist in this matter.\""}
{"id": "34902", "text": "\"Age. Current marginal rate. Total saved so far. Current rate of savings. Joint or single filer. These are among the variables that go into making this decision. Without this, my answer is a general response. In general, you have one marginal rate today. (Unless you happened to be straddling a bracket limit).  In retirement, you have your marginal rate, of course, but also every bracket up to that level. It can make sense to save today pretax to avoid 25%, knowing this money will be withdrawn at an average 10 % or so in retirement.  Edit to clarify to the one who offers comment below to the contrary.  The 2015 taxtable for single filer:  A single person has a combined $10,300 standard deduction and exemption. This means that if he has no other income in retirement, a withdrawal of $47,750 results in a tax bill of $5156. This is an average 10.8% on that withdrawal. It also means that one can save nearly $1.2M before hitting the 25% bracket in retirement. With the numbers I offered, the next $1 is taxed at 25%. In general, if a new worker starts by using Roth, and goes to traditional to avoid slipping into the 25% bracket, they will have a nice mix of pre and post tax money.  In the end, it's not a long term binary choice. Each year, you can decide which flavor or mix of flavors to use. You can convert from traditional to Roth each year to \"\"top off\"\" the 15% bracket, so you retirement withdrawals never push you into the 25% bracket.  Note - the math above tragically ignores The Phantom Tax Rate Zone caused by the taxation of Social Security benefits. For a young person, I don't know that I'd advise counting on this benefit, but if you believe in fairy dust, unicorns, and the like, you should be aware of how the government currently plans to tax you. This situation leans strongly toward the Roth. Until congress decides to use Roth withdrawals as a trigger to tax or reduce your benefits, in which case, just using a taxable account will be all that's left.  2 years ago, I wrote a blog post The 15% solution which walks the reader through the process of optimizing their savings from a tax standpoint. The choice of investments is another matter, this simply addresses the pre-tax post-tax issue.\""}
{"id": "34913", "text": "It is a bad deal.  It saves the government from processing your refund as a check or an ACH deposit, and lets them keep your money -- money that they overwithheld! -- interest-free for another year. Get it back. :)"}
{"id": "34925", "text": "One thing to note before buying bond funds. The value of bonds you hold will drop when interest rates go up. Interest rates are at historical lows and pretty much have nowhere to go but up. If you are buying bonds to hold to maturity this is probably not a major concern, but for a bond fund it might impair performance if things suddenly shift in the interest rate market."}
{"id": "35461", "text": "I'll consent to this. I get it. But the shop itself is making about 80-100k a month in sales. I realize the wind could shift but as long as I recoup the initial 92k I wouldn't be out any monies. It would take almost a year since each harvest period is 66 days but I get what you mean"}
{"id": "35575", "text": "Other than the guaranteed 5% bonus (assuming you sell it right away), no benefits. Keep in mind that the price from which the discount is calculated is not necessarily the market price at the date of the ESPP purchase, so the actual discount may be more than 5% (depending on the volatility of the stock - much more)."}
{"id": "35633", "text": "Since GLD is priced as 1/10 oz of gold, I'd call it the preferred way to buy if that's your desire. I believe gold is entering classic bubble territory. Caveat emptor.  A comment brought me back to this question. My answer still applies, the ETF the best way to buy gold at the lowest transaction cost. The day I posted and expressed my 'bubble' concern, gold was $1746. Today, nearly 5 years later, it's $1350, a drop of 23%, plus an additional 2% of accumulated expenses. Note, GLD has a .4% annual expense. On the other hand, the S&P is up 80% from that time. In other words, $10K invested that day would be worth less than $7,700 had it been invested in gold, and $18,000 in stock. It would take a market crash, gold soaring or some combination of the two for gold to have been the right choice then. No one can predict short term movement of either the market or metals, my answer here wasn't prescient, just lucky."}
{"id": "35752", "text": "For a long term gain you must hold the stock a year and a day, so, the long term hold period will fall into 2015 regardless. This is the only tax related issue that occurs to me, did you have something else in mind?  Welcome to Money.SE."}
{"id": "35865", "text": "Just reading your comment more it is so far off topic. Investor rationality is so far off topic. The outside  investor made a decision to invest already. The owner is being forced make investment decisions. Noting in the article is talking about taking those choices away.  There should be a separate sub for people like who want to make off topic challenges of capitalism. It's disruptive. I can't make a comment with debating every assumption endlessly."}
{"id": "36063", "text": "In many cases, you are required to file your taxes by law even if you won't owe. If it's anything like in the US, it's quite possible your employer is not taking the right amount and you may owe more or may even be in line for a return. http://www.usatax.ca/Pages/filing_requirement_taxes_canada.html"}
{"id": "36193", "text": "At the bottom of the page you linked to, NASDAQ provides a link to this page on nasdaqtrader.com, which states Each FINRA member firm is required to report its \u201ctotal\u201d short interest positions in all customer and proprietary accounts in NASDAQ-listed securities twice a month. These reports are used to calculate short interest in NASDAQ stocks. FINRA member firms are required to report their short positions as of settlement on (1) the 15th of each month, or the preceding business day if the 15th is not a business day, and (2) as of settlement on the last business day of the month.* The reports must be filed by the second business day after the reporting settlement date. FINRA compiles the short interest data and provides it for publication on the 8th business day after the reporting settlement date. The dates you are seeing are the dates the member firms settled their trades. In general (also from nasdaq.com), the settlement date is The date on which payment is made to settle a trade. For stocks traded on US exchanges, settlement is currently three business days after the trade."}
{"id": "36284", "text": "From Vanguard's Best practices for portfolio rebalancing:"}
{"id": "36313", "text": "You own the stock at $29.42 At $40, the stocks is called at $26. You can't add the call premium, as it's already accounted for. The trade is biased towards being bearish on the stock. (I edited and added the graph the evening I answered)  Not the pretiest graph, but you get the idea. With that $29.42 cost, you are in the money till about $30, then go negative until the most you lose is $3.42."}
{"id": "36405", "text": "Damn, helpful Harry above me.   So, in general, when compounding the value of an investment, if you're seeing an annualized interest rate of 4%, and the interest compounds monthly (or n number of times per year), you're going to multiply the Principal P by the growth rate (the interest rate), adjusted for the number of periods that your investment grows in a year. P_end = P * (1 + 0.04/n)^(n * t), where n = number of periods, and t = number of years. If the interest compounds annually, you earn P *(1.04), if it compounds monthly, you earn (1 + 0.04/12)^(12 * 1).   Apply this logic to discounting future cash flows to their net present value. When discounting future cash flows, you're essentially determing the opportunity cost of now being unable to put your investment elsewhere and earning that corresponding interest (discount) rate.   Thus, you would discount $1000 by (1 + 0.08/12)^1, and $2000, $3000 in a similar fashion. Then, as icing on the cake, sum up to get your cumulative net present value.  Please let me know if any portion of my explanation is unclear; I would be happy to elaborate!"}
{"id": "36453", "text": "When you exercise a put, you get paid the strike price immediately. So you can invest that money and earn some interest, compared to only exercising at expiry. So the benefit to exercising early is that extra interest. The cost is the remaining time value of the option, along with any dividend payments you miss. As @JoeTaxpayer points out, there might be tax considerations that make it better to exercise at one time rather than another. But those would likely be personal to you, so if the option would intrinsically have more value unexercised, in many cases you could sell it on rather than exercise it. The exception might be if it wasn't very liquid and the transaction costs of doing that outweighed the theoretical value."}
{"id": "36679", "text": "\"There are raters of stock and bond funds of which Morningstar's is the best. Standard and Poor's and Value line offer reports that aren't quite as good. If you are able to read and understand these reports yourself, you don't need a professional. Such help is necessary for people who are \"\"rank beginners\"\" in investments.\""}
{"id": "36833", "text": "The suggestion may be very delayed, have you personally gone to the Experian Office with all the documentation (in xerox copy and in original)? If not, please do so, there is always a difference between dealing with govt/semi-govt institutions over electronic channels and in person."}
{"id": "37032", "text": "Small companies could have growth prospects. Large companies may not have that many. So look at ROE of companies by quatile to determine which companies have better growth."}
{"id": "37382", "text": "\"If it's work you'd be producing specifically for this organization, that would not be deductable. Per Publication 526, Charitable Deductions, \"\"You can't deduct the value of your time or services, including: \u2026 The value of income lost while you work as an unpaid volunteer for a qualified organization.\"\" On the other hand, if you were say an author of a published book or something (not specifically written for this organization), you could donate a copy of the book and probably deduct its fair market value (or perhaps only your basis, if it's your business's inventory).\""}
{"id": "37449", "text": "You could buy some bitcoins with your credit card and then convert them back to physical money."}
{"id": "37484", "text": "&gt; if govt does it's job of keeping some competition in the banking sector, then the rates offered you and me should be near the actual cost to service such loans,   You cannot really believe this.  There is no sector more artificial than banking, and under the current regime there is no such thing as a relation between any interest rates and the cost to service the loans.  Rates have been artificially depressed across the spectrum using every available manipulation, and we are experiencing a coordinated money-printing/government bailout operation on a global scale.  To say that rates anywhere have any relation to the real cost and/or demand for capital is absurd."}
{"id": "37517", "text": "Let's start with a definition: A Collar is a protective strategy for a position in the underlying instrument created by purchasing a put and selling a call to partially pay for the put option purchased or vice versa. Based on that definition, there are two different types of collars. Each is a combination of two simpler strategies: References Multi-Leg Options Orders"}
{"id": "37725", "text": "\"Your comment to James is telling and can help us lead you in the right direction: My work and lifestyle will be the same either way, as I said.   This is all about how it goes \"\"on the books.\"\" \u00a0\u00a0 [emphasis mine] As an independent consultant myself, when I hear something like \"\"the work will be the same either way\"\", I think: \"\"Here thar be dragons!\"\".  Let me explain: If you go the independent contractor route, then you better act like one.  The IRS (and the CRA, for Canadians) doesn't take lightly to people claiming to be independent contractors when they operate in fact like employees. Since you're not going to be behaving any different whether you are an employee or a contractor, (and assuming you'll be acting more like an employee, i.e. exclusive, etc.), then the IRS may later make a determination that you are in fact an employee, even if you choose to go \"\"on the books\"\" as an independent contractor. If that happens, then you may find yourself retroactively denied many tax benefits you'd have claimed; and owe penalties and interest too.  Furthermore, your employer may be liable for additional withholding taxes, benefits, etc. after such a finding. So for those reasons, you should consider being an employee.  You will avoid the potential headache I outlined above, as well as the additional paperwork etc. of being a contractor. If on the other hand you had said you wanted to maintain some flexibility to moonlight with other clients, build your own product on the side, choose what projects you work on (or don't), maybe hire subcontractors, etc. then I'd have supported the independent contractor idea.  But, just on the basis of the tax characteristics only I'd say forget about it. On the financial side, I can tell you that I wouldn't have become a consultant if not for the ability to make more money in gross terms (i.e. before tax and expenses.)  That is: your top line revenues ought to be higher in order to be able to offset many of the additional expenses you'd incur as an independent.  IMHO, the tax benefits alone  wouldn't make up for the difference. One final thing to look at is Form SS-8 mentioned at the IRS link below.  If you're not sure what status to choose, the IRS can actually help you.  But be prepared to wait... and wait...  :-/ Additional Resources:\""}
{"id": "37954", "text": "Different rates. What the BoE is conducting is known as Quantitative Easing, which is a form of monetary policy avalable to central banks whenever interest rates are already too close to zero or at zero (just like in the UK). In this case, the central banks hopes to influence longer-term rates, rather than just short-term rates. It is useful to remember that the rate central banks announce is a short-term rate used for interbank lending."}
{"id": "38227", "text": "You must file an FBAR when doing your taxes."}
{"id": "38287", "text": "I don't believe in letting the tax tail wag the investing dog. You have a stock you no longer wish to hold for whatever reason? Sell it. But to sell a loser, hoping it doesn't rise by the time you wish to re-buy it in 30 days is folly.  This effort may gain you $50 if done right. No, it's not worth it either way."}
{"id": "38325", "text": "\"&gt;I, for one, look forward to being able to sue the state.  You don't know what investor state is.   Are you [one of these 75,000 corporations](http://www.citizen.org/TAFTA-investment-map) or are you a country?   If you're not, you don't exist to the FTAs.   They were designed to make swift work of your \"\"rights\"\".\""}
{"id": "38335", "text": "I'd value your business at about $70k. $20k inventory, $50k in yearly sales.   You have a good margin, but your growth went from 300% in 2016 to almost flat this year. What happened? How are you using the $25k in profit?"}
{"id": "38720", "text": "A search quickly led to http://www.cardfellow.com/blog/debit-card-credit-card-difference-charges/ which shows the difference in merchant fees charged. A $200 charge costs $3.50-$3.60, a debit charge, $2.34-$2.39 but a PIN Debit, $1.87. The debit cards are a full percent less cost to the merchant, so the money collected is less to use for rewards. (I can't help but wonder how my card gives me 2% cash back, no fee, when I never pay interest.)"}
{"id": "38786", "text": "The main benefit of paying off the loan early is that it's not on your mind, you don't have to worry about missing a payment and incurring the full interest due at that point. Your loan may not be set up that way, but most 0% interest loans are set up so that there is interest that's accruing, but you don't pay it so long as all your payments are on time, oftentimes they're structured so that one late payment causes all of that deferred interest to be due.  If you put the money in the bank you'd make a small amount of interest and also not have to worry about funds availability for your car payment. If you use the money for some other purpose, you're at greater risk of something going wrong in the next 21 months that causes you to miss a payment and being hit with a lot of interest (if applicable to your loan).  If you already have an emergency fund (at least 3-6 months of expenses) then I would pay the loan off now so you don't have to think about it.  If you don't have an emergency fund, then I'd bank the money and keep making payments, and pay it off entirely when you have funds in excess of your emergency fund to do so."}
{"id": "38918", "text": "Is there anywhere I can get further information? I ask because I'm thinking about an alternative theory of money where companies can issue bonds as currency, and we can have coexisting monetary policies.  These relate to what i'm saying:  http://www.reddit.com/r/finance/comments/utf5u/where_has_all_the_money_in_the_world_gone/c4yfkhg  http://www.radicalsocialentreps.org/2012/07/open-source-currencies-on-the-rise-in-greece/   http://www.businessinsider.com/why-are-central-banks-independent-2012-5  http://truth-out.org/news/item/11868-spain-and-greece-are-being-forced-to-suffer-to-save-germany-from-high-inflation"}
{"id": "39149", "text": "\"Yes, that's true. Excerpt from \"\"The Warren Buffett Way\"\":  \"\"In November 2000, Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway paid about $1 billion for Benjamin Moore &amp; Co., the Mercedes of paint companies. Founded in 1883 by the Moore brothers in their Brooklyn basement, Benjamin Moore today is fifth largest paint manufacturer in the United States and has an unmatched reputation  for  quality. It was reported that Buffett paid a 25 percent premium over the stock\u2019s  then  current  price.  On  the  surface,  that  might  seem to contradict one of Buffett\u2019s iron-clad rules: that he will act only when the price is low enough to constitute a margin of safety.  However,  we  also  know  that  Buffett  is  not  afraid  to  pay for  quality.  Even  more  revealing,  the  stock  price  jumped  50 percent to $37.62 per share after the deal was announced. This tells us that either Buffett found yet another company that was undervalued or else that the rest of the investing world was betting  on  Buffett\u2019s  acumen  and  traded  the  price  up  even  higher\u2014 or  both.\"\"\""}
{"id": "39223", "text": "It's a good idea to have some emergency money so I would propose a plan that keeps some in your savings:  If the 0% goes away, then consider paying it off, but by that time hopefully you have built up your savings a bit more. Also consider the ability to move the balance from the 2% cards to the 0% one, if that is possible."}
{"id": "39303", "text": "\"In case other people arrive at this page wondering whether they should enable automatic reinvestment of dividends and capital gains for taxable (non-retirement) accounts (which is what I was searching for when I first arrived on this page): You might want to review https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Reinvesting_dividends_in_a_taxable_account and http://www.fivecentnickel.com/2011/01/26/why-you-shouldnt-automatically-reinvest-dividends/. The general idea is that--assuming you plan to regularly manually rebalance your portfolio to ensure that all of the \"\"pieces of the pie\"\" are the relative sizes that you want--there are approaches you can use to minimize taxes (and also fees, although at Vanguard I don't think that's a concern) if you choose a \"\"SpecID cost basis\"\" and manual reinvestment. Then you can go to \"\"Change your dividends and capital gains distribution elections\"\" at https://personal.vanguard.com/us/DivCapGainAccountSelection.\""}
{"id": "39345", "text": "Good questions. I can only add that it may be valuable if the company is bought, they may buy the options. Happened to me in previous company."}
{"id": "39720", "text": "When the check is deposited, the bank verifies the signature in the check matches your signature in file."}
{"id": "39820", "text": "We are the richest nation in the history of the world. We produce and consume more now than at any point in history.   Credit card debt is nowhere near historical levels. Delinquency rates on credit card loans is near the lowest it has ever been.  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DRCCLACBS   It may seem wild and not make a lot of sense that data does not fit your worldview, but let yourself be open to information that conflicts with your own.   otherwise you are just held hostage by your own misconceptions.   You are going to wait a lifetime for that riot pal and you may learn to capitalize proper nouns while you are at it."}
{"id": "40665", "text": "\"Your dad may have paid an \"\"opportunity cost\"\" for that outright purchase.  If the money he saved had been invested elsewhere, he may have made more money.  If he was that well off, then his interest rate should have been the lowest possible.  My own father is a multi-millionaire (not myself) and he could afford to have paid for his house outright.  He didn't though.  To do so would have meant cashing in on several investments.  I don't know his interest rate but let's say it was 2.5%.  If he invests that million dollars into something he expects to get a 7% return on in the same period, then he would make more money by borrowing the money.  Hence, he would be paying an opportunity cost. Assuming you need to work, some jobs will also do background or credit checks.  Credit cards can be used by well off people to actually make them money by offering rewards (compared to straight cash transactions).  The better your credit history, the better the cards/rewards you can get.  You can build that credit history better by having these loans and making timely payments.\""}
{"id": "40888", "text": "If you are not banking with a credit union, open an account.  Speak with a person there an explain you are wanting to build your credit history.  They will likely have a product designed for the purpose. Also, to agree with duffbeer703, why is your score so low at this point? Make sure your three credit reports do not have anything incorrect on them and challenge wrong items. If everything is fine on the report, you just to have more credit and use it for a longer period of time. I presume you are building credit for a large purchase such as a house.  Please be very careful with borrowing money and do your best to avoid carrying balances."}
{"id": "40982", "text": ""}
{"id": "41052", "text": "I agree with Joe that you seem to have your stuff together. However I can't disagree more otherwise.  You are getting a loan at such a cheap rate that it would be almost impossible to not substantially beat that rate over the next 15-20 years.  You paying off your home early might give you warm fuzzy feeling but would make me queezy.  This is a MONEY website.  Make money. For our purposes let's say your home is worth 500k, you can get a fixed rate loan at 3% over 30 years, and you can earn 7% on your investments per year.  Note that I have earned 12% on mine the past 15 years so I am being pretty conservative. So let's not get into your other stuff because that is fine.  Let's focus just on that 500k - your house. Interest only Loan for the whole thing-  The flip side is you pay off your house.  Your house could be worth 400K in 30 years.  Probably not but neighborhood could decline, house not kept up, or whatever.  Your house is not a risk-free investment.  And it fluctuate in many areas more than the stock market.  But let's just say your area stays OK or normal.  In 30 years you can expect your house to be worth somewhere between 700k to 1.5 million.  Let's just say you did GREAT with your house.  Guess what?  At 1.5 million selling price you still lost 1.5 million because of your decision plus sunk your money into a less liquid option.   Let the bank take the risk on your house price.  The warm fuzzy feeling will be there when you realize you could rebuy your house two times over in 6-7 years. Note: I know my example doesn't use your exact numbers.  I am just showing what your true cost is of making a decision in the most extreme way.  I am guessing you have great credit and might be able to find an all interest loan at 3%.  So not doing this is costing you 1.5 million over 30 years.  Given a lower home price after 30 years or a higher rate of return this easily be much more.  IF you earned 12% over the 30 year period you would be costing yourself 16 million - do the math.  Now you are talking about doing something in-between.  Which means you will basically have the same risk factors with less return."}
{"id": "41176", "text": "\"What does ETFs have to do with this or Amazon?   Actually, investing in ETFs means you are killing actively managed Mutual Funds (managed by people, fund managers) to get an average return (and loss) of the market that a computer manage instead of a person. And the ETF will surely have Amazon stocks because they are part of the index.  I only invest in actively managed mutual funds. Yes, most actively managed mutual funds can't do better than the index, but if you work a bit harder, you can find the many that do much better than the \"\"average\"\" that an index give you.\""}
{"id": "41322", "text": "\"A real estate business could offset income from occupied property with costs from vacant property held for speculation.  For speculation, you can let a building rot, then get it reassessed.  If the jurisdiction assesses part or all of the tax bill on the value of improvements, this can drop the annual tax bill significantly while you hold.  If you plan to hold for a decade or more, this can be very important.  Strategically, this also ruins the neighborhood property values, so you can assemble neighboring parcels to support future major developments.   This is a long speculation game.  Exemplars of the strategy include Richard Basciano who bought up several buildings in NYC's Times Square and installed adult theater tenants in the 70s, for payoff today; and the late Sam Rappaport who pursued a strategy of squeezing rent and simply ignoring building inspection violations in Philadelphia, assembling major urban core parcels on the cheap, and whose children are now selling into strong markets.   Legality: Adult businesses are kind of a grey market covered by specific local ordinances, neither exactly illegal or perfectly legal.  Ignoring building violations is not legal, but the penalties are fines, not jail.  It's certainly not a \"\"nice\"\" strategy.   Richard Basciano: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/porn-king-richard-basciano-survived-rudy-giuliani-plans-risk-article-1.319185 Sam Rappaport: http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2002/08/05/focus13.html?page=all\""}
{"id": "41356", "text": "Deposit it in a business savings account. The following below show you some options you can choose from. Next you can invest it in the market i.e. shares, bonds etc. If you have a more risky side, can go for peer to peer lending. If you are feeling really lucky and want to invest in the long term, then buy a property as a buy-to-let landlord. There are loads of options, you only need to explore."}
{"id": "41417", "text": "\"1) Usually, the choice between Traditional vs. Roth is whether you believe that your tax rate will be higher or lower in the future than it is now. Your income is probably in the 25% bracket now. It's hard to say whether that should be considered \"\"high\"\" or \"\"low\"\". Some people advocate Roth only for 15% bracket; but your income would probably go into higher brackets in the future, so Roth may be preferable from this point of view. Roth IRA also has another advantage that the principal of contributions can be taken out at any time without tax or penalty, so it can serve as an emergency fund just as well as money in taxable accounts. Given that you may not have a lot of money saved up right now, this is useful. 2) In a sense, it's nice to have a mix of Traditional and Roth when you withdraw to hedge against uncertainty in future tax rates and have the option of choosing whichever one is advantageous to withdraw when you need to withdraw. That said, you will likely have many years of access to a 401k and high income in your future working years, in which you can contribute to a Traditional 401k (or if no access to 401k, then Traditional IRA), so a mix will almost certainly happen even if you go all Roth IRA now. 3) I think that depends on you, whether you are a hands-on or hands-off kind of investor.\""}
{"id": "41509", "text": "You need to report the income from any work as income, regardless of if you invest it, spend it, or put it in your mattress (ignoring tax advantaged accounts like 401ks).  You then also need to report any realized gains or losses from non-tax advantaged accounts, as well as any dividends received.  Gains and losses are realized when you actually sell, and is the difference between the price you bought for, and the price you sold for.  Gains are taxed at the capital gains rate, either short-term or long-term depending on how long you owned the stock.   The tax system is complex, and these are just the general rules.  There are lots of complications and special situations, some things are different depending on how much you make, etc.  The IRS has all of the forms and rules online.  You might also consider having a professional do you taxes the first time, just to ensure that they are done correctly.  You can then use that as an example in future years."}
{"id": "41577", "text": "This is a great forum, mostly focused around mutual funds though: http://www.bogleheads.org/"}
{"id": "41675", "text": "The Paragraph talks about dividends given by Mutual Funds. Say a fund has NAV of $ 10, as the value of the underlying security grows, the value of the fund would also grow, lets say it becomes $ 12 in 2 months. Now if the Mutual Fund decides to pay out a dividend of $ 1 to all unit holder, then post the distribution of dividend, the value of the Fund would become to $ 11. Thus if you are say investing on 1-April and know that dividends of $1 would be paid on 5-April [the divided distribution date is published typically weeks in advance], if you are hoping to make $1 in 5 days, that is not going to happen. On 6-April you would get $1, but the value of the fund would now be $11 from the earlier $12. This may not be wise as in some countries you would ending up paying tax on $1. Even in shares, the concept is similar, however the price may get corrected immediately and one may not actually see it going down by $1 due to market dynamics."}
{"id": "41852", "text": "Stocks go down and go back up, that's their nature... Why would you sell on a low point? Stocks are a long term investment. If the company is still healthy, it's very likely you'll be able to sell them with a profit if you wait long enough."}
{"id": "41963", "text": "Thank you, finally somebody else who is able to explain this basic premise.   It's odd how many people operate on the assumption that businesses operate on a margin so thin that every $1 of increased cost must be added to the product price. It just bears no resemblance to reality..."}
{"id": "42124", "text": "\"&gt; However, we are part of a group working with the German Banking Association on getting this law updated to bring it into the line with other jurisdictions around the world\"\"  Eli5 on how this would be done and how can it line with others around the world? I guess each would be hard to \"\"pair up\"\" to others if they have big differences on how they work.\""}
{"id": "42207", "text": "\"Do social workers need Master's degrees? It may not all be from undergrad.  Alternately, if she had her loans in forbearance while job searching or something, interest would capitalize when she took them out of forbearance. She could also have been on a plan that had lower monthly payments earlier and scales up to higher ones and now she's in a higher part.  That said, did you not come from the generation of \"\"get a degree at all costs, it doesn't matter in what, companies won't hire you without a degree?\"\"  Yeah, it's on the borrowers to repay and they could have chosen not to listen to that, but I think it's also somewhat irresponsible of us to expect 18 year olds (many of whom have never really handled their finances) to make smart choices about loans. Which is why every teacher, parent, guidance counselor, etc. isn't exactly innocent in this whole mess.\""}
{"id": "42390", "text": "The total number of shares on April 1st is 100 + 180 + 275 = 555.  The price on April 1st is required.  The current price is stated as $2, but $2 * 555 = $1110 and the current fund values is stated as $1500.  Opting to take the current value as $1500, the price on April 1st can be calculated as $1500/555 = $2.7027. The amounts invested as number of shares x share price are: (Note these investment amounts do not match the example scenario's investment amounts, presumably because the example numbers are just made up.) The monthly returns can be calculated: The current values for each investor as invested amount x returns are: Checking the total:"}
{"id": "42475", "text": "\"The interest rate offered by a bond is called the nominal interest rate.  The so-called real interest rate is the nominal interest rate minus the rate of inflation. If inflation is equal to or greater than the nominal rate at any given time, the REAL interest rate is zero or negative. We're talking about a ten year bond. It's possible for the real interest rate to be negative for one or two years of the bond's life, and positive for eight or nine.  On the other hand, if we have a period of rising inflation, as in the 1970s, the inflation rate will exceed the (original) interest rate in most years, meaning that the real interest rate on the ten year bond will be negative over its whole life. People lost \"\"serious\"\" money on bonds (and loans) in the 1970s. In such situations, the BORROWERS make out. That is, they borrow money at low rates, earn inflation (plus a little more) pay back inflated dollars, and pocket the difference. For them, the money is \"\"free.\"\"\""}
{"id": "42521", "text": "\"If you sell a stock, with no distributions, then your gain is taxable under \u00a71001.  But not all realized gains will be recognized as taxable.  And some gains which are arguably not realized, will be recognized as taxable. The stock is usually a capital asset for investors, who will generate capital gains under \u00a71(h), but dealers, traders, and hedgers will get different treatment.  If you are an investor, and you held the stock for a year or more, then you can get the beneficial capital gain rates (e.g. 20% instead of 39.6%).  If the asset was held short-term, less than a year, then your tax will generally be calculated at the higher ordinary income rates.  There is also the problem of the net investment tax under \u00a71411.  I am eliding many exceptions, qualifications, and permutations of these rules. If you receive a \u00a7316 dividend from a stock, then that is \u00a761 income.  Qualified dividends are ordinary income but will generally be taxed at capital gains rates under \u00a71(h)(11).  Distributions in redemption of your stock are usually treated as sales of stock.  Non-dividend distributions (that are not redemptions) will reduce your basis in the stock to zero (no tax due) and past zero will be treated as gain from a sale. If you exchange stock in a tax-free reorganization (i.e. contribute your company stock in exchange for an acquirer's stock), you have what would normally be considered a realized gain on the exchange, but the differential will not be recognized, if done correctly. If you hold your shares and never sell them, but you engage in other dealings (short sales, options, collars, wash sales, etc.) that impact those shares, then you can sometimes be deemed to have recognized gain on shares that were never sold or exchanged. A more fundamental principle of income tax design is that not all realized gains will be recognized.  IRC \u00a71001(c) says that all realized gains are recognized, except as otherwise provided; that \"\"otherwise\"\" is substantial and far-ranging.\""}
{"id": "42565", "text": "Comedy answer The McDonalds corporation thinks about $600 or 30% The real answer is: Whatever you can part with and still have money left over for the rest of your budget.  Don't consider your savings, consider your monthly income. This type of question is exactly why you need a budget.  A budget isn't just a tool for getting out of debt, it is a tool to help you understand your money and show you how much to spend on stuff. So based on your costs (utilities, food, shopping, auto expenses, savings, etc) how much is left from your monthly income?  That would be what you can afford in rent. Also, please notice that I still suggest you save money each month. You have a great habit going and to lose it now would be a shame in my opinion.  Maybe while you are planning a budget, you can start to roughly plan for buying a house, or having a new car fund, or having a pile of money for starting a family. (Along with an emergency fund and a fully funded retirement.)   You don't have to save 2/3, but save a dime of every dollar at least. Two dimes is better.  In the future, you will probably find it easier to spend more money rather than less; and you will never get back the chance to save."}
{"id": "42599", "text": "\"Note that mutual funds' quarterly/annual reports usually have this number. I generally just let my home-accounting software project my future net worth; its numbers agree well enough with those I've gotten from more \"\"professional\"\" sources such as monte-carlo modelling. (They'd agree better if I fed in all the details of my paycheck, but I don't feel like doing the work to keep that up to date.) I'm using Quicken, but I assume MS Money and other competitors have the same capability if you buy the appropriate version.\""}
{"id": "42924", "text": "If you mostly do work for businesses/individuals who are VAT registered it's a no-brainer to become VAT registered yourself... Although you will have to charge your customers VAT (and pass this on to HMRC) because they are VAT-registered they will reclaim the amount so it won't actually 'cost' them anything. At the same time, you can reclaim all the VAT you're currently being charged on your business expenditure (business equipment, tickets to business events, business software, accountancy/other business services you pay for, web hosting etc etc etc) However, if most of your clients are not VAT-registered it's not worth you registering. You would have to charge your customers an extra 20% (and they wouldn't be able to claim it back!) and you would have to pass this on to HMRC. Although you could still claim for goods and services you purchase for business use, essentially you'd just be another tax collector for HMRC. That said, at the end of the day it's up to you! VAT returns are quarterly and dead simple. Just keep a spreadsheet with your invoices (output tax) and receipts (input tax) and then do some basic maths to submit the final numbers to HMRC. No accountant required!"}
{"id": "43087", "text": "Perhaps it was to close a short position.  Suppose the seller had written the calls at some time in the past and maybe made a buck or two off of them.  By buying the calls now they can close out the position and go away on vacation, or at least have one less thing they have to pay attention to.  If they were covered calls, perhaps the buyer wants to sell the underlying and in order to do so has to get out of the calls."}
{"id": "43216", "text": "\"If banks really controlled house prices, then why do banks now own a shitload of houses that are no longer being paid for?  So many that they can't sell them now because that would drive prices down even more, and they'd lose more.  Sigh... go ahead and continue to blame \"\"them\"\" for everything.  It's easier that way, because then you will never have to take responsibility for any of your mistakes.\""}
{"id": "43432", "text": "\"People in this case, are large institutional investors. The \"\"bid ask\"\" spread is for \"\"small traders\"\" like yourself. It is put out by the so-called specialists (or \"\"market makers\"\") and is typically good for hundreds or thousands of shares at a time. Normally, 2 points on a 50 stock is a wide spread, and the market maker will make quite a bit of money on it trading with people like yourself. It's different if a large institution, say Fidelity, wants to sell, say 1 million shares of the stock. Depending on market conditions, it may have trouble finding buyers willing to buy in those amounts anywhere near 50. To \"\"move\"\" such a large block of stock, they may have to put the equivalent of K-Mart's old \"\"Blue Light Special\"\" on, several points below.\""}
{"id": "43497", "text": "The general rule with stock options is that it's best to wait until expiration to exercise them.  The rationale depends on a few factors and there are exceptions. Reasons to wait: There would be cases to exercise early: Tax implications should be checked with a professional advisor specific to your situation. In the employee stock option plans that I have personally seen, you get regular income tax assessed between exercise price and current price at the time you exercise.  Your tax basis is then set to the current price.  You also pay capital gains tax when you eventually sell, which will be long or short term based on the time that you held the stock. (The time that you held the options does not count.)  I believe that other plans may be set up differently."}
{"id": "43594", "text": "The key is to shift the tax burden to the rich and the assets they own that earn money from your economy.  Once you do that, the debt is just a measure of how much of the money that was created so the rich could earn more of it and get richer do some rich have to pay to the other rich at some point in the future.  There isn't a reason to care about that.  Right now, because we haven't done that, we need to keep creating debt to keep pumping new money into our economies to keep them running.  The alternative is letting them stop running.  That's not a good option."}
{"id": "43603", "text": "Get an education. A bachelor's degree preferably, but AA or even a certificate are fine too. It will increase your earning potential significantly and over your lifetime it will earn you a lot of money.  You make around $30,000 a year now, median salary for someone with a bachelors in the humanities is around $45,000. If you degree is in the STEM field, that goes up to $55,000 - $65,000 range. Second best option is to start a small business of some kind that does not require substantial investment. Handyman comes to mind as an example or some sort of billing service maybe? I would not recommend self directed investment in the stock market - most people lose money and since you don't have a lot of money to invest, commissions and fees will eat up a significant portion of it. I would usually recommend a CD but interest rates it's not really worth it."}
{"id": "44118", "text": "\"I think it's a silly statement. If you are prepared from the start that you might lose it then you shouldn't invest. You invest to earn not to lose. Most often losses are a result of fear.  Remember you only lose when you sell lower than you bought for.  So if you have the patience you will probably regain. I ask my clients many times how much do they want to earn and they all say \"\"as much as possible\"\". Last time I checked, that's not an objective and therefore a strategy can't be built for that.  If there is  a strategy then exiting a stock is easy,  without a strategy you never know when to exit and then you are exposed to  bottomless losses. I've successfully traded for many years with large amounts of money. I made money in the FC and in the bubble, both times it wasn't because I was prepared to lose but because I had an entry and exit strategy. If you have both the idea of investing what u are prepared to lose has little value.\""}
{"id": "44152", "text": "Couple of points about being a consultant in the US: It sounds like the rules for what you can deduct may be more lax in Italy.  For example, you can deduct a certain percentage of your home for work but the rules are relatively strict on your use of that space and how much is deductible.  Also things like clothes, restaurants, phones, car use, etc must follow IRS guidelines to be deductible.  This often means they are used exclusively for work and are required for work.  A meal you eat by yourself is not generally deductible, for example.  Any expense you would have had anyway if you were not working is generally not deductible. A contractor in the US can organize in various ways, including sole proprietorship, an S-corp, and a C-corp.  Each has different tax and regulatory implications.  In the simple case of a sole proprietorship, one must pay not only regular income tax but also self-employment tax, which is the part of social security and medicare tax normally paid for by one's employer.  Estimated taxes must be paid to the government quarterly and then the actual amount due synced up at the end of the year (with the government sending you the difference or vice versa). Generally speaking contractors may set aside more money pre-tax for retirement and have better investment options.  This is because solo 401(k) retirement accounts are cost-effective and flexible and the contractor can set aside the full $18K pre-tax as well as having the company contribute generously (pre-tax) to the retirement account.  Contractors can also easily employ spouses and set aside even more. The details of how frequently you are paid as a contractor and how much notice (if any) the company must give you before terminating your relationship are negotiated between you and the company and are generally pretty flexible.  You could get paid your whole year salary in a lump sum if you wanted.  The company that is paying you will not normally give you any benefits whatsoever...in this way it is the same situation as it is in Italy. By the way the three points you mention in your edit are definitely not true in the US."}
{"id": "44492", "text": "Bitcoins are very liquid.  They can be sold or spent very easily.  And you don't depend on the banks being solvent to keep your Bitcoin funds, since you can keep them yourself in an offline wallet. I'm not sure what's the legality of Bitcoin in Russia, though."}
{"id": "44529", "text": "maybe everyone who has responded needs to look closer at the income base repayment plan for student loans. What this means is he payment does not even cover his interest rate so each month he makes his payment the loan grows, does not decrease. This is not a simple interest loan which is irritating because car dealerships do not even use a non-simple interest loan any longer. So, well your suggestions are well intended what is your suggestion now knowing that his monthly payments is not reducing his loan but actually his loan is growing exponentially each month. I also like the comment where the average student loan is $30,000, I would like to know in what state that is. That may work for a community college or a student who is reliant on parents to supplement their income so they can go to classes, however for someone who is working and going to school that person must opt out for night classes and online classes which definitely increases the cost of your classes. Right now the cost per credit hour is in the $550- 585 range."}
{"id": "44530", "text": "Yes, and there's a good reason they might. (I'm gonna use equity options for the example; FX options are my thing, but they typically trade European style). The catch is dividends.  Imagine you're long a deep-ITM call on a stock that's about to pay a dividend. If that dividend is larger than the time value remaining on the option, you'd prefer to exercise early - giving you the stock and the dividend payment - rather than hanging on to the time value of the option.  You can get a similar situation in FX options when you're long a deep-ITM American call on a positive-carry currency (say AUDJPY); you might find yourself so deep in the money, with so little time value left on the option, that you'd rather exercise the option and give up the remaining time value in return for the additional carry from getting the spot position early."}
{"id": "44578", "text": "\"I use TIAA-Cref for my 403(b) and Fidelity for my solo 401(k) and IRAs.  I have previously used Vanguard and have also used other discount brokers for my IRA. All of these companies will charge you nothing for an IRA, so there's really no point in comparing cost in that respect.  They are all the \"\"cheapest\"\" in this respect. Each one will allow you to purchase their mutual funds and those of their partners for free.  They will charge you some kind of fee to invest in mutual funds of their competitors (like $35 or something).  So the real question is this: which of these institutions offers the best mutual and index funds.  While they are not the worst out there, you will find that TIAA-Cref are dominated by both Vanguard and Fidelity.  The latter two offer far more and larger funds and their funds will always have lower expense ratios than their TIAA-Cref equivalent.  If I could take my money out of TIAA-Cref and put it in Fidelity, I'd do so right now. BTW, you may or may not want to buy individual stocks or ETFs in your account.  Vanguard will let you trade their ETFs for free, and they have lots.  For other ETFs and stocks you will pay $7 or so (depends on your account size).  Fidelity will give you free trades in the many iShares ETFs and charge you $5 for other trades.  TIAA-Cref will not give you any free ETFs and will charge you $8 per trade. Each of these will give you investment advice for free, but that's about what it's worth as well.  The quality of the advice will depend on who picks up the phone, not which institution you use.  I would not make a decision based on this.\""}
{"id": "44603", "text": "Sorry, it appears not, according to http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2008/508/perspectives/p12.htm: ...and the election to make Roth 401(k) contributions (these are after-tax contributions) is irrevocable.  Fairmark says the same thing. PS, don't complain too loudly, given the reason for the problem. :)"}
{"id": "44617", "text": "\"There are no guarantees in the stock market. The index fund can send you a prospectus which shows what their results have been over the past decade or so, or you can find that info on line, but \"\"past results are not a guarantee of future performance\"\". Returns and risk generally trade off against each other; trying for higher than average results requires accepting higher than usual risk, and you need to decide which types of investments, in what mix, balance those in a way you are comfortable with. Reinvested dividends are exactly the same concept as compounded interest in a bank account. That is, you get the chance to earn interest on the interest, and then interest on the interest on the interest; it's a (slow) exponential growth curve, not just linear. Note that this applies to any reinvestment of gains, not just automatic reinvestment back into the same fund -- but automatic reinvestment is very convenient as a default. This is separate from increase in value due to growth in value of the companies. Yes, you will get a yearly report with the results, including the numbers needed for your tax return. You will owe income tax on any dividends or sales of shares. Unless the fund is inside a 401k or IRA, it's just normal property and you can sell or buy shares at any time and in any amount. Of course the advantage of investing through those special retirement accounts is advantageous tax treatment, which is why they have penalties if you use the money before retirement. Re predicting results: Guesswork and rule of thumb and hope that past trends continue a bit longer. Really the right answer is not to try to predict precise numbers, but to make a moderately conservative guess, hope you do at least that well, and be delighted if you do better... And to understand that you can lose value, and that losses often correct themselves if you can avoid having to sell until prices have recovered. You can, of course, compute historical results exactly, since you know how much you put in when, how much you took out when, and how much is in the account now. You can either look at how rate of return varied over time, or just compute an average rate of return; both approaches can be useful when trying to compare one fund against another... I get an approximate version of this reported by my financial management software, but mostly ignore it except for amusement and to reassure myself that things are behaving approximately as expected. (As long as I'm outperforming what I need to hit my retirement goals, I'm happy enough and unwilling to spend much more time on it... and my plans were based on fairly conservative assumptions.) If you invest $3k, it grows at whatever rate it grows, and ten years later you have $3k+X. If you then invest another $10k, you now have $3k+X+10k, all of which grows at whatever rate the fund now grows. When you go to sell shares or fractional shares, your profit has to be calculated based on when those specific shares were purchased and how much you paid for them versus when they were sold and how much you sold them for; this is a more annoying bit of record keeping and accounting than just reporting bank account interest, but many/most brokerages and investment banks will now do that work for you and report it at the end of the year for your taxes, as I mentioned.\""}
{"id": "44917", "text": "\"Assuming a price is set on an free market there are particular difficulties to pricing. A free market is one where the price is entirely determined by the willingness of people to buy and sell at a particular price point. What you perceive as price, is actually the \"\"tick\"\", i.e. the quote of the last transaction. The first and most serious major obstacle to pricing is a variation of the prisoners dilemma, a psychological phenomenon. For instance, bitcoin might be worth 4$ now, but you believe it will be worth 5$ in 3 days. Will you buy bitcoin? If acting only on your conviction, yes. But what if you consider what other people will do? Will others believe bitcoin will be worth 5$ in 3 days? Will they act on their conviction? Will the others believe that others believe that it wil be worth 5$ in 3 days, and will the others believe that the others who believe will act on their conviction? Will the others believe that others believe of still others who believe that they will act on their conviction? It goes on like this ad-infinitum. The actual behavior of any individual on the market is essentially chaotic and unpredictable (for the reason stated above and others). This is related to a phenomenon you call market efficiency. An efficient market always reflects the optimal price-point at any given time. If that is so, then you cannot win on this market, because at the time you would have to realize a competitive edge, everybody else has already acted on that information. Markets are not 100% efficient of course. But modern electronic markets can be very, very efficient (as say compared to stock markets fro 100 years ago, where you could get a competitive edge just by having access to a fast courier). What makes matters rather more difficult for price forecasting is that not only are humans engaging in the market, machines are as well. The machines may not be terribly good at what they do, but they are terribly fast. The machines that work well (i.e. don't loose much) will survive, and the ones that don't will die in short order. Since speed is one of the major benefits of the machines over humans, they tend to make markets even more efficient. Another phenomenon to price forecasting is that of information and entropy. Suppose you found a reliable method to predict a market at a given time. You act on this information and indeed you make a profit. The profit you will be able to achieve will diminish over time until it reaches zero or reverts. The reason for this is that you acted on private information, which you leaked out by engaging in a trade. The more successful you are in exploiting your forecast, the better you train every other market participant to react to their losses. Since for every trade you make successfully, there has to be somebody who lost. People or machines who lose on markets usually exit those markets in some fashion. So even if the other participants are not adjusting their behavior, your success is weeding out those with the wrong behavior. Yet another difficulty in pricing forecasts are black-swan events. Since information can have a huge impact on pricing, the sudden appearance of new information can throw a conservative forecast completely off the rails and incur huge losses (or huge unexpected benefits). You cannot quantify black-swan events in any shape or form. It is my belief that you cannot predict efficient and well working markets. You might be able to predict some very sub-optimal markets, but usually, hedge-funds are always on the hunt for inefficient markets to exploit, so by simple decree of market economics, the inefficient markets tend to be a perpetually dying species.\""}
{"id": "45053", "text": "\"To answer, I'm going to make a few assumptions. First, the ideal scenario for a pre-tax 401(k) is the deposit goes in at a 25% tax rate (i.e. the employee is in that bracket) but withdrawn at 15%. This may be true for many, but not all. It's to illustrate a point.  The SPY (S&P 500 index ETF) has a cost of .09% per year. If your 401(k) fees are anywhere near 1% per year total, over 10 years you've paid nearly 10% in fees, vs less than 1% for the ETF. Above, I suggest the ideal is that the 401(k) saves you 10% on your taxes, but if you pay 10% over the decade, the benefit is completely negated.  I can add to the above that funds outside the retirement accounts give off dividends which are tax favored, and if you were to sell ETFs held over a year, they receive favorable cap-gains rates.  The \"\"deposit to get the matching funds\"\" should always be good advice, it would take many years of high fees to destroy that. But even that seemingly reasonable 1% fee can make any other deposits a bad approach.  Keep in mind, when retired you will have a zero bracket (in 2011, the combined standard deduction and exemption) adding to $9500, as well as a 10% bracket (the next $8500), so having some pretax money to take advantage of those brackets will help. Last, the average person changes jobs now and then. The ability to transfer the funds from the (bad) 401(k) to an IRA where you can control the investments is an option I'd not ignore in the analysis.  I arbitrarily picked 1% to illustrate my thoughts. The same math will show a long time employee will get hurt by even .5%/yr if enough time passes. What are the fees in your 401(k)?   Edit - Study of 401(k) fees - put out by the Dept of Labor. Unfortunately, it's over 10 years old, but it speaks to my point. Back then, even a 2000 participant plan with $60M in assets had 110 basis points (this is 1.1%) in fees on average. Whatever the distribution is, those above this average shouldn't even participate in their plans (except for matching) and those on the other side should look at their expenses. As Radix07 points out below, yes, for those just shy of retirement, the fee has less impact, and of course, they have a better idea if they will retire in a lower bracket. Those who have some catching up to do, may benefit despite the fees.\""}
{"id": "45174", "text": "Here's a good strategy: Open up a Roth IRA at a discount-broker, like TD Ameritrade, invest in no-fee ETF's, tracking an Index, with very low expense ratios (look for around .15%) This way, you won't pay brokers fees whenever you buy shares, and shares are cheap enough to buy casually. This is a good way to start. When you learn more about the market, you can check out individual stocks, exploring different market sectors, etc. But you won't regret starting with a good index fund. Also, it's easy to know how well you did. Just listen on the radio or online for how the Dow or S&P did that day/month/year. Your account will mirror these changes!"}
{"id": "45218", "text": "Take a look at this: http://code.google.com/p/stock-portfolio-manager/ It is an open source project aimed to manage your stock portfolio."}
{"id": "45519", "text": "I am assuming that you are referring to Personal Checks since you do not have a business account.  Generally, your full name is the minimal requirement that is needed on the top left of each check. It is best if this information is pre-printed. In fact, some businesses and banks will not honor a check if your full name is handwritten on the check. This is for obvious reasons such as fraud."}
{"id": "45819", "text": "Make sure you have sufficient insurance. Luckily, my wife and I had insurance on our mortgage, and term life insurance on both of us. Statistically speaking, insurance is a poor investment. However, when my wife was killed 263 days after our wedding, I was very happy to have it. Note that it took almost five months to pay out, though this was partly due to a Canada Post strike earlier this year; as such, you'll need sufficient emergency funds. I was able to continue working (just about), but still needed approximately $30,000. $10,000 within 24 hours, another $10,000 within 7 days, and the remainder sometime later, to cover funeral expenses. You may also want to consider a will. Neither of us had one as we both had made the decision that we were fine with the other partner receiving the entire estate. If you are not happy with this, or if your situation is more complex, you'll need a will."}
{"id": "45942", "text": "I think a larger issue is that you're trying to do market timing. Whether you had a large or small amount of money to invest, no one wants to put the money in to watch it go down.  You can't really predict if prices in a market or security will go up in six months (in which case you want to put all your cash in now), of if it will go down (in which case you'd want to wait until the bottom), or if it will skitter around (in which case you'd want to only buy at the bottoms).  Of course, if you're magic enough to nail all of those market conditions, you're a master finance trader and will quickly make billions. If you're really concerned with protecting your money and want to take some long positions, I'd look into some put options. You'll of course pay the fees for those put options, but they'll protect your downside.  Much of this depends on your time horizon: at the age of 35, someone can expect to see ~6 more recessions and perhaps ~30 more market corrections before retirement. With that big of a time range, it's best to avoid micro-optimizing since that tends to hurt your performance overall (because you won't be able to time the market correctly most of the time).  One thing that's somewhat reasonable, if you have the stomach for it, is to not buy at somewhat-obvious market highs and wait for corrections. This isn't fool proof by any means, but as an example many people realized that US equities basically were on a ~5 year up run by December 2014. Many people cashed out those positions, expecting that a correction would be due. And around late summer of 2015, that correction came. For those with patience, they made ~15% with a few mouse clicks.  Of course many others would have been waiting for that correction since 2010 and missed out on the market increases.  Boiled down:"}
{"id": "46099", "text": "\"You say: To clarify, my account is with BlackRock and the fund is titled \"\"MID   CAP GROWTH EQUITY-CLASS A\"\" if that   helps. Not totally sure what that   means. You should understand what you're investing in.  The fund you have could be a fine investment, or a lousy one.  If you don't know, then I don't know. The fund has a prospectus that describes what equities the fund has a position in.  It will also explain the charter of the fund, which will explain why it's mid-cap growth rather than small-cap value, for example.  You should read that a bit.  It's almost a sure thing that your father had to acknowledge that he read it before he purchased the shares! Again: Understand your investments.\""}
{"id": "46291", "text": "Think of it this way:  1) You buy 1k in call options that will let you buy 100k of stock when they expire in the money in a year.   2) You take the 99k you would have spent on the stock and invest it in a risk free savings account.  3) Assume the person who sold you the call, immediately hedges the position by buying 100k of stock to deliver when the options expire.  The amount of money you could make on risk free interest needs to be comparable to the premium you paid the option writer for tying up their capital, or they wouldn't have made the trade. So higher risk free rates would mean a higher call price.   NOTE: The numbers are not equal because of the risk in writing the option, but they will move the same direction."}
{"id": "46352", "text": "generally i have sufficient funds to last 5 years or so without an income.... When I was a broke kid I would check my accounts often though... so it's just not something I prioritize in my life, already too many other things have my attention."}
{"id": "46511", "text": "Straight line in this example should be just the $2MM per year.  I don't think the author of the problem intended you to use anything in the actual tax code like MACRS.  I think the goal of the problem is to get you to identify the value of the depreciation tax shield and how the depreciation does affect your cash flow by reducing your taxes, even though depreciation itself is not a cash event."}
{"id": "46587", "text": "As no one has mentioned them I will...  The US  Treasury issues at least two forms of bonds that tend to always pay some interest even when prevailing rates are zero or negative.  The two that I know of are TIPS and I series bonds. Below are links to the descriptions of these bonds: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/tips/res_tips.htm http://www.treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/ibonds/res_ibonds.htm"}
{"id": "46671", "text": "But if you add a security to the index you also remove one from the index, thus both a buy and sell. If weights change some go up, some go down thus some need to be purchased and some need to be sold.   So I still don't see how ETFs are net sinks beyond their simple AUM."}
{"id": "46716", "text": "These are yields for the government bonds. EuroZone interest rates are much lower (10 times lower, in fact) than the UK (GBP zone) interest rates. The rates are set by the central banks."}
{"id": "46741", "text": "\"Never understood why any company would want to be beholden to complete strangers that you would never hire to begin with. I cringe when I watch shareholders' meetings and people talk about \"\"Well, as shareholders, we're worried about/what are you gonna do about xyz\"\"\""}
{"id": "46791", "text": "\"ECI is relevant to non-resident aliens who are engaged in trade or business in the US. For that, you have to be present in the US, to begin with, or to own a business or property in the US. So the people to whom it is relevant are non-resident aliens in the US or business/property owners, not foreign contractors.  From the IRS: The following categories of income are usually considered to be   connected with a trade or business in the United States. You are considered to be engaged in a trade or business in the United States if you are temporarily present in the United States as a   nonimmigrant on an \"\"F,\"\" \"\"J,\"\" \"\"M,\"\" or \"\"Q\"\" visa. The taxable part of any   U.S. source scholarship or fellowship grant received by a nonimmigrant   in \"\"F,\"\" \"\"J,\"\" \"\"M,\"\" or \"\"Q\"\" status is treated as effectively connected   with a trade or business in the United States. If you are a member of a partnership that at any time during the tax year is engaged in a trade or business in the United States, you   are considered to be engaged in a trade or business in the United   States. You usually are engaged in a U.S. trade or business when you perform personal services in the United States. If you own and operate a business in the United States selling services, products, or merchandise, you are, with certain exceptions,   engaged in a trade or business in the United States. For example,   profit from the sale in the United States of inventory property   purchased either in this country or in a foreign country is   effectively connected trade or business income. Gains and losses from the sale or exchange of U.S. real property interests (whether or not they are capital assets) are taxed as if you   are engaged in a trade or business in the United States. You must   treat the gain or loss as effectively connected with that trade or   business. Income from the rental of real property may be treated as ECI if the taxpayer elects to do so.\""}
{"id": "46986", "text": "I highly recommend passive investing through something like betterment (www.betterment.com) or vanguard's ETFs.  FutureAdvisor.com can provide some good advice as to what funds to invest in. I'd recommend using that money to max out your Roth IRAs each year, too."}
{"id": "47053", "text": "\"If you really believe in the particular stocks, then don't worry about their daily price.  Overall if the company is sound, and presumably paying a dividend, then you're in it for the long haul. Notwithstanding that, it is reasonable to look for a way out.  The two you describe are quite different in their specifics. Selling sounds like the simpler of the two, but the trigger event, and if it is automatic or \"\"manual\"\" matters.  If you are happy to put in a sell order at some time in the future, then just go ahead with that. Many brokers can place a STOP order, that will trigger on a certain price threshold being hit.  Do note, however, that by default this would place a market order, and depending on the price that breaks through, in the event of a flash crash, depending on how fast the brokers systems were, you could find yourself selling quite cheaply. A STOP LIMIT order will place a limit order at a triggered price.  This would limit your overall downside loss, but you might not sell at all if the market is really running away. Options are another reasonable way to deal with the situation, sort of like insurance.  In this case you would likely buy a PUT, which would give you the right, but not the obligation to sell the stock at the price the that was specified in the option.  In this case, no matter what, you are out the price of the option itself (hence my allusion to insurance), but if the event never happens then that was the price you paid to have that peace of mind. I cannot recommend a specific course of action, but hopefully that fleshed out the options you have.\""}
{"id": "47565", "text": "It is one thing to take the advice of some numb-skulls on a web site, it is another thing to take the advice of someone who is really wealthy. For myself, I enjoy a very low interest rate (less than 3%) and am aggressively paying down my mortgage.  One night I was contemplating slowing that down, and even the possibility of borrowing more to purchase another rental property. I went to bed and picked up Kevin O'Leary's book(Cold Hard Truth On Men, Women, and Money: 50 Common Money Mistakes and How to Fix Them), which I happened to be reading at the time.   The first line I read, went something like:  The best investment anyone can make is to pay off their mortgage early.  He then did some math with the assumption that the person was making a 3% mortgage payment.   Any conflicting advice has to be weighted against what Mr. O'Leary has accomplished in his life.  Mark Cuban also has a similar view on debt.  From what I heard, 70% of the Forbes richest list would claim that getting out of debt is a critical step to wealth building. My plan is to do that, pay off my home in about 33 (September '16) more weeks and see where I can go from there."}
{"id": "47747", "text": "\"The Finance Buff discusses why the Roth 401k is often disadvantaged compared to a Traditional 401k in the article The Case Against the Roth 401k, including the following reasons (paraphrased): Contributions to the 401k come from the \"\"top\"\" of your highest tax bracket rate but withdrawals fill in from the \"\"bottom\"\".  For example, suppose you are in the 28% tax bracket.  Every marginal dollar you contribute to the Traditional 401k reduces your tax burden by .28 cents.  However, when withdrawing, the first $10,150 of income is tax-free (from standard deduction and exemption, 2014 numbers; $20,300 for married couples, joint filing).  The next dollars are at the 10% tax bracket, and so on.  This is an advantage for the Traditional 401k only if you earn less when withdrawing than you did when contributing, a reasonable assumption. Avoid High State Income Tax. There are many states that have low or no state income tax.  If you live in a state with a high income tax, paying tax now through the Roth 401k reduces the benefit of moving to a state with a lower income tax rate. Avoid triggering credit phaseouts. Many tax credits (e.g. student loan interest, child tax credit, Hope credit, Roth IRA eligibility, etc.) begin phasing out as your income increases.  Contributing to the Traditional 401k can help you realize more of those credits when you starting running up against those limits. As described in the article, if these items don't apply, contributing to the Roth 401k can be a valuable component of tax diversification.\""}
{"id": "47779", "text": "\"You, yourself, cannot spend the money from life insurance because, well, you are dead.  So the question becomes \"\"what is best for those you leave behind?\"\".  Thus is a question that can only be answered by examining the individual(s) you would leave behind. Near as I can tell, you currently have no one else who may be significantly hurt by your passing. So you cannot answer this question until there is (are) that (those) other(s).  In the meantime, 'self-insure' by saving (true investing) up the money that you would otherwise be spending on premiums.\""}
{"id": "47795", "text": "The long term view you are referring to would be over 30 to 40 years (i.e. your working life). Yes in general you should be going for higher growth options when you are young. As you approach retirement you may change to a more balanced or capital guaranteed option. As the higher growth options will have a larger proportion of funds invested into higher growth assets like shares and property, they will be affected by market movements in these asset classes. So when there is a market crash like with the GFC in 2007/2008 and share prices drop by 40% to 50%, then this will have an effect on your superannuation returns for that year. I would say that if your fund was invested mainly in the Australian stock market over the last 7 years your returns would still be lower than what they were in mid-2007, due to the stock market falls in late 2007 and early 2008. This would mean that for the 7 year time frame your returns would be lower than a balanced or capital guaranteed fund where a majority of funds are invested in bonds and other fixed interest products. However, I would say that for the 5 and possibly the 10 year time frames the returns of the high growth options should have outperformed the balanced and capital guaranteed options. See examples below: First State Super  AMP Super  Both of these examples show that over a 5 year period or less the more aggressive or high growth options performed better than the more conservative options, and over the 7 year period for First State Super the high growth option performed similar to the more conservative option. Maybe you have been looking at funds with higher fees so in good times when the fund performs well the returns are reduced by excessive fees and when the fund performs badly in not so good time the performance is even worse as the fees are still excessive. Maybe look at industry type funds or retail funds that charge much smaller fees. Also, if a fund has relatively low returns during a period when the market is booming, maybe this is not a good fund to choose. Conversely, it the fund doesn't perform too badly when the market has just crashed, may be it is worth further investigating. You should always try to compare the performance to the market in general and other similar funds. Remember, super should be looked at over a 30 to 40 year time frame, and it is a good idea to get interested in how your fund is performing from an early age, instead of worrying about it only a few years before retirement."}
{"id": "47798", "text": "Center for Research in Security Prices would be my suggestion for where to go for US stock price history. Major Asset Classes 1926 - 2011 - JVL Associates, LLC has a PDF with some of the classes you list from the data dating back as far as 1926. There is also the averages stated on a Bogleheads article that has some reference links that may also be useful. Four Pillars of Investing's Chapter 1 also has some historical return information in it that may be of help."}
{"id": "47957", "text": "Yes, but make sure you issue a 1099 to these freelancers by 1/31/2016 or you may forfeit your ability to claim the expenses. You will probably need to collect a W-9 from each freelancer but also check with oDesk as they may have the necessary paperwork already in place for this exact reason.  Most importantly, consult with a trusted CPA to ensure you are completing all necessary forms correctly and following current IRS rules and regulations.  PS - I do this myself for my own business and it's quite simple and straight forward."}
{"id": "47973", "text": "\"First, I applaud you for caring.  Most people don't!  In fact, I was in that category.   You bring up several issues and I'll try to address them separately. (1) Getting a financial planner to talk with you.  I had the same experience!  My belief is that they don't want to admit that they don't know how things work. I even asked if I could pay them an hourly fee to ask questions and review stocks with them.  Most declined.  You'll find that very few people actually take the time to get trained to evaluate stocks and the stock market as a whole.  (See later Investools.com). After looking, however, I did find people who would spend an hour or two with me when we met once a quarter to review my \"\"portfolio\"\"/investments.  I later found training that companies offered.  I would attend any free training I could get because they actually wanted to spend time and talk and teach investors. Bottom line is: Talking to their clients is the job of a financial planner.  If he (or she) is not willing to take this time, it is in your best interest to find someone who will spend that time. (2) Learning about investing! I'm not affiliated with anyone.  I'm a software developer and I do my own trading/investments.  The opinions I share are my own. When I was 20 years away from retirement, I started learning about the stock market so that I would know how it worked before I retired so that (a) I could influence a change if one was needed, and (b) so I wouldn't have to blindly accept the advice of the \"\"experts\"\" even when the stock market is crashing. I have used Investools.com, and TDAmeritrade's Think-or-Swim platform.  I've learned a tremendous amount from the Investools training.  I recommend them.  But don't expect to learn how to get rich from them or any training you take. The TDA Think-or-swim platform I highly recommend BECAUSE it has a feature called \"\"Paper Money\"\".  It lets you trade using the real market but with play money.  I highly recommend ANY platform that you can use to trade IN PAPER money! The think-or-swim platform would allow you to invest $30,000 in paper money (you can have as much as you want) into any stock.  This would let you see if you can make more money than your current investment advisor.  You could invest $10K in one SPY, $10K in DIA and $10K in IWM (these are symbols for the S&P 500, Dow 30, and Small Cap stocks).  This is just an example, I'm not suggesting any investment advise! It's important that you actually do this not just write down on a piece of paper or Excel spreadsheet what you were going to do because it's common to \"\"cheat\"\" and change the dates to meet your needs.  I have found it incredibly helpful to understand how the market works by trying to do my own paper and now real money investing. I was and you will be surprised to find that many trades lose money during the initial start part of the trade because it's very difficult to buy at the exact right time. An important part of managing your own investments is learning to trade with rules and not get \"\"emotionally involved\"\" in your trades. (3) Return on investment. You were not happy with $12 return.  Low returns are a byproduct of the way most investment firms (financial planners) take (diversification).  They diversify to take a \"\"hands off\"\" approach toward investment because that approach has been the only approach that they have found that works relatively well in all market conditions.  It's not (necessarily) a bad approach.  It avoids large losses in down markets (most riskier approaches lose more than the market).  The downside is it also avoids the high returns.  If the market goes up 15% the investment might only go up 5%. 30K is enough to give to multiple investment firms a try.  I gave two different firms $25K each to see how they would invest.  The direction was to accept LOTS of risk (with the potential for large losses or large gains). In a year that the market did very well, one lost money, and one made a small gain.  It was a learning experience.  I, now, have taken the money back and invest it myself. NOTE: I would be happy with a guy who made me 10-15% year over year (in good times and bad) and didn't talk with me, but I haven't found someone who can do that. :-) NOTE 2: Don't believe what you hear from the news about the stock market being up 5% year to date.  Do your own analysis. NOTE 3: Investing in \"\"the market\"\" (S&P 500 for example) is a great way to go if you're just starting.  Few investment firms can beat \"\"the market\"\" although many try to do so.  I too have found it's easier to do that than other approaches I've learned.  So, it might be a good long term approach as well. Best wishes to you in your learning about the market and desires to make money with your money.  That is what is all about.\""}
{"id": "48866", "text": "I have been using Bill Pay from BoA, Chase, and a local Credit Union, all for at least five years (maybe even 10), and never had any issues with lost checks. Sometimes, an address given to me was incorrect, and what happens is either nothing (meaning, after 90 days, the check is considered outdated and the money gets reimbursed in the account) the bank notifies me after about two weeks that the check was returned as 'recipient not found at that address' or 'invalid address', and the money gets restored right then. That is no guarantee, of course, that nothing will ever happen. But banks are not supposed to accept checks where the recipient name does not match. Also, you should consider using 'Quick Pay' or 'Pay an individual' instead, whatever your bank calls it. That will transfer the money same or next day to your other account, without ever mailing a check. You do not need to enter account information across banks, it works by both banks contacting you through your logins/emails."}
{"id": "48941", "text": "That is definitely where my intuition went as well. I know we wouldn't meet certain requirements. I expect to have to jump through hoops to make it happen. I was mostly asking what hoops I will jump through, and if we will have to jump through fewer if we are not planning on handling other people's cash."}
{"id": "48947", "text": "You'd likely be most familiar with them with respect to options and futures on commodities but they're used for credit/interest as well. The intrinsic value of an option is *derived* from the spread between call/put price and strike price; the value of the contract I've paid for or sold is derived from the current market value of the underlying asset, be it rice, platinum, or the Swedish kroner"}
{"id": "49285", "text": "The SEC considers a day trade to be any trade that is opened and closed within the same trading day, and considers a day trader to be any trader that completes 4 or more day trades within 5 business days. If so they would label you day trader and in the US you are required to have at least $25K in your account. Maybe that's why they require you to add more money to your account? See more at Day trading restriction on US stocks and Wikipedia - Pattern day trader."}
{"id": "49483", "text": "At their age, the likely did not even need the coverage anymore unless they were doing some major estate planning.  If that's the case then it sound like they purchased the wrong policy to begin with since OP's account of the information makes it sound like a term policy.  If it is a term policy, the term was also probably about to end as well.    In the end, this will likely not be a bog deal."}
{"id": "49602", "text": "\"It is measured in US dollars.  The US cannot just print the money because that would cause inflation.  Remember that money is really just a convenient placeholder for the barter system.  Creating more money regardless of whether there is more value in the economy (work, resources, etc.) is a very bad idea, and doing so has collapsed the economies of many countries. Debt increasing means that the US owes other countries more money.  So yes, they are receiving more money from other countries, but the US has to pay it all back with interest eventually. The US government spends more money than it receives in taxes.  To decrease the debt, spending needs to decrease and/or taxes need to increase. Many countries lend to the US.  One of the biggest is China.  These countries do so because of interest -- the US pays back more money than it gets lent, so the lending countries make a profit. If China suddenly called in all its debt to the US, this would severely damage the world economy.  China's biggest trading partner is the US, so it has no interest in harming the US this way; it would harm itself.  Additionally, the US would probably refuse to pay it (not to mention that it can't), and then China would lose all the money it \"\"invested\"\" in the US.  It would benefit no one.\""}
{"id": "49782", "text": "I can often get the option at [a] price [between bid and ask] The keyword you use here is quite relevant: often. More realistically, it's going to be sometimes. And that's just how supply and demand should work.  The ask is where you know you can buy right away. If you don't wanna buy at ask, you can try and put a higer bid but you can only hope someone will take it before the price moves. If prices are moving up fast, you will have missed a chance if you gambled mid-spread. Having said that, the larger the spread is, the more you should work with limits mid-spread. You don't want to just take ask or bid with illiquid options. Make a calculation of the true value of the option (i.e. using the Black Scholes Model), then set your bid around there. Of course, if not only the option but also the underlying is illiquid, this all gets even more difficult."}
{"id": "49798", "text": "Generally banks will thoroughly check to make sure there is a market for the item before they take it as collateral. After that they will say it's only worth 40-80% of its value to avoid price volatility. So while it is rediculous to take a Andy Warhol painting as collateral, banks will be pretty conservative on its value (usually)."}
{"id": "49966", "text": "The exchanges artificially push the price of the stock down on the ex-div date. Often the impact of paying the dividend is absorbed by the ebb and flow of trading in the stock later in the day by the market. I think this was noticable with Nokia because the company is in poor shape and the stock has plunged recently.  Dividends are a great way for companies to return value to shareholders. The trend for many companies, particularly growth stocks is to reinvest profits to grow the company. Former growth stocks like Microsoft like to just sit on billions of dollars and do nothing with it."}
{"id": "50355", "text": "I really think /r/personalfinance would be a better platform for this, there's people there who deal with this all the time. I would repost this question there with the additional information;   1. Your age 2. Your savings, including IRAs/401ks 3. Total amount of all debt, including credit card and student loans 4. Your income 5. Your future plans (plans to retire? to which country? back to school?) 6. Your family situation (married / unmarried, kids / no kids)  All of these things impact any financial decisions you might have, that's why personal financial advisors exist."}
{"id": "50357", "text": "&gt;\u201cIf you were to disallow deductions for settlements, then that would create an incentive for companies to litigate the case all the way to a trial verdict,\u201d Victor Fleischer, a tax law professor at the University of Colorado, said. \u201cIf the company had to pay a claim in that instance, it would be deductible. That\u2019s not wise public policy either.\u201d  Huh?  First of all, if the deduction were disallowed why would the payment of a claim at the end of a trial be deductible?  Second, part of the problem, which is unaddressed in the article, is that the companies paying these fines typically sign agreements that admit liability for the fine but deny all aspects of wrongdoing.  Thus, there is no precedent set and there are no guidelines to follow in the future.  As such, the result of a trial would actually be instructional to future participants in these markets.  Similarly, it might actually result in personal liability for the worst offenders in the organizations."}
{"id": "50542", "text": "The iron-clad rule of investing is that risk and return are directly related. It is impossible to get a higher return than you are getting without putting principal at risk. Your emergency fund should be in cash, preferably in government insured cash (like a savings account). The best you could probably do is laddered 3-month CDs. That way, you could cash them out, one per month, as they mature."}
{"id": "50735", "text": "You could also look at your growth in online subscribers as a metric for valuing your company. A progressive increase in subscribers is one of the signs of a healthy online business, and vice versa. Your subscriber growth, site visitations, returning customer percentages and other subscriber based metrics should not be ignored when valuing your company."}
{"id": "50750", "text": "Once the loan is taken out, Chase would turn around and sell that debt to others, getting all their money upfront and leaving both the person who took the loan out and the new creditor holding the bag.  I worked for a company that used to do this with loans for other things.  They company was Norvergence and were complete scumbags."}
{"id": "51043", "text": "This kid gives a good summary of the silver market as it currently stands, and why you should own the physical:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAK9ohz9h7M  But yes, you will do well to have bank accounts in China and Switzerland, diversifying into yuan and francs... and also jurisdictionally diversifying."}
{"id": "51504", "text": "There is no way the stock exchange even remotely compares to the efficiency, global reach, and transparency of a decentralized asset exchange like counter wallet.   I'm not saying that these specific implementations will become the next platforms, but they are proof of concept of what's possible and its way better than the way the current institutions handle it. Block chain technology may not carry bitcoin forward to the end game but it will certainly be used in other sectors."}
{"id": "51602", "text": "\"Dividends can also be automatically reinvested in your stock holding through a DRIP plan (see the wikipedia link for further details, wiki_DRIP). Rather than receiving the dividend money, you \"\"buy\"\" additional stock shares your with dividend money. The value in the DRIP strategy is twofold. 1) your number of shares increases without paying transaction fees, 2) you increase the value of your holding by increasing number of shares. In the end, the RIO can be quite substantial due to the law of compounding interest (though here in the form of dividends). Talk with your broker (brokerage service provider) to enroll your dividend receiving stocks in a DRIP.\""}
{"id": "51621", "text": "I know nothing about this, but found this link which suggests for H&R Block specifically: I kept searching and I found the section. It's at the end in the Credits section under 'other backup withholding'. Hopefully this helps someone else in the future."}
{"id": "51761", "text": "You are correct that you do not need to file under a certain circumstances primarily related to income, but other items are taken into account such as filing status, whether the amount was earned or unearned income (interest, dividends, etc.) and a few other special situations which probably don't apply to you.  If you go through table 2 on page 3 and 4 of IRS publication 501 (attached), there is a worksheet to fill out that will give you the definitive answer.   As far as the 1099 goes, that is to be filed by the person who paid you.  How you were paid (i.e., cash, check, etc., makes no difference).  You don't have a filing requirement for that form in this case. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p501.pdf"}
{"id": "51848", "text": "\"Before anything else, read up on the basics of economics. After that, there a few things you need to ask yourself before you even think about investing in anything: If you have an answer to those questions: Once you answered those questions I could make a simple first suggestion: Confident in handling it yourself and low maintenance with uncertain horizon: look up an online bank that offers ETFs such as IWDA (accumulation (dividend is not payed but reinvested) or income(dividend is payed out)) and maybe a few more specific ones then buy and hold for at least 5 years. Confident and high maintenance with long horizon: maybe stock picking but you'll probably never be able to beat the market unless you invest 10's of hours in research per week. However this will also cost a bit and given your initial amount not advisable to do. Be sure that you also have a VERY close look at the prospectus of an investment (especially if you go with a (retail) bank and they \"\"recommend\"\" you certain actively traded funds). They tend to charge you quite a bit (yearly management fees of 2-3% (which is A LOT if you are eying maybe 7%-8% yearly) aren't unheard of). ETF's such IWDA only have for example a yearly cost of 0.20%. Personally I have one portfolio (of many) only consisting of that ETF (so IWDA) and one global small cap. It's one of the best and most consistant ones to date. In the end, the amount you start with doesn't really matter so much as long as it's enough to buy at least a few shares of what you have in mind. If you can then increase your portfolio over time and keep the expenses in check, compounding interest should do the rest.\""}
{"id": "52190", "text": "How's your savings and emergency fund? Everyone should have an emergency fund that will last them 6 months, and the goal should be two years' worth.  This should be in an easily accessible account, such as a savings or money market account at your bank (you could consider CDs, but unless you're laddering them there will be penalties to get at the money). Once you've got 6 months' worth saved, the next thing to focus on is a tax advantaged retirement account.  Only when you've maxed out your contributions (and the tax benefits) should you consider other investments.  After all, those tax benefits are free money from Uncle Sam :)"}
{"id": "52360", "text": "it's so much easier to stop payments then have to go asking for your money after a bank has taken it. I have had monthly homeowners payments taken after I sold a property. Took a lot of effort to get my money back. Wish I had taken a few minutes to stop the payments earlier."}
{"id": "52532", "text": "Hard to say in general. It depends on the actual numbers.  First you need to check the suggested retail price of a new car, and the price that you can actually get it for. The difference between these prices is between non-existing and huge, depending on the car. Some dealers will sell you a car that has done 50 miles for a huge rebate - that means they can't sell their cars at full price but don't want to reduce the price. Used cars can be quite expensive compared to a new car or not, also depending on the brand.  Estimate that a brand new car should drive 12 years and 200,000 miles without major repairs (go for a car with generous warranty or check reviews to make sure you are buying a long lasting car). Calculate the cost per year. Since you prefer driving a nicer new car, increase the cost for the first four years and reduce the cost for the last four years. With that information, check what the used car costs and if that is reasonable. Assuming 12 years life, a six your old car should be quite a bit less than 50% of a new one.  You can improve your cost a bit: If your annual mileage is low, you might find a rather new car with huge mileage quite cheap which will still last many years. Or if your annual mileage is excessively high, you can look for a car that is a bit older with low mileage.  Anyway, paying 70% of the price of a new passenger car for a used car that is six years old (you say <7 years, so I assume six years) seems excessive; it would mean the first user effectively paid 30% of the new price to drive the car for six years, and you pay 70% to drive another six years (estimated). You'd be much much better off buying a new car and selling it for 70% after six years."}
{"id": "52622", "text": "\"I also don't know the specific details for Finland and/or Belgium, however many countries have tax treaties, which generally prevent double taxation (i.e., paying tax in both countries on the same base income). Being that both Finland and Belgium are EU member states, I'm quite certain there's a provision that covers this, and the same would apply: You pay taxes on what you earn while in Finland to Finland, and to Belgium what you earn while in Belgium. All of this is similar to what you presented, however there's also a section where you'd declare how much taxes were paid in other countries. One other thing to note, which will be the determining factor in the above, is whether EU law requires you to change residence to BE for the time you're there. If not  then you'll be paying taxes in Finland the entire time on the entire amount. This comes from an Irish governmental site: \"\"By working in another member state and by transferring your residence there, you are likely to become \"\"resident for tax purposes\"\" there. The definition of fiscal residence varies from one member state to another. You must comply with the laws of the country where you have established your residence. The laws on personal taxation vary considerably from one member state to another and you may be liable for taxation in more than one country. In general, you are subject to income tax in the country where you are living but this may not be the case if you are a \u201cposted worker\u201d \u2013 see below. In general, property is taxed in the country in which it is situated but, again, there are variations. Tax agreements have been concluded between most of the member states of the EU, which are intended to avoid double taxation, if you derive income from different countries. In general, national fiscal rules must respect the fundamental principle of non-discrimination against nationals of another EU country.\"\"\""}
{"id": "52756", "text": "&gt; Actually, the thing they need is debt, not depositors money.  I was trying to explain how a bank could be a ponzi scheme.  But on second thought, even the example I provided is wrong.    Depositors are creditors to the bank.  Ponzi schemes are paying out returns to investors or equity holders and has nothing to do with paying out liabilities to creditors.  No matter how the bank sourced the assets, paying returns of interest to depositors (creditors) can't be deemed a ponzi scheme."}
{"id": "52855", "text": "Stock price is determined by what's being asked for it, and what's being paid for it. The reported price is either a recent average, or is the last price at which a sale actually took place, depending on which you've asked for. Limit orders are an agreement between you and your brokerage, and have no direct effect on price. When and if their condition is triggered and the transaction takes place, the transaction is what's significant."}
{"id": "52878", "text": "It's a lot easier to trade a contract based on the forward value (a futures contract) of some commodity, than say constantly trade &amp; deliver 1000 barrels of crude oil.   Along those lines, it's also easier to trade an option on the forward value than it is an option on the actual commodity, especially if you have the ability to exercise the option"}
{"id": "52925", "text": "The manufacturing world generates enough RFQ's that you can survive off of a professional looking website, good SEO, and a solid Google Maps listing. Make it easy to be found and the customers throw themselves at you, it's pretty amazing in my experience."}
{"id": "53047", "text": "Obviously, you should not buy stock when the option is to pay down your debt. However, your question is different. Should you sell to reduce debt. That really depends on your personal situation. If you were planning to sell the stock anyway, go ahead and reduce your loans. Check out how the stock is doing and what the perspectives are. If the stock looks like it's going down, sell... Do you have savings? Unless you do, I should advise to sell the stock at any rate. If you do have savings, are they earning you more (in percentage) than your loans? If they are, keep them..."}
{"id": "53100", "text": "\"That's a lot of manual checking-in to see if everything is performing the way you \"\"want\"\". Not to insult your intelligence, but that is not your job, and doing that on a monthly basis is going to eat a lot of time. Plus, most 401(k) programs have lockout periods wherein changes can't be made without incurring additional fees (related to distributions, etc). And if you're checking that often, you are [likely] losing the benefits of investing in mutual funds to start with. If you have the stomach to handle the risk, go for the high-risk investment vehicles early in your career - you can afford a 30% drop this year if you then make 105%, 15%, or 50% back each of the next 5. If, on the other hand, you're in your mid-career, switch to more conservative management tactics.\""}
{"id": "53200", "text": "\"In my opinion, you can't save too much for retirement. An extra $3120/yr invested at 8% for 30 years would give you $353K more at retirement.  If your \"\"good amount in my 401k\"\" is a hint that you don't want us to go in that direction, then how about saving for the child's college education? 15 years' savings, again at 8% will return $85K, which feels like a low number even in today's dollars, 15 years of college inflation and it won't be much at all.  Not sure why there's guilt around spending it. If one has no debt, good retirement savings level, and no pressing need to save for something else, enjoying one's money is an earned reward.  Even so, if you want a riskless 'investment' just prepay the mortgage. You'll see an effective return of the mortgage rate, 4%(?) or so, vs the .001% banks are paying. Of course, this creates a monthly windfall once the mortgage is paid off, but it buys you time to make this ultimate decision.  In the end, I'd respond that similar to Who can truly afford luxury cars?, one should produce a budget. I don't mean a set of constraints to limit spending in certain categories, but rather, a look back at where the money went last year and even the year before that. What will emerge are the things that are normal, the utility bills, tax bill, mortgage, etc, as well as the discretionary spending. If all your current saving is on track, the investment may be in experiences, not financial products.\""}
{"id": "53225", "text": "One approach would be to create Journal Entries that debit asset accounts that are associated with these items and credit an Open Balance Equity account. The value of these contributions would have to be worked out with an accountant, as it depends on the lesser of the adjusted basis vs. the fair market value, as you then depreciate the amounts over time to take the depreciation as a business expense, and it adjusts your basis in the company (to calculate capital gains/losses when you sell). If there were multiple partners, or your accountant wants it this way, you could then debit open balance equity and credit the owner's contribution to a capital account in your name that represents your basis when you sell. From a pure accounting perspective, if the Open Balance Equity account would zero out, you could just skip it and directly credit the capital accounts, but I prefer the Open Balance Equity as it helps know the percentages of initial equity which may influence partner ownership percentages and identify anyone who needs to contribute more to the partnership."}
{"id": "53544", "text": "A matching pension scheme is like free money. No wait, it actually IS free money. You are literally earning 100% interest rate on that money the instant you pay it in to the account. That money would have to sit in your credit card account for at least five years to earn that kind of return; five years in which the pension money would have earned an additional return over and above the 100%. Mathematically there is no contest that contributing to a matching pension scheme is one of the best investment there is. You should always do it. Well, almost always. When should you not do it?"}
{"id": "53601", "text": "\"There's an old saying:  \"\"Never invest in anything that eats or needs maintenance.\"\" This doesn't mean that a house or a racehorse or private ownership of your own company is not an investment.  It just points out that constant effort is needed on your part, or on the part of somebody you pay, just to keep it from losing value.  Common stock, gold, and money in the bank are three things you can buy and leave alone.  They may gain or lose market value, but not because of neglect on your part. Buying a house is a complex decision.  There are many benefits and many risks. Other investments have benefits and risks too.\""}
{"id": "53996", "text": "Your math is correct. As you point out, because of the commutative property of multiplication, Roth and traditional IRAs offer the same terminal wealth if your tax rate is the same when you pull it out as when you put it in.  Roth does lock in your tax rate as of today as you point out, which is why it frequently does not maximize wealth (most of us have a higher tax bracket when we are saving than when we are withdrawing from savings). There are a few other potential considerations/advantages of a Roth: Roth and traditional IRAs have the same maximum contribution amount.  This means the effective amount you can contribute to a Roth is higher ($5,500 after tax instead of before).  If this constraint is binding for you and you don't expect your tax rate to change, Roth is better. Roth IRAs allow you to withdraw your contributed money (not the gains) at any time without any tax or penalty whatsoever.  This can be an advantage to some who would like to use it for something like a down payment instead of keeping it all the way to retirement.  In this sense the Roth is more flexible. As your income becomes high, the deductibility of traditional IRA contributions goes to zero if you have a 401(k) at work (you can still contribute but can't deduct contributions).  At high incomes you also may be disallowed from contributing to a Roth, but because of the backdoor Roth loophole you can make Roth contributions at any income level and preserve the full Roth tax advantage. Which type of account is better for any given person is a complex problem with several unknowns (like future tax rates).  However, because tax rates are generally higher when earning money, for most people who can contribute to them, traditional IRAs maximize your tax savings and therefore wealth. Edit: Note that traditional IRA contributions also reduce your AGI, which is used to compute eligibility for other tax advantages, like the child care tax credit and earned income credit.  AGI is also often used for state income tax calculation. In retirement, traditional IRA distributions may or may not be state taxable, depending on your state and circumstances."}
{"id": "54377", "text": "Lets say that college costs 100K per kid and they you have 3 (ages 8,9,10) and expect tuition and fees inflation of 8% per year; you are 40 and want to retire at age 65, and would have to replace 80% of you final years salary and expect your salary to increase 2% above inflation, but you do have a pension that based on the number of years of service you will have if you don't switch companies will replace 40% of you final salary, but if you leave now will only cover 15%; the equivalent of social security will replace 10%; your spouse works part time and has no company provided pension; your big single bucket of long term savings has 123,456. Are you on target? You can't answer the question without first determining how much money each of those individual buckets (kid 1, kid 2, kid 3, pension, social security and retirement) needs to have today and in the future. Then you take the money you do have and assign it to the buckets. Of course different accounts have different tax, age, deposit and use rules. Also what happens after the last child graduates, so the amount of money available each year will change significantly. The key to not stealing money from long term savings goals is to realize you also need an emergency fund and a life happens fund. That way an engine repair does require you to pull money from the education fund."}
{"id": "54394", "text": "There is no free ride at most brokers. You will likely be charged a margin fee for that trade even though you only held the margin shares for part of one day. The margin fee would be the annual margin interest rate calculated down to a one day holding period,so it would be smaller. Check your broker's policies but most work like this."}
{"id": "54406", "text": "Your math is fine, except employers might not permit the withdrawal. You'd have to go back to their rules or contact HR to understand the withdrawals permitted."}
{"id": "54452", "text": "isn't the answer in the question?  it says the company starts officially NEXT year, yet it is asking for the net present value...i.e what that project is worth today.  it could be that funds for that particular project may not be necessary for another year, but there may be other projects to evaluate against today."}
{"id": "54638", "text": "\"According to Wikipedia, Treasury bills mature in 1 year or less to a fixed face value: Treasury bills (or T-Bills) mature in one year or less. Regular weekly T-Bills are commonly issued with maturity dates of 28 days (or 4 weeks, about a month), 91 days (or 13 weeks, about 3 months), 182 days (or 26 weeks, about 6 months), and 364 days (or 52 weeks, about 1 year). Treasury bills are sold by single-price auctions held weekly. The T-bills (as Wikipedia says, like zero-coupon bonds) are actually sold at a discount to their face value and mature to their face value. They do not return any interest before the date of maturity.  Because the amount earned is fixed at purchase, \"\"return\"\" is a more accurate term than \"\"rate\"\" when referring to a specific T-bill. The \"\"rate\"\" is the difference between this return and the discount value you purchased it at. So, yes, your rate of return is guaranteed. T-notes (1-10 year) and T-bonds (20-30 year) also have an interest rate guaranteed, but have coupon payments (usually every 6 months), paying out a fixed amount of interest on the principal.  (See more info on the same Wikipedia page.) Because those bonds are not compounding the interest it pays out, but instead paying out every 6 months, you'd have to purchase new securities to create a compound return, changing your rate of return over time slightly as the rates for new treasury securities changes.\""}
{"id": "54932", "text": "\"I personally take the zero percent financing plans any day.  I have done this with my car and the iphone 6s.  The vendors are trying to make it more attractive for you to \"\"afford\"\" the product.  It could show up on your credit report and impact the amount of money you can borrow in the future (e.g getting a home loan).  The other thing I do is make sure the monthly payments are automatically paid from my bank account so I don't miss any payments\""}
{"id": "54948", "text": "I would use the withdrawal date to record, as it represents you no longer have these funds in your account whether you have written a check and/or transferred money you should count the funds as no longer being in your account."}
{"id": "54960", "text": ""}
{"id": "55162", "text": "It will not hurt your score to pay off your debt.  It will allow your score to start healing as you plug the holes in your report. What is CRUCIAL is how you pay off the debt.  Make sure you get, in writing, that paying $X amount will fully satisfy the debt and will close the matter as in Pay-To-Delete.  If you try to do a settlement, this is very important. Also, the moral brigade will not like my answer, but if you are close to seven years out on your debts, you might as well not pay them since they will fall off of your report after 7 years.  If you pay any part of the debt however, it will often reset the clock on those 7 years, so tread carefully."}
{"id": "55407", "text": "According to pages 6 & 7 of the instructions for form 1040 in 2009 AMT was only temporarily patched for the year. Congress can't politically afford to drastically cut AMT exemptions by 30 to 40%, and may even retroactively change it, if it isn't passed by the end of the year (despite the constitution forbidding ex post facto laws) : What\u2019s New for 2009 ...    Alternative minimum tax (AMT) exemption amount increased. The AMT exemption amount has increased to $46,700 ($70,950 if married filing jointly or a qualifying widow(er); $35,475 if married filing separately)... What\u2019s New for 2010 ...    Alternative minimum tax (AMT) exemption amount. The AMT exemption amount is scheduled to decrease to $33,750 ($45,000 if married filing jointly or a qualifying widow(er); $22,500 if married filing separately). So, if you are married, and several regular tax deductions push your income below the AMT exemption amount of $45,000, it's quite possible you would be required to pay AMT, even if you didn't last year. There is a work sheet for AMT in the instructions for line 43, but the IRS also provides an AMT calculator. According to page 146 (E-8) of the instructions for form 1040 AMT is paid as: the smallest amount you are allowed to report as your taxable income (Form 1040, line 43). It is also the smallest amount you are allowed to report as your alternative minimum taxable income   (AMTI) on Form 6251, line 29. If the [AMT calculation] is larger than your taxable income would otherwise be, enter the amount from column (c) on Form 1040, line 43 [or ...] Form 6251, line 29.  As always, congress finds ways to further complicate things by making a few credits and losses deductible against the absolute minimum you're expected to pay taxes on, making the AMT a misnomer."}
{"id": "55445", "text": "I will never understand the logic behind this. If you buyback shares instead of funding pension liabilities... those liabilities are still there and any serious investor will factor that into the companies stock price.   I guess it's just easier to be a consistent dividend grower and cater to that audience if your outstanding shares decrease."}
{"id": "55499", "text": "\"Someone (I forget who) did a study on classifying total return by the dividend profiles. In descending order by category, the results were as follows: 1) Growing dividends. These tend to be moderate yielders, say 2%-3% a year in today's markets. Because their dividends are starting from a low level, the growth of dividends is much higher than stocks in the next category. 2) \"\"Flat\"\" dividends. These tend to be higher yielders, 5% and up, but growing not at all, like interest on bonds, or very slowly (less than 2%-3% a year). 3) No dividends. A \"\"neutral\"\" posture. 4) Dividend cutters. Just \"\"bad news.\"\"\""}
{"id": "55535", "text": "If the position starts losing money as soon as it is put on, then I would close it out ,taking a small loss. However, if it starts making money,as in the stock inches higher, then you can use part of the premium collected to buy an out of money put, thereby limiting your downside. It is called a collar."}
{"id": "55541", "text": "\"The part that I find confusing is the loan/stock hybridization.  Why would the investor be entitled to a 30% share if he's also expecting to be getting paid back in full? This is the part that's making me scratch my head.  I can understand giving equity and buying out later.  I can understand giving equity with no expectation of loan repayment.  I can understand loan repayment without equity.  I can even understand collateralizing the loan with equity.  I can not understand how \"\"zeroing out\"\" the loan still leaves him with a claim on 30% of the equity. Would this be more of a good will gesture as a way to thank the investor for taking a chance?  Please forgive any naivety in my questions.\""}
{"id": "55666", "text": "I don't think there's much you can do. Losses from the sale of personal-use automobiles (used for pleasure, commuting, etc) are not deductible as capital losses.  See IRS Tax Topic 409, end of the first paragraph.  The expenses you incurred in owning and operating the car (insurance, fuel, maintenance, service plans, etc) are not deductible either. If you used it partly for business, then some of your expenses might be deductible; see IRS Tax Topic 510.  This includes depreciation (decline in value), but only according to a standard schedule; you don't generally just get to deduct the difference between your buying and selling price.  Also, you'd need to have records to verify your business use.  But anyway, these deductions would apply (or not) regardless of whether you sell the car. You don't get your sales tax refunded when you resell the vehicle.  That's why it's a sales tax, not a value-added tax.  Note, however, that if you do sell it, the sales tax on this new transaction will be the buyer's responsibility, not yours. You do have the option on your federal income tax return to deduct the state sales tax you paid when you bought the car; in fact, you can deduct all the sales taxes you paid in that year.  (If you have already filed your taxes for that year, you can go back and amend them.)  However, this takes the place of your state income tax deduction for the year; you can't deduct both.  See Tax Topic 503.  So this is only useful if your sales taxes for that year exceeded the state income tax you paid in that year.  Also, note that state taxes are not deductible on your state income tax return.  Again, this deduction applies whether you sell the car or not."}
{"id": "55772", "text": "I would read this irs page to get an understanding of how this might negativity affect you.  There is an 800 number at the bottom of the page, I would call them and find out what your cousin did file on your behalf (ie Extension).   I would get your original paperwork back from your cousin (or look for copies) and get your return done as soon as possible (either by another CPA or yourself).  If you do owe, you owing more every day thanks to interest.  If you have a refund due, then get your refund."}
{"id": "55845", "text": "If you have enough assets at T Rowe Price, you get what I think is a scaled back version of the portfolio tracker for free."}
{"id": "55893", "text": "Your three options are: Options 2 and 3 are obviously identical (other than transaction costs), so if you want to keep the stock, go for option 1, otherwise, go for option 3 since you have the same effect as option 2 with no transaction costs.  The loss will likely also offset some of the other short term gains you mentioned."}
{"id": "56118", "text": "Let's work from the inside out. Options are not stock. Options are a contract that give you the right to own the stock. For options to have value they have to be exercised. Straight line means that each quarter 1/16th of the option grant becomes yours and the company cannot take it away. Four quarters in a year times four years is 16 quarters. 'Grant' means they are giving you the options at no cost to you. 'Nonqualified' means that there is nothing you have to do, or be, in order to get the options. (Some options are only for management.)"}
{"id": "56560", "text": "I think that you could probably structure a trust like this.  The terms would be that the money is in trust for Person A if they claim it by some deadline.  After that it will go to Person B.  This won't be a cheap option though, since you'll probably need an attorney to structure it properly."}
{"id": "56689", "text": "\"I'd love to see how he thinks he can \"\"measure\"\" the financial world. You can only measure what you are allowed to see and Wall Street is only going to give you a certain percentage. The rest will throw your predictions way off, thus making this a fruitless endeavor. Welcome to the real world.\""}
{"id": "56732", "text": "The standard answer I have heard is that if you were to purchase term life insurance and invest the difference between the cost of the policies, your investments would grow larger than the cash value of the insurance. Also when you take cash out of CVLI the insurance value drops by a like amount. So you can't have your cake and leave it to your heirs too. Either you get the cash value OR they get the insurance value. Hopefully, there could be some of both. Although I believe the philosophy of that answer I have two issues with it. First, you must be dedicated enough to invest the difference every month. I can imagine that might be tough to do consistently and if you take breaks from the investing will you still accumulate more than you would have with the insurance? Second, for the past couple of years all of my investments in mutual funds have lost value. My life insurance has continued to grow cash value over the same time period. Hmm, maybe there isn't a one size fits all solution. If you need a large amount of insurance, term life will certainly be more affordable. However, considering this as an investment I would not expect that to be a deciding factor. Good luck with your decision. It is great that at such a young age you are concerned about investments."}
{"id": "56932", "text": "A Random Walk Down Wall Street Barbarians at the Gate Liar's Poker King of Capital The Big Short No need to even consider CFP or CFA if you don't have a degree/full time job that requires it. They are costly."}
{"id": "57168", "text": "You cannot have off-campus employment in your first year, but investments are considered passive income no matter how much time you put into that effort. Obviously you need to stay enrolled full-time and get good enough grades to stay in good standing academically, so you should be cautious about how much time you spend day trading. If the foreign market is also active in a separate time zone, that may help you not to miss class or otherwise divert your attention from your investment in your own education. I have no idea about your wealth, but it seems to me that completing your degree is more likely to build your wealth than your stock market trades, otherwise you would have stayed home and continued trading instead of attending school in another country."}
{"id": "57229", "text": "Your clients should not send you 1099-MISC if they paid with a credit card. You can refer them to this text in the instructions for the form 1099-MISC: Payments made with a credit card or payment card and certain other   types of payments, including third party network transactions, must be   reported on Form 1099-K by the payment settlement entity under section   6050W and are not subject to reporting on Form 1099-MISC. See the   separate Instructions for Form 1099-K. By sending out the 1099-MISC, your clients are essentially saying that they paid you directly (check or cash) in addition to the payment they made with a credit card (which will be reported on 1099-K). In case of an audit, you'll have trouble convincing the IRS that it didn't happen. I suggest asking the clients not to do this to you, since it may cost you significant amounts to fight the IRS later on. In any case, you report on your tax return what you really got, not what the 1099 says. If you have two 1099's covering the same income - there's no legal obligation to report the income twice. You do not have to pay twice the tax just because you have stupid clients. But you may have troubles explaining it to the IRS, especially if you're dealing with cash in your business. If you want to avoid matching issues, consider reporting all the 1099s, and then subtracting the duplicates and attaching a statement (the software will do it automatically when you add the description in the miscellaneous item) about what it is."}
{"id": "57392", "text": "But cash talks. If you can save yourself a grand or two a month in mortgage overpayment, and have the cash for 1st and last month's rent plus deposit, a job or two, etc. That crap means more than a credit score. Plus don't rent from people you can't talk to about with what is going on in your life.   My personal credit has always been shit (because the morality associated with debt is complete bullshit) since my 20s and I have never had a problem renting, because I let my landlords know I am human and that paying rent on time and in full is my top bill to pay.   People are beginning to realize that FICO scores are pretty meaningless in this Lesser Depression.  e: prepositional indifference"}
{"id": "57406", "text": "I took littleadv's advice and talked to an accountant today. Regardless of method of payment, my US LLC does not have to withhold taxes or report the payment as payments to contractors (1099/1042(S)) to the IRS; it is simply a business expense.  He said this gets more complicated if the recipient is working in the US (regardless of nationality), but that is not my case"}
{"id": "57457", "text": "Since you are paying taxes on the distributions from your mutual funds anyway, instead of reinvesting the distributions back into the mutual funds, you could receive them as cash, then contribute them to your Roth IRA once you are able to open one."}
{"id": "57716", "text": "If you don't know how to evaluate funds and are looking for someone to help you make good investment decisions, then you want a financial advisor.  My suggestion is to look for one that 1) doesn't try to sell you insurance first (since insurance is an expense, not an investment), 2) can explain to you the the relationship between risk and return (and what mix is right for you) and 3) recommends funds that have good demonstrated returns after fees have been removed. If you plan to pick your own funds and just want a transaction broker, go with one of the free/cheap online discount brokers.  Many let you invest in hundreds of different funds, so look for brokers with the cheapest fees."}
{"id": "57844", "text": "In 1929 the Dow Jones Industrial Average peaked at roughly 390 just prior to the Great Depression. It did not return to that level again until 25 years later in 1954. 25 years is a long time to go without any returns, especially if you are a retiree. There is no easy answer with investing. Trying to time the tops and bottoms is widely regarded as a foolhardy endeavor, but whenever you invest you expose yourself to the possibility of this scenario. The only thing I highly recommend is not to base your decision on the historical returns from 1975 to 2000 that the other answers have presented. These returns can be explained by policy changes that many are coming to understand are unsustainable. The growth of our debt, income inequality, and monetary manipulation by central banks are all reasons to be skeptical of future returns."}
{"id": "58353", "text": "The underlying investment is usually somewhat independent of your mortgage, since it encompasses a bundle of mortgages, and not only yours. It works similarly to a fund. When, you pay off the old mortgage while re-financing, the fund receives the outstanding debt in from of cash, which can be used to buy new mortgages."}
{"id": "58432", "text": "Seems like a good deal to me. You are paying less interest over the lifetime of the loan. And what I would do is take the difference between the new payments and the old, put it into a savings account each month, and when the savings account exceeds the balance of the loan pay it off."}
{"id": "58690", "text": "\"The problem with daily-rebalanced \"\"inverse\"\" or \"\"leveraged\"\" ETFs is that since they rebalance every day, you can lose money even if your guess as to the market's direction is correct. Quoting from FINRA'S guide as to why these are a bad idea: How can this apparent breakdown between longer term index returns and ETF returns happen? Here\u2019s a hypothetical example: let\u2019s say that on Day 1, an index starts with a value of 100 and a leveraged ETF that seeks to double the return of the index starts at $100. If the index drops by 10 points on Day 1, it has a 10 percent loss and a resulting value of 90. Assuming it achieved its stated objective, the leveraged ETF would therefore drop 20 percent on that day and have an ending value of $80. On Day 2, if the index rises 10 percent, the index value increases to 99. For the ETF, its value for Day 2 would rise by 20 percent, which means the ETF would have a value of $96. On both days, the leveraged ETF did exactly what it was supposed to do\u2014it produced daily returns that were two times the daily index returns. But let\u2019s look at the results over the 2 day period: the index lost 1 percent (it fell from 100 to 99) while the 2x leveraged ETF lost 4 percent (it fell from $100 to $96). That means that over the two day period, the ETF's negative returns were 4 times as much as the two-day return of the index instead of 2 times the return. That example is for \"\"just\"\" leveraging 2x in the same direction. Inverse funds have the same kind of issue. An example from Bogleheads Wiki page on these kinds of funds says that over 12/31/2007 to 12/31/2010, The funds do exactly what they say on any given day. But any losses get \"\"locked in\"\" each day. While normally a 50% loss needs a 100% gain to get back to a starting point, a fund like this needs more than a 100% gain to get back to its starting point. The result of these funds across multiple days doesn't match the index it's matching over those several days, and you won't make money over the long term. Do look at the further examples at the links I've referenced above, or do your own research into the performance of these funds during time periods both when the market is going up and going down. Also refer to these related and/or duplicate questions:\""}
{"id": "58785", "text": "If you have a mortgage backed by FHA, Fannie, or Freddie I would hold off.  There is talk of a new plan that would allow refi's on mortages that were underwater.  I would expect rates to stay about the same for the forseeable future.  Take that money you would spend each month on the personal loan and stick it into your mortgage payment to bring down your debt on it.  Your home may be underwater on paper but once the economy comes back, or hyperinflation sets in (one of the 2 will happen) you will have equity in your home again soon after."}
{"id": "58882", "text": "\"Each candlestick in a candlestick chart represents the open, close, high and low for a period of time. If you are looking at a daily chart it represents the open price, close price, high price and low price for that day. If you are looking at an hourly chart, then a single candlestick represents the open, close, high and low prices for an hour. If looking at a weekly chart, then a single candlestick will represent the opening price on Monday morning, the closing price on Friday afternoon, and the highest and lowest price for that week. The diagram below represents the two main types of candle sticks.  When the price closes higher than they open for the period of the candlestick it is called a bullish candle and the main body is usually represented in green. When the price closes lower than they open for the period of the candlestick it is called a bearish candle and the main body is usually represented in red. In a bullish candle with a large real body and small shadows or wicks, where prices open near the low of the period and close near the top of the period, it represents a very bullish period (especially if volume is high). An example of this situation could be when good news is released to the market and most market participants want to buy the shares driving prices higher during the period. An example of a bullish candle with a small real body and a large upper shadow or wick could be when market participants start buying early during the period, then some negative news comes out or prices reach a major resistance level, then prices drop from their highs but still close higher than the open. The large upper shadow represents some indecision in prices moving higher. In a bearish candle with a large real body and small shadows or wicks, where prices open near the high of the period and close near the low of the period, it represents a very bearish period (especially if volume is high). An example of this situation could be when bad news is released to the market and most market participants want to sell the shares driving prices lower during the period. An example of a bearish candle with a small real body and a large lower shadow or wick could be when market participants start selling early during the period, then some positive news comes out or prices reach a major support level, then prices move up from their lows but still close lower than the open. The large lower shadow represents some indecision in prices moving lower. These are just some examples of what can be derived from looking at candlestick charts. There are plenty more and too much to include in this answer.  Another type of candle is the Doji, represented in the diagram below.  The Doji Candle represents indecision in the market. Prices open then move up to the high of the period then start falling past the open before reversing again and closing either at the open or very close to the open. The market participants can't decide whether the price should move up or down, so prices end up closing very close to where they opened. A doji Candle close to a market high or low could represent a turning point in the short term trend and could mean that over the next period or two prices could reverse and go in the opposite direction. There are many more definitions for candlestick charts, and I would recommend an introductory book on candlestick charting, like one from the \"\"Dummies\"\" series. The main things to keep in mind as a beginner it that a strong bullish candle with small shadows and large real body could represent further price movement upwards, a strong bearish candle with small shadows and large real body could represent further movement downwards, and any candle with large shadows could represent indecision and a reversal from the direction of the large shadow.\""}
{"id": "58907", "text": "As someone who works in the industry, it's because they all are on the same side of the trade doing the same thing investing based off the same data and when that data is wrong getting caught on the wrong side for a 10 to 15% move at which point they all bail together.  Lemming mentality.  It's the simplest way to understand why they are doing so bad."}
{"id": "59317", "text": "This depends on the nature of the income. Please consult a professional CPA for specific advise."}
{"id": "59327", "text": "Every $1,000 you use to pay off a 26% interest rate card saves you $260 / year.  Every $1,000 you use to pay off a 23% interest rate card saves you $230 / year. Every $1,000 you put in a savings account earning ~0.5% interest earns you $5 / year. Having cash on hand is good in case of emergencies, but typically if your debt is on high interest credit cards, you should consider paying off as much of it as possible. In your case you may want to keep only some small amount (maybe $500, maybe $1000, maybe $100) in cash for emergencies. Paying off your high interest debt should be a top priority for you. You may want to look on this site for help with budgeting, also. Typically, being in debt to credit card companies is a sign of living beyond your means. It costs you a lot of money in the long run."}
{"id": "59468", "text": "First thing to know about investing is that you make money by taking risks. That means the possibility of losing money as well as making it.  There are low risk investments that pretty much always pay out but they don't earn much. Making $200 a month on $10,000 is about 26% per year.  That's vastly more than you are going to earn on low risk assets. If you want that kind of return, you can invest in a diversified portfolio of equities through an equity index fund.  Some years you may make 26% or more.  Other years you may make nothing or lose that much or more.  On average you may earn maybe 7%-10% hopefully. Overall, investing is a game of making money over long horizons.  It's very useful for putting away your $10k now and having hopefully more than that when it comes time to buy a house or retire or something some years into the future.  You have to accept that you might also end up with less than $10K in the end, but you are more likely to make money than to use it. What you describe doesn't seem like a possible situation.  In developed markets, you can't reliably expect anything close to the return you desire from assets that are unlikely to lose you money.  It might be time to re-evaluate your financial goals.  Do you want spending money now, or do you want to invest for use down the road?"}
{"id": "59686", "text": "You're doing business in the US and derive income from the US, so I'd say that yes, you should file a non-resident tax return in the US. And in Connecticut, as well, since that's where you're conducting business (via your domestic LLC registered there). Since you paid more than $600 to your contractor, you're probably also supposed to send a 1099 to him on that account on behalf of your LLC (which is you, essentially, if you're the only member)."}
{"id": "59710", "text": "One will find that the fixed 30 year mortgage rate is tightly correlated to the 10 year treasury. An adder of 2-2.5% or so, changing slightly with the rest of the economy, as money can get tight or loose independent of the rate itself. In 2011 we are witnessing low rates yet tough loan standards, this is the phenomenon I am referencing."}
{"id": "59786", "text": "pay off one of the cards completely. there are several reasons why:"}
{"id": "59795", "text": "As your is a very specific case, please get an advice of CA. It should not cost you much and make it easier. The sale of agriculture land is taxable in certain conditions and exempt from tax in other cases. Sale of agricultural land is subject to capital gains tax. But there are certain exemptions under Section 54B, subject to conditions, which are as follows:    If deemed taxable, you can avail indexation, ie the price at which you grandfather got [the date when he inherited it as per indexation] and pay 10% on the difference. If the price is not known, you can take the govt prescribed rate.   As there is a large deposit in your fathers account, there can be tax queries and need to be answered. Technically there is no tax liable even if your grandfather gifts the money to your father. More details at http://www.telegraphindia.com/1130401/jsp/business/story_16733007.jsp and http://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/publications/4_compute_your_capital_gains/chapter2.asp"}
{"id": "59819", "text": "The CPA's mention of $2,500 is probably referring to the recently increased de minimis safe harbor under the final tangible property regulations (used to be $500) without an applicable financial statement. The IRS will not challenge your choice of expense or capitalization on amounts on or below $2500 if you elect the de minimis safe harbor election on your return. However, you must follow whatever you're doing for your books. (So if you are capitalizing your laptops for book purposes, you would also need to capitalize for tax purposes). Section 179 allows you to expense property that you would have otherwise have had to capitalize and depreciate. Section 179 can be annoying, especially if your LLC is treated as a passthrough, because there are recapture provisions when you dispose of the asset too early. For the tax return preparer, it makes the return preparation much more simple if there are no fixed assets to account for in the first place, which is quite possible if you are expensive all items/invoices less than $2,500."}
{"id": "59826", "text": "At www.corpsquare.in we make company registration in India a hassle free and smooth process by endeavor of intelligent, strict and proven procedures and protocols so that it becomes very simple and easy go through process for our clients. Our team of highly dedicated professionals keep on striving on the procedures with continuous efforts. We believe we are part of your business and should make you take your first ever step of starting your business in best manner. So confidently hand over your Company formation process with us and get going on core business of your company."}
{"id": "60082", "text": "What I would prefer is top open a new category charges under dispute and park the amount there. It can be made as an account as well in place of a income or expenses category. This way your account will reconcile and also you will be able to track the disputes."}
{"id": "60093", "text": "What you put that money into is quite relevant. It depends on how soon you will need some, or all, of that money.  It has been very useful to me to divide my savings into three areas...  1) very short term 'oops' funds. This is for when you forget to put something in your budget or when a monthly bill is very high this month. Put this money into passbook savings.  2) Emergency funds that are needed quite infrequently. Used for such things as when you go to the hospital or an appliance breaks down. Put this money in higher yeald savings, but where it can be accessed.  3) Retirement savings. Put this money into a 401-K. Never draw on it till you retire. Make no loans against it. When you change jobs roll over into a self-directed IRA and invest in an ETF that pays dividends. Reinvest the dividend each month.  So, like I said, where you put that money depends on how soon you will need it."}
{"id": "60098", "text": "The dividend is for a quarter of the year, three months. 80 cents is 3.9% of $20.51. Presumably the Div/yield changes as the stock price changes. On Yahoo, they specify that the yield is based on a particular stated date. So it's only the exact number if the stock trades at the price on that date."}
{"id": "60119", "text": "Can't see why would you need to track the sources of the original funds. Can't think of a reason not to consolidate, if at all it will only make the management of your IRA more convenient, and may be even cheaper (if the fees depend on the account value...)."}
{"id": "60137", "text": "\"Simply paying him back the 50K to reduce \"\"his equity\"\" back to 30% doesn't necessarily mean that he still doesn't have a higher liq pref upon a liquidation event. You don't need the legal language to know...I deal with term sheets all the time, I don't deal in the legal language, we cut the deal with the term sheet and leave the legal language to the lawyers.\""}
{"id": "60176", "text": "And then there is the issue of people who actually don't intend to reduce the size of their loan. They only want to pay the interest, so their debt with the bank remains constant. If you are upside down, it means you will not have the financial means to remove the debt. If, for some reason, you are no longer able to pay the bank, you might lose the house. After that you will have no house, but you still have a debt with the bank."}
{"id": "60300", "text": "Quite a bit as in, $100K+? If you're a sole operator, not sure what constitutes a real likelihood that a risk of liability will materialize, and in need of a lot of up front financing, I am genuinely concerned that you're going to a lay a giant egg on this one. What is it your business is going to be doing? I don't really want to give a free consultation, but I'm worried you're either misunderstanding something or about to make a mistake, and I don't want to see that happen."}
{"id": "60441", "text": "The big difference for me is that my contribution thorough a cafeteria plan also skips Social Security and Medicare taxes. That is a 6.2% (SS) + 1.45% (Medicare) tax on those contributions if done outside a cafeteria plan. Some companies make a contribution to a the HSA. If you handle your contributions outside of their channels they may see you as a non-participant, and not make any matching contributions. You might have to put a minimum amount into the company setup HSA.  The non-company HSA may also charge fees that the company one doesn't. Regarding the taxes: If you contribute $3,000 to the HSA via post tax, your paychecks would have had an extra $229.50 paid into social security/Medicare. There is no mechanism to get this refunded."}
{"id": "60508", "text": "\"The following is from Wikipedia - Term life insurance (with very minor editing) Because term life insurance is a pure   death benefit, its primary use is to   provide coverage of financial   responsibilities, for the insured.   Such responsibilities may include, but   are not limited to, consumer debt,   dependent care, college education for   dependents, funeral costs, and   mortgages. Term life insurance is   generally chosen in favor of permanent   life insurance because it is usually   much less expensive (depending on the   length of the term). Many financial   advisors or other experts commonly   recommend term life insurance as a   means to cover potential expenses   until such time that there are   sufficient funds available from   savings to protect those whom the   insurance coverage was intended to   protect. For example, an individual   might choose to obtain a policy whose   term expires near his or her   retirement age based on the premise   that, by the time the individual   retires, he or she would have amassed   sufficient funds in retirement savings   to provide financial security for   their dependents. This suggests the questions \"\"why do you have this policy?\"\" also \"\"how many term life policies do you need?\"\" or \"\"how much insurance do you need?\"\" Clearly you will be better off investing the premiums in the market.  Your beneficiaries may be better off either way (depends when you die and to a lesser extent on market performance). If you are not able to retire now but expect to be able to later, you should strongly consider having sufficient insurance to provide income replacement for your spouse.  This is a fairly common why.\""}
{"id": "60728", "text": "As you mentioned in the title, what you're asking about comes down to volatility.  DCA when purchasing stock is one way of dealing with volatility, but it's only profitable if the financial instrument can be sold higher than your sunk costs.  Issues to be concerned with: Let's suppose you're buying a stock listed on the NYSE called FOO (this is a completely fake example).  Over the last six days, the average value of this stock was exactly $1.00Note 1.  Over six trading days you put $100 per day into this stockNote 2: At market close on January 11th, you have 616 shares of FOO.  You paid $596.29 for it, so your average cost (before fees) is: $596.29 / 616 = $0.97 per share Let's look at this including your trading fees: ($596.29 + $30) / 616 = $1.01 per share. When the market opens on January 12th, the quote on FOO could be anything.  Patents, customer wins, wars, politics, lawsuits, press coverage, etc... could cause the value of FOO to fluctuate.  So, let's just roll with the assumption that past performance is consistent: Selling FOO at $0.80 nets: (616 * $0.80 - $5) - ($596.29 + $30) =  $123.49 Loss Selling FOO at $1.20 nets: (616 * $1.20 - $5) - ($596.29 + $30) =  $107.90 Profit Every day that you keep trading FOO, those numbers get bigger (assuming FOO is a constant value).  Also remember, even if FOO never changes its average value and volatility, your recoverable profits shrink with each transaction because you pay $5 in fees for every one. Speaking from experience, it is very easy to paper trade.  It is a lot harder when you're looking at the ticker all day when FOO has been $0.80 - $0.90 for the past four days (and you're $300 under water on a $1000 portfolio).  Now your mind starts playing nasty games with you. If you decide to try this, let me give you some free advice: Unless you have some research (such as support / resistance information) or data on why FOO is a good buy at this price, let's be honest: you're gambling with DCA, not trading. END NOTES:"}
{"id": "60750", "text": "The numbers you have quoted don't add up. For Rs 30,000 / month is 3,60,000 a year. The tax should be around 11,000 again this will be reduced by the contributions to PF. You have indicated a tax deductions of 18,000. There are multiple ways to save taxes. Since you are beginner, investments into section 80C should give you required tax benefits. Please read this article in Economic Times"}
{"id": "60793", "text": "Save a little if you want but pay most of your way through college if you can.  Debt sucks bad and I try to avoid as little as possible.  I'm willing to bet that any money you invested while in school would be trumped by a only a few hours of overtime once you're out of college and making money (assuming you've chosen a path that is valuable today and through most of your future).  I worked full time and attended school full time when I was in college..those 3-4 hour nights of sleep were worth it not that I see people paying $1k/month for the next 10 years on loans... assuming you can handle it."}
{"id": "60803", "text": "Your employer pays the expected (but estimated) taxes for you. So the chances are you don't own more; but that might be different if you have other sources of income that he doesn't know about (interest on savings or a side-job or whatever). Also, you could have deductions that reduce the taxes you owe, which he again doesn't know, so you overpay. If you don't file, you don't get them back. Most tax software companies offer free usage of their tool for standard filings, and you can use it to find out your tax situation, and then buy the tool only when you want to file. If you use one of those, you can type in all your data, and depending on the result, decide to buy it and file right away. Note that if it turns out you owe taxes, you must file (and pay), but of course you can do it manually instead of buying the tool. If it turns out you get money back, it is your decision to file - you probably don't care for a small amount, but if you get 1000 $ back, you might want to file - again, buying the software of doing it manually."}
{"id": "61014", "text": "There are loan options for those in your situation.  It is very common.  I am a licensed loan officer nmls 1301324 and have done many loans just like this.  Your schooling is counted as your work history Contrary to popular belief.  We want to write loans and guidelines are easing.  Banks are a different story and their loan officers aren't licensed.  If you talk to a bank you aren't getting an educated loan officer.  They also have what are called overlays that make guidelines stricter."}
{"id": "61022", "text": "\"From the way you frame the question it sounds like you more or less know the answer already. Yes - you can make a non-deductable contribution to a traditional IRA and convert it to a Roth IRA. Here is Wikipedia's explanation: Regardless of income but subject to contribution limits, contributions can be made to a Traditional IRA and then converted to a Roth IRA.[10] This allows for \"\"backdoor\"\" contributions where individuals are able to avoid the income limitations of the Roth IRA. There is no limit to the frequency with which conversions can occur, so this process can be repeated indefinitely. One major caveat to the entire \"\"backdoor\"\" Roth IRA contribution process, however, is that it only works for people who do not have any pre-tax contributed money in IRA accounts at the time of the \"\"backdoor\"\" conversion to Roth; conversions made when other IRA money exists are subject to pro-rata calculations and may lead to tax liabilities on the part of the converter. [9] Do note the caveat in the second paragraph. This article explains it more thoroughly: The IRS does not allow converters to specify which dollars are being converted as they can with shares of stock being sold; for the purposes of determining taxes on conversions the IRS considers a person\u2019s non-Roth IRA money to be a single, co-mingled sum. Hence, if a person has any funds in any non-Roth IRA accounts, it is impossible to contribute to a Traditional IRA and then \u201cconvert that account\u201d to a Roth IRA as suggested by various pundits and the Wikipedia piece referenced above \u2013 conversions must be performed on a pro-rata basis of all IRA money, not on specific dollars or accounts. Say you have $20k of pre-tax assets in a traditional IRA, and make a non-deductable contribution of $5k. The account is now 80% pre-tax assets and 20% post-tax assets, so if you move $5k into a Roth IRA, $4k of it would be taxed in the conversion. The traditional IRA would be left with $16k of pre-tax assets and $4k of post-tax assets.\""}
{"id": "61109", "text": "What you're missing is the continuous compounding computation doesn't work that way.  If you compound over n periods of time and a rate of return of r, the formula is e^(r*n), as you have to multiply the returns together with a mulitplicative base of 1.  Otherwise consider what 0 does to your formula.  If I get a zero return, I have a zero result which doesn't make sense.  However, in my formula I'd still get the 1 which is what I'm starting and thus the no effect is the intended result. Continuous compounding would give e^(-.20*12) = e^(-2.4) = .0907 which is a -91% return so for each $100 invested, the person ends up with $9.07 left at the end.  It may help to picture that the function e^(-x) does asymptotically approach zero as x tends to infinity, but that is as bad as it can get, so one doesn't cross into the negative unless one wants to do returns in a Complex number system with imaginary numbers in here somehow. For those wanting the usual compounding, here would be that computation which is more brutal actually: For your case it would be (1-.20)^12=(0.8)^12=0.068719476736 which is to say that someone ends up with 6.87% in the end.  For each $100 had in the beginning they would end with $6.87 in the end. Consider someone starting with $100 and take 20% off time and time again you'd see this as it would go down to $80 after the first month and then down to $64 the second month as the amount gets lower the amount taken off gets lower too.  This can be continued for all 12 terms.  Note that the second case isn't another $20 loss but only $16 though it is the same percentage overall. Some retail stores may do discounts on discounts so this can happen in reality.  Take 50% off of something already marked down 50% and it isn't free, it is down 75% in total.  Just to give a real world example where while you think a half and a half is a whole, taking half and then half of a half is only three fourths, sorry to say.  You could do this with an apple or a pizza if you want a food example to consider. Alternatively, consider the classic up and down case where an investment goes up 10% and down 10%.  On the surface, these should cancel and negate each other, right?  No, in fact the total return is down 1% as the computation would be (1.1)(.9)=.99 which is slightly less than 1. Continuous compounding may be a bit exotic from a Mathematical concept but the idea of handling geometric means and how compounding returns comes together is something that is rather practical for people to consider."}
{"id": "61170", "text": "Concerning the Broker: eToro is authorized and registered in Cyprus by the Cyprus Securities Exchange Commission (CySEC). Although they are regulated by Cyprus law, many malicious online brokers have opened shop there because they seem to get along with the law while they rip off customers. Maybe this has changed in the last two years, personally i did not follow the developments. eToro USA is regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and thus doing business in a good regulated environment. Of course the CFTC cannot see into the future, so some black sheep are getting fined and even their license revoked every now and then. It has no NFA Actions: http://www.nfa.futures.org/basicnet/Details.aspx?entityid=45NH%2b2Upfr0%3d Concerning the trade instrument: Please read the article that DumbCoder posted carefully and in full because it contains information you absolutely have to have if you are to do anything with Contract for difference (CFD). Basically, a CFD is an over the counter product (OTC) which means it is traded between two parties directly and not going through an exchange. Yes, there is additional risk compared to the stock itself, mainly: To trade a CFD, you sign a contract with your broker, which in almost all cases allows the broker A CFD is just a derivative financial instrument which allows speculating / investing in an asset without trading the actual asset itself. CFDs do not have to mirror the underlying asset's price and price movement and can basically have any price because the broker quotes you independently of the underlying. If you do not know how all this works and what the instrument / vehicle actually is and how it works; and do not know what to look for in a broker, please do not trade it. Do yourself a favor and get educated, inform yourself, because otherwise your money will be gone fast. Marketing campaigns such as this are targeted at people who do not have the knowledge required and thus lose a significant portion (most of the time all) of their deposits. Answer to the actual question: No, there is no better way. You can by the stock itself, or a derivative based on it. This means CFDs, options or futures. All of them require additional knowledge because they work differently than the stock. TL;DR: DumbCoder is absolutely right, do not do it if you do not know what it is about. EDIT: Revisiting this answer and reading the other answers, i realize this sounds like derivatives are bad in general. This is absolutely not the case, and i did not intend it to sound this way. I merely wanted to emphasize the point that without sufficient knowledge, trading such products is a great risk and in most cases, should be avoided."}
{"id": "61350", "text": "If you go traditional financing there is a chance it'd be syndicated amongst a bank group. That is going to add a little depth to your credit agreement id imagine. You thinking a term loan with a 7-10 amortization? I've never seen a LOC more than 5 years out."}
{"id": "61384", "text": "a) Contracts are for future delivery of said underlying. So if you are trading CL (crude oil) futures and don't sell before delivery date, you will be contacted about where you want the oil to be delivered (a warehouse presumably). 1 contract is the equivalent of 1000 barrels. b) 600 contracts depends entirely on what you are trading and how you are trading. If you are trading ES (S&P 500 e-Mini), you can do the 600 contracts in less than a second. c) No fees does not make particular sense. It's entirely possible that you are not trading anything, it's just a fake platform so they can judge your performance. d) The catch typically is that when it's time to pay you, they will avoid you or worst case, disappear. e) Trading is a full-time job, especially for the first 4-5 years when you're only learning the basics. Remember, in futures trading you are trading against all the other professionals who do only this 24/7 for decades. If you are only risking your time with the reward being learning and possibly money, it seems like a good deal. There's typically a catch with these things - like you would have to pay for your data which is very expensive or withdrawing funds is possible only months later."}
{"id": "61518", "text": "\"Your assertion that you will not be selling anything is at odds with the idea that you will be doing tax loss harvesting.  Tax loss harvesting always involves some selling (you sell stocks that have fallen in price and lock in the capital losses, which gives you a break on your taxes).  If you absolutely prohibit your advisor from selling, then you will not be able to do tax loss harvesting (in that case, why are you using an advisor at all?). Tax loss harvesting has nothing to do with your horizon nor the active/passive difference, really. As a practical matter, a good tax loss harvesting plan involves mechanically selling losers and immediately putting the money in another stock with more-or-less similar risk so your portfolio doesn't change much.  In this way you get a stable portfolio that performs just like a static portfolio but gives you a tax benefit each year.  The IRS officially prohibits this practice via the \"\"wash sale rule\"\" that says you can't buy a substantially identical asset within a short period of time.  However, though two stocks have similar risk, they are not generally substantially similar in a legal sense, so the IRS can't really beat you in court and they don't try.  Basically you can't just buy the same stock again. The roboadvisor is advertising that they will perform this service, keeping your portfolio pretty much static in terms of risk, in such a way that your tax benefit is maximized and you don't run afoul of the IRS.\""}
{"id": "61593", "text": "Sad part is that you aren't going to make meaningful gains with small account like that unless you are putting everything into one stock and trying to squeeze out 10% gains each trade. At this point, your main focus contributing money into the account regularly. You will be able to trade more frequently as you get more money into the account."}
{"id": "61787", "text": "I think Wikipedia offers a very good explanation: A dividend reinvestment program or dividend reinvestment plan (DRIP) is an equity investment option offered directly from the underlying company. The investor does not receive quarterly dividends directly as cash; instead, the investor's dividends are directly reinvested in the underlying equity. The investor must still pay tax annually on his or her dividend income, whether it is received or reinvested. This allows the investment return from dividends to be immediately invested for the purpose of price appreciation and compounding, without incurring brokerage fees or waiting to accumulate enough cash for a full share of stock. So essentially, a dividend reinvestment plan is offered by companies directly, allowing investors to bypass brokerages, and immediately re-invests dividends rather than paying them out in cash. Investopedia also gives a straighforward definition: A plan offered by a corporation that allows investors to reinvest their cash dividends by purchasing additional shares or fractional shares on the dividend payment date.  A DRIP is an excellent way to increase the value of your investment. Most DRIPs allow you to buy shares commission free and at a significant discount to the current share price. Most DRIPS don't allow reinvestments much lower than $10.  I had a hard time finding a comprehensive listing of companies that offered DRPs (or DRIPs), but MyDollarPlan.com offers these suggestions:  Finding a Dividend Reinvestment Plan: Computershare offers one-stop shopping for hundreds of dividend reinvestment plans. They offer a searchable list that can be filtered to easily find a dividend reinvestment plan that fits your needs. You can also use OneShare. Probably the best way to find out if a company offers a dividend reinvestment plan is to visit the company website. Most companies have an Investor Relations area that will highlight the various options available to shareowners. For example: Coca-Cola, Disney, and Wal-Mart. Hope this helps! @YMCbuzz"}
{"id": "61832", "text": "\"Yes, of course there have been studies on this.  This is no more than a question about whether the options are properly priced. (If properly priced, then your strategy will not make money on average before transaction costs and will lose once transaction costs are included.  If you could make money using your strategy, on average, then the market should - and generally will - make an adjustment in the option price to compensate.) The most famous studies on this were conducted by Black and Scholes and then by Merton. This work won the Nobel Prize in 1995. Although the Black-Scholes (or Black-Scholes-Merton) equation is so well known now that people may forget it, they didn't just sit down one day and write and equation that they thought was cool. They actually derived the equation based on market factors. Beyond this \"\"pioneering\"\" work, you've got at least two branches of study.  Academics have continued to study option pricing, including but not limited to revisions to the original Black-Scholes model, and hedge funds / large trading house have \"\"quants\"\" looking at this stuff all of the time.  The former, you could look up if you want. The latter will never see the light of day because it's proprietary. If you want specific references, I think that any textbook for a quantitative finance class would be a fine place to start.  I wouldn't be surprised if you actually find your strategy as part of a homework problem. This is not to say, by the way, that I don't think you can make money with this type of trade, but your strategy will need to include more information than you've outlined here.  Choosing which information and getting your hands on it in a timely manner will be the key.\""}
{"id": "61919", "text": "\"Alternatively you could exercise 12000 shares for $36000 and immediately sell 7200 shares to recover your exercise price. Then you use the remaining 4800 share to pay the exercise price of the remaining 8000 options. Both scenarios are equivalent but may have different fees associated, so it's worth checking the fine print.  Tax wise: The above example is \"\"cash neutral before taxes\"\". The taxes associated with these transaction are substantial, so it's highly recommended to talk with a tax adviser. \"\"cash neutral after taxes\"\" depends highly on your specific tax situation.\""}
{"id": "62019", "text": "A better answer is to put the money in a Dodd-Frank qualified non interest bearing checking account.  FDIC covers the entire balance, there is no upper limit on the insurance.  This will only be good till the end of 2012 but for short term landing spot this works well.  Forget the interest you will earn and go for the safety of the principal."}
{"id": "62047", "text": "\"I think this question is perfectly on topic, and probably has been asked and answered many times.  However, I cannot help myself. Here are some basics however: Personal Finance is not only about math.  As a guy who \"\"took vector calculus just for fun\"\", I have learned that superior math skills do not translate into superior net worth.  Personal finance is about 50% behavior.  Take a look at the housing crisis, car loans, or payday lenders and you will understand that the desire to be accepted by others often trumps the math surrounding a transaction. Outline your goals  What is it that you want in life?  A pile of money or to retire early?  What does your business look like?  How much cash will you need?  Do you want to own a ton of rental properties?  How does all this happen (set intermediate goals). Then get on a budget  A budget is a plan to spend your money in advance.  Stick to it.  From there you can see how much money you have to implement various goals.  Are your goals to aggressive?   This is really important as people have a tendency to spend more money then they have.  Often times when people receive a bonus at work, they spend that one bonus on two or three times over.  A budget will prevent this from happening. Get an Emergency Fund  Without an emergency fund, you be subject to the financial whims of people involved in your own life and that of the broader marketplace.  Once you have one, you are free to invest with impunity and have less stress in a world that deals out plenty.  Bad things will happen to you financially, protect against them. The best first investments are simple:  Invest in yourself.  Find a way to make a very healthy income with upward mobility.  Also get out and stay out of debt.  These things are not sexy, but they pay off in the long run. The next best investment is also simple:  Index funds.  These become the bench mark for all other investments.  If you do not stand a good chance of beating the S&P 500 index fund, why bother?  Just dump the money in the fund and sleep well at night.\""}
{"id": "62281", "text": "\"Click on the ? icon next to \"\"Employer Plan\"\". This is used to determine if you can deduct your annual contributions from your taxes. For more information on how an employer plan can affect your IRA tax deduction, see the definition for non-deductible contributions. So, we look there: The total of your Traditional IRA contributions that were deposited without a tax deduction. Traditional IRA contributions are normally tax deductible. However, if you have an employer-sponsored retirement plan, such as a 401(k), your tax deduction may be limited.  The $20K difference between $272K and $252K just happens to be $15% of $132,500 which is the amount of your non-deductible contributions.\""}
{"id": "62290", "text": "There are several camps for stock valuation, and much of it boils down to your investment style.  A growth investor will not consider something with a 50x P/E ratio to be overvalued, but a value investor certainly would. I would recommend looking up the Fama-French n-factor model (it was 3-factor, I believe they have released newer papers which introduce other factors), and reading The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham.  Graham's methodology is practically canon for many investors, and the methodology focuses on value, while outlining quantitative factors for determining if a stock is under or over valued."}
{"id": "62465", "text": "Yes, and there are almost no checks (no pun intended) on people pulling money from your account using a routing number. It is an EXTREMELY insecure system. If you want a real Halloween scare, read this article: Easy Check Fraud Technique Draws Scrutiny. Unfortunately you just have to live with it. If you are curious why this loophole is allowed to continue, consider how hard it is to close it without undermining the convenience of checks. Short of you going to the bank with each person you write a check to and showing ID to validate the transaction, I don't see how you could continue to use a negotiable instrument like this without such a security hole.  The ultimate answer is going to have to be replacing checks with other means of payment."}
{"id": "62498", "text": "Two reasons are typically cited (I've heard these from Dave Ramsey): So I wouldn't refinance to a 15-year loan just for item 2, but would definitely look at it for the better interest rates."}
{"id": "62669", "text": "This is literally the thought process that caused the 2008 collapse, the only difference being the bonds consisted of sub-prime mortgages. Not saying its a bad idea, honestly you could make a lot of money, but macro-economically its a shit-storm brewing in the distance."}
{"id": "62876", "text": "\"So with any debt, be it a loan or a bond or anything else, you have two parts, the principal and the interest. The interest payment is calculated by applying the interest % to the principal. Most bonds are \"\"bullet bonds\"\" which means that the principle remains completely outstanding for the life of the bond and thus your interest payments are constant throughout the life of the bond (usually paid semi-annually). Typically part of the purpose of these is to be indefinitely refinanced, so you never really pay the principal back, though it is theoretically due at expiration.  What you are thinking of when you say a loan from a bank is an amortizing loan. With these you pay an increasing amount of the principal each period calculated such that your payments are all exactly the same (including the final payment).  Bonds, just like bank loans, can be bullet, partially amortizing (you pay some of the principle but still have a smaller lump sum at the end) and fully amortizing. One really common bullet structure is \"\"5 non-call 3,\"\" which means you aren't allowed to pay the principle down for the first three years even if you want to! This is to protect investors who spend time and resources investing in you!\""}
{"id": "63054", "text": "I\u2019m going to suggest something your parents may be reluctant to say: \u201cGrow up and get out.\u201d A man living in a van down by the river, making minimum wage, with $0 in savings has achieved something you have still failed to achieve: adulthood.  This, I believe, is more important than a man\u2019s income or net worth. So please join us adults Bryan.  I think you\u2019ll enjoy it.  Yes, your savings may take a hit but you will gain the respect that comes with being an adult.  I think it is worth it."}
{"id": "63075", "text": "IMO this means one of two things: the bank thinks that 3 months from now, the interest rates it plans to offer will be lower than 1%; after 180 days, it will go up again. the bank needs more short-term cash than mid-term cash right now, so it offers you a better deal. In either case, it is unlikely that your 90 day intrest rate will be available 90 days from now, and most likely it will be below 1% unless the bank yet again needs short-term cash from its customers. With those proposed rates, I would go for half in 90 days and half in 270 days. Disclaimer: am no economist, just spent a lot of time the past year fretting over the same kind of questions.  Feel free to tell me where I'm wrong if you think I am."}
{"id": "63091", "text": "More leverage means more risk. There is more upside. There is also more downside. If property prices and/or rents fall then your losses are amplified. If you leverage at 90% then a 5% fall means you've lost half your money."}
{"id": "63176", "text": "I believe firmly that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.    Cash your gains out and be happy with your profit."}
{"id": "63250", "text": "It could be a couple of things besides extra principal: I seem to remember hearing that some (shady?) lenders would just pocket extra payments if you didn't specify where they were headed, but I've also been told that this just isn't true."}
{"id": "63301", "text": "You are the one lending yourself the shares to sell;you purchase the stock at market price and sell at the strike price of the option to the put seller when you exercise the option."}
{"id": "63365", "text": "Beware of keeping up with the Joneses. Many of your free-spending neighbors are broke. Basically, the prices of things like what you're noticing will rise as incomes in the area rise. A great example of this can be found in state capitals and college towns, where battalions of government workers or students all make just about the same amount of money and drive prices accordingly. For example, a college town tends to have a tight rental market."}
{"id": "63427", "text": "You have to have 9% ROI for your investment to break even. That's pretty steep. I'd pay the loan, where you have 9% promised return. Just make sure that there are no pre-payment penalties, and that you're comfortable enough with not having that money available."}
{"id": "63437", "text": "And I assume that is raw numbers, not corrected dollars.  Even if it were  corrected for official inflation it'd understate the change.  Anyone paying attention can tell that inflation is pretty rampant, even if the official figures pretend it's low.  Just had to pay $14 for an ordinary decent burger in a bar here, where only a few years ago it would have been $7 or $8 (metro Boston MA)."}
{"id": "63501", "text": "\"If the balance on the low rate loan is very high (say, an IBR student loan at 6% that accumulates interest every year), and the balance on the high rate loan (say, a CC at 18%) is comparatively very small, then you'd want to make sure that you've at least \"\"stopped the bleeding\"\" on the high balance loan before starting to pay off the CC.\""}
{"id": "63883", "text": "It's six of one a half dozen of another.   Investing the cash is a little more risky.  You know exactly what you'll get by paying down your mortgage.  If you have a solid emergency fund it's probably most advisable to pay down your mortgage.   If your mortgage is 3% and your investment makes 3.5% you're talking about a taxable gain of 0.5% on the additional cash.  Is that worth it to you? Sure, the S&P has been on a tear but remember, past results are not a guarantee of future performance."}
{"id": "63908", "text": "A graphic designer, strong spreadsheet skills, and knowledge about the cost-structure of your idea/business will be key to making a presentation work.   You must be able to show (with extreme confidence) what you will expect to post for revenues and profits for at least the first 3-5 years in the current lending environment... unless you are raising capital without using a bank or traditional methods."}
{"id": "64017", "text": "\"http://www.attaincapital.com/alternative-investment-education/managed-futures-newsletter/investment-research-analysis/423  http://www.cta-info.com/cta_stats.htm  I just googled \"\"managed futures stats\"\".    I'm not 100% sure what your goal is, but I wouldn't look to filter out trades.  You're better off grading returns and variance within the returns.  http://www.autumngold.com/  Poke around the \"\"top traders\"\" section and compare the returns with the drawdown of the traders.  You'll see the \"\"lucky\"\" traders, but you'll also see the high risk guys and low risk guys.\""}
{"id": "64026", "text": "Hm, surprised nobody has mentioned tech gadgets yet. I'm surprised how many undergrads run around with the latest iPhone, iPad, MacBook, of course all with unlimited data etc.  There's just no reason to drop $1500 on a laptop and to pay $50 a month for a cell phone plan."}
{"id": "64279", "text": "Is this legal?  If the purpose of the sale at that price is to defraud somebody else, you could have a legal issue. For example if the purpose was to make yourself appear poorer to make you eligible for government aid; Or to increase your chances of getting a college grant; or to not have to pay money to your spouse as part of a divorce settlement; or if there is an unwritten part of the transaction for the sibling to sell the house back to in a few years when you no longer need to appear poor.  The answer by @littleadv covers the tax complications.  I do have one additional point. The sale can't be a short sale. The bank will never approve. The short sale can only be approved when the bank is convinced that there are no viable purchasers at a level to get all their money back. Your sibling is not an arms length transaction."}
{"id": "64410", "text": "If you have been a good steward of your friend's money this suggestion will not be too difficult. Pay your friend what his money would have earned in the S&P 500 if you had just invested it in an index fund. Subtract 15% for long-term capital gains. You can use the ticker SPY to see what the price was on the day he gave you the money, versus the price today. If you had helped your friend open an account for himself, you would have given him more than the returns on his money, you would have helped educate him on how to invest for himself."}
{"id": "64598", "text": "When in doubt, you should always seek the advice of a professional tax preparer or your accountant. (Many agents/accountants will gladly review your tax preparations to ensure you haven't missed something. That's quicker and cheaper than paying them to do it all.) Having said that... This Illinois resource has detailed information about S-corps:  Of relevance to your situation:"}
{"id": "64614", "text": "make assume should be make assumptions*. I feel like there are other reasons that the 5% in year 2 could have cost less than the 5% in year 1 besides a falling stock price (this is what I'm trying to figure out).   In your opinion, how do you think the investment is performing."}
{"id": "64634", "text": "Yes, the larger number of ETFs will have a greater chance of enhancing the effect you observe. It's beyond a simple discussion, but the bottom line is that by carving out the different market segments your rebalancing will have greater impact."}
{"id": "65040", "text": "As the owner of the S-corp, it is far easier for you to move money in/out of the company as contributions and distributions rather than making loans to the company. Loans require interest payments, 1099-INT forms, and have tax consequences, whereas the distributions don't need to be reported because you pay taxes on net profits regardless of whether the money was distributed. If you were paid interest, disregard this answer. I don't know if or how you could re-categorize the loan once there's a 1099-INT involved. If no interest was ever paid, you just need to account for it properly: If the company didn't pay you any interest and never issued you a 1099-INT form (i.e. you wrote a check to the company, no promissory note, no tax forms, no payments, no interest, etc.) then you can categorize that money as a capital contribution. You can likewise take that money back out of the company as a capital distribution and neither of these events are taxable nor do they need to be reported to the IRS. In Quickbooks, create the following Equity accounts -- one for each shareholder making capital contributions and distributions: When putting money into the company, deposit into your corporate bank account and use the Capital Contribution equity account. When taking money out of the company, write yourself a check and use the Distributions account. At the end of every tax year, you can close out your Contributions and Distributions to Retained Earnings by making a general journal entry. For example, debit retained earnings and credit distributions on Dec 31 every year to zero-out the distributions account. For contributions, do the reverse and credit retained earnings. There are other ways of recording these transactions -- for example I think some people just use a Member Capital equity account instead of separate accounts for contributions and distributions -- and QB might warn you about posting journal entries to the special Retained Earnings account at the end of the year. In any case, this is how my CPA set up my books and it's been working well enough for many years. Still, never a bad idea to get a second opinion from your CPA. Be sure to pay yourself a reasonable salary, you can't get out of payroll taxes and just distribute profits -- that's a big red flag that can trigger an audit. If you're simply distributing back the money you already put into the company, that should be fine."}
{"id": "65095", "text": "As an individual freelancer, you would need to maintain a book of accounts. This should show all the income you are getting, and should also list all the payments incurred. This can not only include the payments to other professionals, but also any hardware purchased, phone bills, any travel and entertainment bills directly related to the service you are offering.  Once you arrive at a net profit figure, you would need to file this as your income.  Consult a tax professional and he can help with how to keep the records of income and expenses. i.e. You would need to create invoices for payments, use checks or online transfers for most payments, segregate the accounts, one account used for this professional stuff, and another for your personal stuff, etc. In a normal course the Income Tax Department does not ask for these records, however whenever your tax returns get scrutinized on a random basis, they would ask for all the relevant documentations."}
{"id": "65121", "text": "\"If it were me, I would pay off the 23%er.  That is as long as you don't borrow anymore.  Please consider \"\"your hair on fire\"\" and get that 26%er paid off as soon as possible.   From my calculations your big CC is sitting at 26% has a balance of 20K.  Holy cow girl, what in the world?  The goal here is to have that paid off in less than one year.  Get another job, work more than you have in your life.   Others may disagree as it is more efficient to pay down the 26%er.  However, if you pay it all of within the year the difference only comes to $260.  If you gain momentum, which is important in changing your financial life, that $260 will be meaningless.  With focus, intensity, and momentum you can get this mess cleaned up sooner than you think. However, if you are going to continue to rack up credit card debt at these rates, it does not matter what you do.\""}
{"id": "65179", "text": "\"As others have said: unless you can find someone willing to make a zero-interest loan, the answer is no.  If you can figure out how to turn a \"\"0% for first N months\"\" credit card offer onto a leveraged investment or something of that sort -- seems unlikely -- maybe.\""}
{"id": "65257", "text": "That's the point though.  They are allowing themselves to be *led*, in the first place, to the decision to do something with their capital that they don't understand.  While I don't condone how these Wall St. people behave with peoples money (hence why I don't put any of my money into it), I also cant sympathize with the people who lose money to Wall St. because they were too lazy to be informed about what was going on with their money and to act in their own best interest.  I am guessing (pure speculation) that a lot of the problem with the financial industry could've been avoided if people were proactive about their money and only made investments that they were personally knowledgeable about."}
{"id": "65295", "text": "The owner of a long futures contract does not receive dividends, hence this is a disadvantage compared to owning the underlying stock. If the dividend is increased, and the future price would not change, there is an arbitrage possibility. For the sake of simplicity, assume that the stock suddenly starts paying a dividend, and that the risk free rate is zero (so interest does not play a role). One can expect that the future price is (rougly) equal to the stock price before the dividend announcment. If the future price would not change, an investor could buy the stock, and short a futures contract on the stock. At expiration he has to deliver the stock for the price set in the contract, which is under the assumptions here equal to the price he bought the stock for. But because he owned the stock, he receives the announced dividend. Hence he can make a risk-free profit consisting of the divivends. If interest do play a role, the argument is similar."}
{"id": "65567", "text": "If you have just started an IRA (presumably with a contribution for 2012),  you likely have $5000 in it, or $10,000 if you made a full contribution for  2013 as well. At this time, I would recommend putting it all in a  single low-cost mutual fund. Typically, mutual funds that track an index such as the S&P 500 Index have lower costs (annual expense fees) than actively managed funds, and most investment companies offer such mutual funds, with Fidelity, Vanguard, Schwab, to name a few, having very low expenses even among index funds. Later, when you have more money in the account, you can consider diversifying into more funds, buying stocks and bonds, investing in ETFs, etc. Incidentally, if you are just starting out and your Roth IRA is essentially your first investment experience, be aware that you do not need a brokerage account for your Roth IRA until you have more money in the account to invest and specifically want to buy individual stocks and bonds instead of just mutual funds. If you opened a brokerage account for your Roth IRA, close it and  transfer the Roth IRA to your choice of mutual fund company; else you will be paying annual fees to the brokerage for maintaining your account, inactivity fees since you won't be doing any trading, etc. The easiest way to do this is to go to the mutual fund company web site and tell them that you want to transfer your IRA to them (not roll over your IRA to them) and they will take care of all the paper work and collecting your money from the brokerage (ditto if your Roth IRA is with a bank or another mutual fund company). Then close your brokerage account."}
{"id": "65618", "text": "I assume that when you say 'the DOW' that you actually mean the general market.  The ticker symbol for the general market is SPY (called a 'Spider'). The ticker symbol for Nasdaq is QQQ.  SPY currently pays 2.55% in dividends in a year.  QQQ currently pays 1.34% in dividends in a year."}
{"id": "65648", "text": "Increasing rates from .75% to 1% is an attempt to control debt.  The new 1% rate drives down demand for bonds based on the old .75% rate and drives down demand for stocks who have decrease profit because they pay more interest on debt.  This is the federal reserves primary tool controling inflation.   1% is what the banks pay to borrow money, they base their lending rates on this 1% figure.  If a person can guarantee a .75% return on money borrowed at 1%, they will opt to save and instead lend their money out at 1%."}
{"id": "65698", "text": "The purpose of the W-4 form is to allow you to adjust the withholding to meet your tax obligations. If you have outside non-wage income (money from tutoring) you will have to fill out the W-4 to have extra taxes withheld. If you have deductions (kids, mortgages, student loan interest) then you need to adjust the form to have less tax taken out. Now if yo go so far that you owe too much in April, then you can get hit with penalties and a requirement to file your taxes quarterly the next year. Most years I adjust my W-4 to reflect changes to my situation. The idea is to use it to manage your withholding so that you minimize your refund without triggering the penalties. The HR department has advised you well. How to adjust: If you want to decrease withholding (making the refund smaller) add one to the number on the worksheet. In 2014 a change by 1 exemption is equal to a salary adjustment of  $3,950. If this was spread over 26 paychecks that would be the same as lowering your salary by ~$152. If you are in the 15% tax bracket that increases your take home pay by ~10 a check."}
{"id": "65797", "text": "The classic Nigerian scam involves sending fraudulent cashier's checks to unwitting recipients who then deposit them in their account.  The bank reverses these deposits once they discover the check is not valid.  At least in the US and in the parts of the EU I'm familiar with (the Netherlands), the method of the Nigerian scam is consistent and banks will reverse the deposit after some holding period. Given this, it's unlikely that most banks will convert an arbitrary cashier's check to cash without any means to recover the amount should the check be fraudulent."}
{"id": "66183", "text": "\"I'm surprised people don't bring this up more often....if you add together, not just our sovereign debt, but public and private debt, plus our contingent liabilities, meaning FHA, student loans, fannie mae, freddie mac, AIG, etc.  that totals over $100 TRILLION dollars, more than we could ever pay back, meaning literally there is no amount of growth and taxes that could ever pay this money back. (cite my sources do a google search of James Rickards Hopkins lecture it's in the first few minutes)  The reason you need to add all that together is because the economy can't grow if nobody has any money for investment, etc. (there isn't much home equity left after the housing crisis, retirement plans aren't holding as much, etc.) there wouldn't be an easy way to grow this economy, that's why we have \"\"currency wars\"\" competitive devaluations....to me we're already over the cliff I don't see us heading back, but I'm not saying that means we're going to collapse, just we'll need to go back to some sort of standard where our currency is backed by something (i.e. commodities or gold or something) and there are going to be A LOT of losses in the near term....meaning I want OUT of dollars....  combined with our lazy/entitled generation (don't tell me creating some website where you can order artistic candy on a stick is going to save our economy...we need to produce and innovate again to lower our trade deficit and so people actually bring their capital here), and dwindling resources I'd say it's already game over, the pieces just need to move into place\""}
{"id": "66248", "text": ""}
{"id": "66251", "text": "Checks are on the way out. The liability for even sending someone a check is worrying. Banks really do not look at these things very closely before cashing them, it's insane. If you're defrauded you will usually get restitution but it can take a long time to get them to pay up."}
{"id": "66431", "text": "A better idea if applicable is to borrow 50K (max allowed) to buy a house and pay interest to yourself instead of a bank. And none of that origination and closing fees lost to the lender"}
{"id": "66460", "text": "This security looks like it will require patience for it to pay off. The 200 day moving average looks as if it will soon cross over the 20 day moving average. When that happens the security can be said to be in a bull run.  http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=UWTI&p=D&yr=1&mn=6&dy=0&id=p10888728027 However, this is just speculation... trying to make money via 'buy low, sell high' as I have stated previously, you have about a 25% chance of buying at the low and selling at the high. Better to buy into a fund that pays dividends and reinvest those dividends. Such as: http://www.dividend.com/dividend-stocks/uncategorized/other/pgf-invesco-powershares-financial-preferred-portfolio/ http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=PGF&p=D&yr=1&mn=6&dy=0&id=p59773821284"}
{"id": "66492", "text": "You're charging service fees as a conduit entity for these tickets. While the service fee is not a fixed rate, but a percentage, you would need to record each purchase at dollar amount. To illustrate, it would look like:   Now, to your question:  How do I report this on my taxes? You would first start out by filing your Schedule C from the eyes of the business (the money you earn at your job, and the money you earn as a business are different). Just keep a general journal with the above entry for each sale and close them down to a simple balance sheet and income statement and you should be fine. Of course, read the instructions for your Schedule C before you begin.  As always, good luck."}
{"id": "66534", "text": "Realization is, literally, when something is made real. For example, let's say that you own some stock.  You bought the stock for $1000, and after many years the stock is worth $10,000.  Your investment has gained $9,000.  However, you don't actually have this $10,000; you just own stock that is supposedly worth $10,000 on paper.  Tomorrow, the value of the stock could plummet and only be worth $8,000.  But if you sell your stock today and obtain this $10,000, the gain has now become real.  You have realized a $9,000 gain. In investing, realization of a gain or loss occurs when an asset that you own has been sold for more or less than what you purchased it for.  Before the asset is sold, you only have a theoretical gain or loss based on what you might receive if you sold the asset today.  And tomorrow, that theoretical gain or loss could change."}
{"id": "66607", "text": "From The Prospectus for VTIVX;  as compared to the Total Stock Market Fund;  You can see how the Target date fund is a 'pass through' type of expense. It's not an adder. That's how I read this."}
{"id": "66649", "text": "In month 9 you still owe $7,954.25. You need to pay that, plus the $250. At that line, you haven't made the payment, the rest of the line with next month's payment due. So you haven't paid the $242.47 in col 4."}
{"id": "66834", "text": "\"It's impossibly difficult to time the market. Generally speaking, you should buy low and sell high. Picking 25% as an arbitrary ceiling on your gains seems incorrect to me because sometimes you'll want to hold a stock for longer or sell it sooner, and those decisions should be based on your research (or if you need the money), not an arbitrary number. To answer your questions: If the reasons you still bought a stock in the first place are still valid, then you should hold and/or buy more. If something has changed and you can't find a reason to buy more, then consider selling. Keep in mind you'll pay capital gains taxes on anything you sell that is not in a tax-deferred (e.g. retirement) account. No, it does not make sense to do a wash sale where you sell and buy the same stock. Capital gains taxes are one reason. I'm not sure why you would ever want to do this -- what reasons were you considering? You can always sell just some of the shares. See above (and link) regarding wash sales. Buying more of a stock you already own is called \"\"dollar cost averaging\"\". It's an effective method when the reasons are right. DCA minimizes variance due to buying or selling a large amount of shares at an arbitrary single-day price and instead spreads the cost or sale basis out over time. All that said, there's nothing wrong with locking in a gain by selling all or some shares of a winner. Buy low, sell high!\""}
{"id": "66880", "text": "This could get them into cities where they can't operate as a taxi service. And if they can operate in a city making deliveries, they can point out that their cars are already on the road and not causing danger like opponents claim. They will also then have workers in those cities who can show up to city council meetings."}
{"id": "67320", "text": "\"It may be margin loans or credit lines given to brokerages. I have no idea what a loan book is though so don't I don't really know. Also no one \"\"plays\"\" in equity markets with borrowed money unless they know for sure what they are doing or they have collateral as in the case of margin.\""}
{"id": "67456", "text": "Put \u20ac300-500 in a savings account. Or -- since you already have an emergency fund -- a medium risk fund. @Relaxed is right, though: what are your future goals?  (There's more to life than buying a house...  Travel, future children, etc, etc.)"}
{"id": "67457", "text": "I came here asking for advice because google gave me conflicting answers. I don't need a lawyer to tell me which licenses I need, I  just need somebody with experience, which it's obvious you don't have for 2 reasons. 1) You would have told me already and 2) joining existing firms will result in DNC agreements which I don't want. I'd appreciate a little bit more respect and knowledgeable answers than just putting me down for asking a simple question to clarify my confusion. I am new to this sub and your attitude does not make me feel welcomed here nor to other people I'd imagine that may be new as well."}
{"id": "67641", "text": "well yes but you should also begin to understand the sectoral component of real estate as a market too in that there can be commercial property;  industrial property and retail property; each of which is capable of having slightly (tho usually similar of course) different returns, yields, and risks.  Whereas you are saving to buy and enter into the residential property market which is different again and valuation principles are often out of kilter here because Buying a home although exposing your asset base to real estate risk isnt usually considered an investment as it is often made on emotional grounds not strict investment criteria."}
{"id": "67741", "text": "The fees for Vanguard and Fidelity IRA housing cannot be lower, because they are zero.  Depending on the fund you invest in, one or the other will have pretty low fees and are often the lowest in the industry. I don't qualify for TIAA-CREF, but my mother does and she loves them.  She can call up and get some advice for free.  I would not qualify it as the best advice in the world, but it certainly isn't horrible.   So it really depends on what you are looking for.  If you want a little investment advice, I would go with TIAA-CREF.  If you are a do it yourself-er go with Vanguard."}
{"id": "67904", "text": "How do I report this on our income tax return? You should include it on Line 7 of your Form 1040.   Additionally, you should report the extra payment to your employer if it was greater that $20. You can use From 4070 to do this if your employer does not provide you with a form. And finally, you are right, you should Form 4137 to report any tips that you include on your Form 1040 in order to pay the required social security and medicare taxes.   Credit is due to glibdud and Nathan L for constructive feedback! Thanks!"}
{"id": "68088", "text": "Looking through his post history, it seems all he does is hit up Internet strangers for advice on his business. I don't see it there, but I vaguely remember a post he had on either here or r/personalfinance that didn't go his way.   On topic: if it were me, I'd want no less than 60% of the company. If I'm fronting 100%, it's *my* risk, while you have zero."}
{"id": "68249", "text": "\"In this instance \"\"quotational\"\" is a reference to a market price quote, not a mathematical function.  Staunch \"\"value investors\"\" like Graham, Dodd, Munger, Buffett et al. believe there is a material difference between what security is \"\"worth\"\" and what the current market mood quotes as its price.   You, the investor, perform your analysis then derive a value for a security. If there has been no material change to an aspect of the security you analyzed then there hasn't been a change in that security's value, even if there has been a decline in the price quoted by the market, that is a \"\"quotational loss.\"\"\""}
{"id": "68325", "text": "&gt;Nearly 20 years ago in the book Market Wizards, hedge fund manager Michael Steinhardt said the term hedge funds is a misnomer because most funds don\u2019t hedge, and a new name is almost 2 decades overdue. The more apt titles such as Alt In or absolute return funds haven\u2019t seen any traction, so hedge funds seems here to stay. Besides, consider how misnamed mutual funds are. Vanguard is one of the only mutual fund names that remains a mutual ownership structure, so what\u2019s in a name anyway."}
{"id": "68431", "text": "Buy a car. Vehicle loans, like mortgages, are installment loans. Credit cards are revolving lines of credit. In the US, your credit score factors in the different types of credit you have. Note that there are several methods for calculating credit scores, including multiple types of FICO scores. You could buy a car and drive for Uber to help cash flow the car payments and/or save for your next purchase. As others have suggested, you should be very careful with debt and ask critical questions before taking it on. Swiping a credit card is more about your behavior and self-control than it is logic and math. And if you ever want to start a business or make multi-million dollar purchases (e.g. real estate), or do a lot of other things, you'll need good credit."}
{"id": "68439", "text": "As the bank probably told you, a HOA has no assets.  Taking out loans like that is the domain of a co-op, which is a different kind of corporation and residents own shares in a corporation that owns the entire property as an asset. It is probably a bad idea to allow someone to be a guarantor of the loan.  These kinds of things may pop up in an annual audit of the books (why is a particular person being paid a monthly fee?) or may be seen as red flags by banks offering mortgages to buyers in the HOA."}
{"id": "68640", "text": "What does your cash flow look like? If you can comfortably afford to pay the extra cost and ride out the mortgage, it can be a nice investment. Better if you can manage the property yourself and are somewhat handy. Realize you should be able to raise rents over time so that it is cash flow even eventually.    If cash flow is tight, sell it and re-fi your current place"}
{"id": "68980", "text": "Anyone with a background in finance should have been well aware that the government would swoop in with a bailout of the major banks. Such a scenario was even discussed in money and banking textbooks pre financial crisis.   Since I have no excess cash,  and wad in senior year of college, I was unable to capitalize on that, but I did invest in the banks in market simulating games \ud83d\ude01"}
{"id": "69005", "text": "Even Gold lost 1/2 of it's value between 1980 and 2000.   You would not have fared well if you retired during that period heavily invested in Gold. http://www.usagold.com/reference/prices/history.html You said yourself that one can not foresee what the future will bring. At least IRA's force you to into dollar cost averaging, whereas if your money was outside of a retirement account, you might be tempted to speculate. -Ralph Winters"}
{"id": "69058", "text": "\"That ain't nothing.  It's really easy to get \"\"whipped up\"\" into a sense of entitlement, and forget to be grateful for what you do have.  If this house doesn't exist, what would his costs of housing be elsewhere?  Realistically.  Would landlords rent to him? Would other bankers lend him money to buy a house? Would those costs really be any better?  What about the intangible benefits like not having any landlord hassles or having a good relationship with the neighbors?  It's entirely possible he has a sweet deal here, and just doesn't make enough money.  If your credit rating is poor, your housing options really suck.  Banks won't lend you money for a house unless you have a huge ton of upfront cash.  Most landlords won't rent to you at all, because they are going to automated scoring systems to avoid accusations of racism.  In this day and age, there are lots of ways to make money with a property you own.  In fact, I believe very firmly in Robert Allen's doctrine: Never sell.  That way you avoid the tens of thousands of dollars of overhead costs you bear with every sale. That's pure profit gone up in smoke.  Keep the property forever, keep it working for you.  If he doesn't know how, learn.  To \"\"get bootstrapped\"\" he can put it up on AirBnB or other services. Or do \"\"housemate shares\"\".  When your house is not show-condition, just be very honest and relatable about the condition.  Don't oversell it, tell them exactly what they're going to get.  People like honesty in the social sharing economy.  And here's the important part: Don't booze away the new income, invest it back into the property to make it a better money-maker - better at AirBnB, better at housemate shares, better as a month-to-month renter. So it's too big - Is there a way to subdivide the unit to make it a better renter or AirBnB?  Can he carve out an \"\"in-law unit\"\" that would be a good size for him alone? If he can keep turning the money back into the property like that, he could do alright.  This is what the new sharing economy is all about.  Of course, sister might show up with her hand out, wanting half the revenue since it's half her house.  Tell her hell no, this pays the mortgage and you don't!  She deserves nothing, yet is getting half the equity from those mortgage payments, and that's enough, doggone it!  And if she wants to go to court, get a judge to tell her that.  Not that he's going to sell it, but it's a huge deal. He needs to know how much of his payments on the house are turning into real equity that belongs to him.   \"\"Owning it on paper\"\" doesn't mean you own it.  There's a mortgage on it, which means you don't own all of it.  The amount you own is the value of the house minus the mortgage owed.   This is called your equity.   Of course a sale also MINUS the costs of bringing the house up to mandatory code requirements,  MINUS the cost of cosmetically making the house presentable.   But when you actually sell, there's also the 6% Realtors' commission and other closing costs.  This is where the mortgage is more than the house is worth.  This is a dangerous situation.  If you keep the house and keep paying the mortgage all right, that is stable, and can be cheaper than the intense disruption and credit-rating shock of a foreclosure or short sale.  If sister is half owner, she'll get a credit burn also. That may be why she doesn't want to sell.  And that is leverage he has over her.  I imagine a \"\"Winter's bone\"\" (great movie) situation where the family is hanging on by a thread and hasn't told the bank the parents died.  That could get very complex especially if the brother/sister are not creditworthy, because that means the bank would simply call the loan and force a sale.   The upside is this won't result in a credit-rating burn or bankruptcy for the children, because they are not owners of the house and children do not inherit parents' debt.\""}
{"id": "69150", "text": "\"While the question is highly subjective as you noted, putting extra money will of course save you interest payments, it depends on how much \"\"enjoyment\"\" is worth now. I would suggest you to not be overly aggressive as you might dig yourself a ditch, your minimum monthly payments might get adjust upwards if some of these loans are student loans as it might seem you have a higher degree of disposable income to play with. Be aggressive in paying them off but not to aggressive, I also think the interest is tax deductible. What it really comes down to is, how much more interest do you want to pay them for enjoyment now, 50 months is not long its just north of 4 years. I'd say if you think you can put 800 extra towards them, don't. Instead if it were me I would put an extra 400 towards the highest until its paid and then take the 400 plus the monthly minimum and add that to the next highest and keep the other 400 for a rainy day, you will still get paid off quick but will leave yourself some scratch if necessary.\""}
{"id": "69197", "text": "Quote driven markets are the predecessors to the modern securities market. Before electronic trading and HFTs specifically, trading was thin and onerous.  Today, the average investor can open up a web page, type in a security, and buy at the narrowest spread permitted by regulators with anyone else who wants to take the other side. Before the lines between market maker and speculator became blurred to indistinction, a market maker was one who was contractually obligated to an exchange to provide a bid and ask for a given security on said exchange even though at heart a market maker is still simply a trader despite the obligation.  A market maker would simultaneously buy a large amount of securities privately and short the same amount to have no directional bias, exposure to the direction of the security, and commence to making the market.  The market maker would estimate its cost basis for the security based upon those initial trades and provide a bid and ask appropriate for the given level of volume.  If volumes were high, the spread would be low and vice versa. Market makers who survived crashes and spikes would forgo the potential profit in always providing a steady price and spread, ie increased volume otherwise known as revenue, to maintain no directional bias.  In other words, if there were suddenly many buyers and no sellers, hitting the market maker's ask, the MM would raise the ask rapidly in proportion to the increased exposure while leaving the bid somewhere below the cost basis.  Eventually, a seller would arise and hit the MM's bid, bringing the market maker's inventory back into balance, and narrowing the spread that particular MM could provide since a responsible MM's ask could rise very high very quickly if a lack of its volume relative to its inventory made inventory too costly.  This was temporarily extremely costly to the trader if there were few market makers on the security the trader was trading or already exposed to. Market makers prefer to profit from the spread, bidding below some predetermined price, based upon the cost basis of the market maker's inventory, while asking above that same predetermined cost basis.  Traders profit from taking exposure to a security's direction or lack thereof in the case of some options traders. Because of electronic trading, liquidity rebates offered by exchanges not only to contractually obligated official market makers but also to any trader who posts a limit order that another trader hits, and algorithms that become better by the day, market making HFTs have supplanted the traditional market maker, and there are many HFTs where there previously were few official market makers.  This speed and diversification of risk across many many algorithmically market making HFTs have kept spreads to the minimum on large equities and have reduced the same for the smallest equities on major exchanges. Orders and quotes are essentially identical.  Both are double sided auction markets with impermenant bids and asks.  The difference lies in that non-market makers, specialists, etc. orders are not shown to the rest of the market, providing an informational advantage to MMs and an informational disadvantage to the trader.  Before electronic trading, this construct was of no consequence since trader orders were infrequent.  With the prevalence of HFTs, the informational disadvantage has become more costly, so order driven markets now prevail with much lower spreads and accelerated volumes even though market share for the major exchanges has dropped rapidly and hyperaccelerated number of trades even though the size of individual trades have fallen. The worst aspect of the quote driven market was that traders could not directly trade with each other, so all trades had to go between a market maker, specialist, etc.  While this may seem to have increased cost to a trader who could only trade with another trader by being arbitraged by a MM et al, paying more than what another trader was willing to sell, these costs were dwarfed by the potential absence of those market makers.  Without a bid or ask at any given time, there could be no trade, so the costs were momentarily infinite. In essence, a quote driven market protects market makers from the competition of traders.  While necessary in the days where paper receipts were carted from brokerage to brokerage, and the trader did not dedicate itself to round the clock trading, it has no place in a computerized market.  It is more costly to the trader to use such a market, explaining quote driven markets' rapid exit."}
{"id": "69306", "text": "Most US states have rules that go something like this: You will almost certainly have to pay some registration fees, as noted above.  Depending on how you organize, you may or may not need to file a separate tax return for the business. (If you're sole proprietor for tax purposes, then you file on Schedule C on your personal Form 1040.)  Whether or not you pay taxes depends on whether you have net income.  It's possible that some losses might also be deductible. (Note that you may have to file a return even if you don't have net income - Filing and needing to pay are not the same since your return may indicate no tax due.)  In addition, at the state level, you may have to pay additional fees or taxes beyond income tax depending on what you sell and how you sell it. (Sales tax, for example, might come into play as might franchise taxes.)  You'll need to check your own state law for that. As always, it could be wise to get professional tax and accounting advice that's tailored to your situation and your state.  This is just an outline of some things that you'll need to consider."}
{"id": "69308", "text": "Like @chirs, I'm of the opinion that you might want to buy more. I've done this a couple of times, price dropped a bunch, and I said, heck, I bought some last week, and this week I can get twice as much stock for about the same price. Brought down my average cost per share, and when the company was taken private, I actually didn't lose money - unlike some other people I know, who only bought at one price, watched the drop, and held on awaiting a recovery (which didn't happen in time before the big money swooped in on it). But to do this, you need to keep cash reserves (that, like @afforess says, you can afford to lose all of) on hand, awaiting buying opportunities.  This, too, is a cost - an opportunity cost."}
{"id": "69518", "text": "Lots of countries *have* printed themselves away from debt. Not all inflation turns into a death spiral like Zimbabwe (or Weimar Germany) did, for that you need to have a really shitty economy that no-one believes in.  The problem with Japan right now is that they are trying to print their debt away, but as they do so, their currency *appreciates*. Gold medal for the first one who manages to explain that one."}
{"id": "69560", "text": "\"Square use SSN to verify identity, and they only ask for the last 4 digits for that purpose. If she entered the full SSN - then she entered it into the tax id field, which was a wrong thing to do. It is also worth mentioning that since you mentioned a \"\"business partner\"\" that \"\"should have taken care of taxes\"\" that you should have a tax adviser whose job would be to take care of taxes and ensure that your interests are well-represented. I would suggest not to try interacting with the IRS on your own. Hire a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) to do that. That tax adviser will be able to fix the problem (there are different ways of doing it, depending on the circumstances) and also verify that the business taxes were properly taken care of. When dealing with business partners - assume that what they've \"\"supposedly\"\" did was not done, until you see it with your own eyes. Saying that \"\"Supposedly, her business partner took care of all tax issues\"\" means, in this case, that you've been caught with unreported income that you tried to conceal. It is your (your sister's...) responsibility to prove otherwise. It is a very weak defense when the IRS comes knocking on the door for their money.\""}
{"id": "69721", "text": "There are also low-risk money markets to invest into.  With that kind of long-term savings plan I'd look into those first for the investment factor. I used one like this so that I had the flexibility to either use it for a down payment on a house or school.  And make sure to name a new  administrator in your will if you want to make sure the intent is upheld."}
{"id": "69960", "text": "As long as we remember that debt is the only option when the government has to borrow their money at interest or take it from taxes. When taxes don't cut it, we borrow. Ever wondered why the government doesn't just spend money into the economy instead of borrowing at interest?"}
{"id": "70109", "text": "\"Without divulging too many specifics.  Net income is 73k.  Total income is 136k.  Filed as an S-Corp.  Using Quickbooks to classify expenses etc.  I know its not much information but I don't know what to look out for, like \"\"whoa, net income is 73k, you gotta spend that!\"\"  I have a CPA but isn't offering much in the terms of \"\"help\"\" and \"\"explanation\"\".  Thanks for your time!\""}
{"id": "70460", "text": "Buy term and invest the rest is in fact the easiest plan.  Just buy the term insurance based on your current and expected needs. Review those needs every few years, or after a life event (marriage, divorce, kids, buying a house...) For the invest the rest part: invest in your 401K, IRA or the equivalent. There are index funds, or age based funds that can help the inexperienced. Those index funds have low costs; the age based funds change as you get older.  The biggest issue with the whole life type products is that what your care about for the term insurance doesn't mean that the company  has a good investment program. You also want to have the ability to decide to change insurance companies or investment companies without impacting the other."}
{"id": "70575", "text": "\"I don't think there is a recession proof investment.Every investment is bound to their ups and downs.  If you buy land, a change in law can change the whole situation it may become worthless, same applies for home as well.  Gold - dependent on world economy.  Stock - dependent on world economy Best way is to stay ever vigilant of world around you and keep shuffling from one investment to another balance out your portfolio.  \"\"The most valuable commodity I know of is information.\"\" - Wall Street -movie\""}
{"id": "70702", "text": "\"This is not a direct answer to your question, but you might want to consider whether you want to have a financial planner at all. Would a large mutual fund company or brokerage serve your needs better than a bank? You are still quite young and so have been contributing to IRAs for only a few years. Also, the wording in your question suggests that your IRA investments have not done spectacularly well, and so it is reasonable to infer that your IRA is not a large amount, or at least not as large as what it would be 30  years from now. At this level of investment, it would be difficult for you to find a financial planner who spends all that much time looking after your interests. That you should get away from your current planner, presumably a mid-level employee in what is typically called the trust division of the bank, is a given.  But, to go to another bank (or even to a different employee in the same bank), where  you will also likely be nudged towards investing your IRA in CDs, annuities, and a few mutual funds with substantial sales charges and  substantial annual expense fees, might just take you from the frying pan into the fire. You might want to consider transferring your IRA to a large mutual fund company and investing it in something simple  like one of their low-cost (meaning small annual expense ratio) index funds. The Couch Potato portfolio suggests equal amounts invested in a no-load S&P 500 Index fund and a no-load Bond Index fund, or a 75%-25% split favoring the stock index fund (in view of your age and the fact that the IRA should be a long-term investment).  But the point is,  you can open an IRA account, have the money transferred from your IRA account with the bank, and make the investments on-line all by yourself instead of having a financial advisor do it on your behalf and charge you a fee for doing so (not to mention possibly screwing it up.) You can set up Automated Investment too; the mutual fund company will gladly withdraw money from your checking account and invest it in whatever fund(s) you choose.  All this is not complicated at all.  If you would like to follow the Couch Potato strategy and rebalance your portfolio once a year, you can do it  by yourself too. If you want to invest in funds other than the S&P 500 Index fund, etc. most mutual fund  companies offer a \"\"portfolio analysis\"\" and advice for a fee (and the fee is usually waived when the assets increase above certain levels - varies from company to company).  You could thus have a portfolio analysis done each year, and hopefully it will be free after a few more years.  Indeed, at that level, you also typically get one person assigned as your advisor, just as you have with a bank. Once you get the recommendations, you can choose to follow them  or not, but you have control over how and where your IRA assets are invested.  Over the years, as your IRA assets grow, you can branch out into  investments other than \"\"staid\"\" index funds, but right now, having a financial planner for your IRA might not be worth it. Later, when you have more assets, by all means if you want to explore investing in specific stocks with a brokerage instead of sticking to mutual funds only but this might also mean phone calls urging you to sell Stock A right now, or buy hot Stock B today etc. So, one way of improving your interactions and have a better experience with your new financial planner is to not have a planner at all for a few years and do some of the work yourself.\""}
{"id": "70724", "text": "\"FICO 08, a newer fico formula that many lenders are simultaneously switching to now, ignores artificially lengthened credit history/score by piggybacking. So don't feel left out in that regard.  Average age of accounts is affected when closed accounts fall off your credit report, which can take 7 years, not just by closing them. But I'm not familiar with the latest \"\"weightings\"\" of these things, so its tough to say how significant it will be when that happens. There are also newer FICO formulas, that may become relevant 7 years from now, so it is definitely something to be conscious of but they aren't immediately consequential, since you can do other things to improve your credit worthiness in the near term.\""}
{"id": "70799", "text": "No. There is no indication that the recent decline will have an impact on the house market in the UK. The reason(s) for the downward move these last few weeks are mainly due to: The last two points caused the Chinese government to decide to devaluate the Yuan. This in turn triggered an unforeseen panic attack among investors and speculators around the globe starting with the Chinese that are trading on borrowed money (not only on margin but also by using loans). The UK house prices are not influenced by the above factors, not even indirectly. The most important factors for house prices are in general: If you keep the above points in mind you should be able to decide whether now is the right time to buy a house in your area. Given that a lot of central banks (incl. BoE) are maintaining a low interest rate policy (except fed soon), now is a good time to take a mortgage. Sources used: I know interest rates are determined by the BoE which looks at the global picture to determine these rates but the main directive of a central bank is to maintain an inflation close to but not exactly 2 % as to spur on economic growth.  As such, the value of a company as valuated on the stock market is not or barely taken into account. The negligible impact is the reason why I stated that the crash in the summer of 2015 doesn't even have an indirect impact.  Also such a crash is very short lived. It's more the underlying reason for the fears that could cause issues if they drag on."}
{"id": "71204", "text": "Regarding the Summer of 2011 Crisis: There is NO reason that the United States cannot continue borrowing like it is just based on a particular ratio:  Debt to GDP. The Debt to GDP ratio right now is around 100%, or 1:1. This means the US GDP is around $14 Trillion and its debt is also around $14 trillion.  Other countries have higher debt:gdp ratios Japan - for instance - has a debt:gdp ratio of 220% Regarding a selloff of stocks, dollars and bonds: you have to realize that selling pressure on the dollar will make THE PRICE OF EVERYTHING increase. So commodities and stocks will skyrocket proportionally. The stockmarket can selloff faster than the dollar though. And both markets have circuit breakers that can attempt to curb quick selloffs. Effectiveness pending."}
{"id": "71230", "text": "\"Assuming that the ETF is tracking an index, is there a reason for not looking at using details on the index?  Typically the exact constituents of an index are proprietary, and companies will not publish them publicly without a license.  S&P is the heavyweight in this area, and the exact details of the constituents at any one time are not listed anywhere.  They do list the methodology, and announcements as to index changes, but not a full list of actual underlying constituents. Is there a easy way to automatically (ie. through an API or something, not through just reading a prospectus) get information about an ETF's underlying securities? I have looked for this information before, and based on my own searches, in a word: no.  Index providers, and providers of APIs which provide index information, make money off of such services.  The easiest way may be to navigate to each provider and download the CSV with the full list of holdings, if one exists.  You can then drop this into your pipeline and write a program to pull the data from the CSV file.  You could drop the entire CSV into Excel and use VBA to automagically pull the data into a usable format. For example, on the page for XIU.TO on the Blackrock site, after clicking the \"\"All Holdings\"\" tab there is a link to \"\"Download holdings\"\", which will provide you with a CSV.  I am not sure if all providers look at this. Alternatively, you could write the ETF company themselves.\""}
{"id": "71257", "text": "\"If your financial needs aren't complex, and mostly limited to portfolio management, consider looking into the newish thing called robo-advisers (proper term is \"\"Automated investing services\"\").  The difference is that robo-advisers use software to manage portfolios on a large scale, generating big economy of scale and therefore offering a much cheaper services than personal advisor would - and unless your financial needs are extremely complex, the state of the art of scaled up portfolio management is at the point that a human advisor really doesn't give you any value-add (and - as other answers noted - human advisor can easily bring in downsides such as conflict of interest and lack of fiduciary responsibility).  disclaimer: I indirectly derive my living from a company which derives a very small part of their income from a robo-adviser, therefore there's a possible small conflict of interest in my answer\""}
{"id": "71276", "text": "Banking is highly regulated, but you may want to have a look at Basel II which is kind of an international standard on how to create banking regulations. Your country/state may have considered this when creating its own local regulation; the United States do."}
{"id": "71293", "text": "Thanks, at the moment I don't plan to do alot of trading just need to sell a few shares at the moment and might sell some more more at another point, but other than that I don't plan on touching the stock and just plan on letting it re-invest itself. Since I don't plan on doing alot of selling I don't know how much I need to worry about fee's as long as they aren't too steep."}
{"id": "71299", "text": "As your question appears in the second half, so will my answer.  Like you, I will provide some background.  I remember buying gasoline for $1.759 per gallon.  I am so old that I remember buying gasoline for $0.759 per gallon.  I recently paid $2.759 per gallon.  You claim that your  relative is not getting a very good return.  Some would suggest that, at $2.759 per gallon, I am not getting a very good price on gasoline.  Rates, yields, returns and the price of gas are not what they once were.  It is actually difficult to get a pretty bad return relative to the current market.  I suspect your relative is no longer getting what he used to get but he is getting a fair return. About record keeping.  Your Uncle Sam benefits at your expense when you keep poor records.  There are substantial penalties for failing to report everything.  Most high school graduates can manage one checking account, one savings account, several charge cards and about 20 CDs and stocks at different institutions with little more than the following:  a) a wall calendar b) a shoe box and c) a stack of 3 by 5 cards.  Don't misplace the shoe box.  If you can use a spreadsheet, it is even easier.  Backup your data. There are a several reasons why you shouldn't consolidate all his cash and put it in a single mutual fund account and then put together a mix of investments that work well for him.  - you are doing it backwards 1st put together a mix of investments that work well for him 2nd consolidate the assets.  Your phrasing suggests a general lack of understanding  - most CDs have penalties for early withdrawal.   - while you enjoy managing your 401K in a single online account, your older relative might not be as comfortable with a lack of paper statements (see shoe box above)  Let me tell you a little about my 401K.  x% blue chip, y% small cap, z% bonds, w% foreign stock.  Once a quarter, I change my current contribution to re-balance current value towards my target percentages.  Every 30 months or so, I consider changing my asset allocation.  The allocation considers my age, my spouses age, our childrens ages, my risk tolerance and my intermediate view of the markets.  Your mileage my vary. to recap"}
{"id": "71399", "text": "One way I heard of, from a friend who ran a similar fund as yours, is to calculate $days of investment and divide the investment as accordingly.  For example, If I invested 10$ for 10 days and you have invested 20$ for 5 days. At the end of the 10th day my $day = 10*10=100, while your $day=20*5=100. If the investement has grown to 100$, the I should get $100/(100+100)*100=$50, you also should get the same. This I guess is equitable, you could try dividing the corpus with above method. It consideres the amount invested as well as the time invested for. I think by the above method, you could also handle the inbetween withdrawals."}
{"id": "71511", "text": "\"You have to be the owner of record before the ex-dividend date, which is not the same day as the date the dividend is paid. This also implies that if you sell on or after the ex-dividend date, you'll still get the dividend, even if you no longer own the stock.  Keep in mind, also, that the quoted price of the stock (and on any open orders that are not specifically marked as \"\"do not reduce\"\") on its ex-dividend date is dropped by the amount of the dividend, first thing in the morning before trading starts. If you happen to be the first order of the day, before market forces cause the price to move, you'll end up with zero gain, since the dividend is built into the price, and you got the same value out of it -- the dividend in cash, and the remaining value in stock. As pointed out in the comments (Thanks @Brick), you'll still get a market price for your trade, but the price reduction will have had some impact on the first trade of the day. Source: NYSE Rule 118.30 Also, remember that the dividend yield is expressed in annualized terms. So a 3% yield can only be fully realized by receiving all of the dividend payments made by the company for the year. You can, of course, forget about individual companies and just look for dividends to create your own effective yield over time. But, see the final point... Finally, if you keep buying and selling just to play games with the dividends, you're going to pay far more in transaction fees than you will earn in dividends. And, depending on your individual circumstances, you may end up paying more in capital gains taxes.\""}
{"id": "71543", "text": "Sometimes hedging is used if you have a position and you feel the market is going against your position, so one would hedge that position in order to protect their capital and possible profits instead of closing the position and incurring capital gains tax. Personally if the market was going against a position I had open I would get out of that position and protect my capital/profits instead of using more capital to hedge against my position. I would rather take a profit and pay some capital gains tax than watch my profits turn into a loss or use up more capital to try and protect a bad position. Hedging can be useful in certain circumstances but I think if you feel the market is going against your position/s for the medium to long term you should just get out of your positions instead of hedging against them."}
{"id": "71552", "text": "Let P denote the amount of the investment, R the rate of return and I the rate of inflation.  For simplicity, assume that the payment p is made annually right after the return has been earned.  Thus, at the end if the year, the investment P has increased to P*(1+R) and p is returned as the annuity payment. If I = 0, the entire return can be paid out as the payment, and thus p = P*R. That is, at the end of the year, when the dust settles after the return P*R has been collected and paid out as the annuity payment, P is again available at the beginning of the next year to earn return at rate R. We have P*(1+R) - p = P If I > 0, then at the end of the year, after the dust settles, we cannot afford to have only P available as the investment for next year. Next year's payment must be p*(1+I) and so we need a larger investment since the rate of return is fixed.  How much larger?  Well, if the investment at the beginning of next year is P*(1+I), it will earn exactly enough additional money to pay out the increased payment for next year, and have enough left over to help towards future increases in payments. (Note  that we are assuming that R > I. If R < I, a perpetuity cannot be created.)  Thus, suppose that we choose p such that P*(1+R) - p = P*(1+I)   Multiplying this equation by (1+I), we have [P(1+I)]*(1+R) - [p*(1+I)] = P*(1+I)^2 In words, at the start of next year, the investment is P*(1+I) and the return less the increased payout of p*(1+I) leaves an investment of P*(1+I)^2 for the following year.  Each year, the payment and the amount to be invested for the following year increase by a factor of (1+I). Solving P*(1+R) - p = P*(1+I) for p, we get  p = P*(R-I)  as the initial perpetuity payment and the payment increases by a factor (1+I) each year.  The initial investment is P and it also increases by a factor of (1+I) each year. In later years, the investment is P*(1+I)^n at the start of the year, the payment is p*(1+I)^n and the amount invested for the next year is P*(1+I)^{n+1}. This is the same result as obtained by the OP but written in terms that I can understand, that is, without the financial jargon about discount rates, gradients, PV, FV and the like."}
{"id": "71708", "text": "I looked at this a little more closely but the answer Victor provided is essentially correct.  The key to look at in the google finance graph is the red labled SMA(###d) would indicate the period units are d=days.  If you change the time axis of the graph it will shift to SMA(###m) for period in minutes or SMA(###w) for period in weeks.  Hope this clears things up!"}
{"id": "71816", "text": "But were they bad mortgages? At the time, real estate prices were going up. The thinking was if someone defaulted, they could just foreclose on the property and recoup their money. Is that deceptive? They bundled poorer mortgages with better rated mortgages to eliminate risk. The risk was all the debtors defaulting in a short period - which happened.  Again, no financial model forecasted the worst recession since the Great Depression. Not the top financial firms, not the Federal Reserve, not the Treasury. They were all wrong."}
{"id": "71873", "text": "You will lose out on your spread, you always pay a spread. Also, if you are looking at a strategy for using stop losses, try taking into account the support lines if you are going long. So, if the stock is on an upward trend but is dropping back from profit taking, your best best is to take a position closest to the next support line. You place your stop just below the support. this will give you the best chance of a winning position as most technical analysts will have looking towards the support as a buy back area. Obviously, in a bear market the opposite is true.  If you have taken your position and the market move past the first resistance line, then bring your stop to just below that line as once resistance is broken, it then becomes support. You then have a profitable position with profit locked in. Leave the position to break the next resistance and repeat."}
{"id": "71987", "text": "\"For anyone that's curious, I had a number of chats with Quickbooks who recommended I import only the relevant business transactions from my personal account & personal credit card in order to lower the tax liability. This way money \"\"paid\"\" from the business account to myself rightly shows up as a transfer and not as income. This means when generating a tax report, it calculates the correct rate of tax to be paid based on income minus allowable expenses, regardless which account they came from.\""}
{"id": "72026", "text": "Mortgage qualification is typically done based on pretax income. To keep the math easy, let's assume $10K/month gross.  A well written loan allows 28% or $2800 to be used for the mortgage and property tax. Property tax varies, but 1% is the average of the 2 states mentioned. This results in $7500/yr property or $625/mo tax leaving $2175/mo. Note here - OP stated $750K house.  $2175 will finance $450K at 4%/30 years. $2175 will finance $300K at 3.5% /15years. Let me pause here. Facts are most important to make these decisions. Unless you're clear on gross income, which may be higher, the constraints above quickly come into play.  Once the numbers are spelled out, you may find that you are qualified to only borrow $350K based on a 30 year note. Nathan's $2500 payment was correct, but for the mortgage only. Add property tax and you'd be at $3125. You'd need a gross $11,160/mo. to meet the 28% rule.  The above discussion would render any further thoughts (of mine) moot."}
{"id": "72054", "text": "\"Dividend-paying securities generally have predictable cash flows. A telecom, electric or gas utility is a great example. They collect a fairly predictable amount of money and sells goods at a fairly predictable or even regulated markup. It is easy for these companies to pay a consistent dividend since the business is \"\"sticky\"\" and insulated by cyclical factors. More cyclic investments like the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Gold, etc are more exposed to the crests and troughs of the economy. They swing with the economy, although not always on the same cycle. The DJIA is a basket of 30 large industrial stocks. Gold is a commodity that spikes when people are faced with uncertainty. The \"\"Alpha\"\" and \"\"Beta\"\" of a stock will give you some idea of the general behavior of a stock against the entire market, when the market is trending up and down respectively.\""}
{"id": "72289", "text": "Correct. By putting expenses on to a credit card which does not charge interest during the grace period, and paying that balance every month, in effect you earn interest on money you've already spent. However, first, savings account interest is something like .05% right now depending on your bank. Yeah it's money, but seriously, that's 4 cents per month on $1000.  Second, two things can make this very wrong. If you carry a balance, you'll pay much more in interest than you'd get from practically any investment you could make with the cash in the meantime. Second, a debit card can be used to get cash you already have from an ATM (not everyone takes credit, you know), and it'll cost you little or nothing. Use a credit card for the same purpose and you're paying 40% from the second the money comes out of the machine. Also correct. Rewards cards earn you more the more they're used. That's because the card issuer makes money based on usage; they get 3% of each transaction. They're happy to turn 1% of that, up to a limit or subject to a spending floor, back around to you. Again, check the terms and conditions. Most cards have a limit on total rewards. Many of them also have fees, either while you hold the card or when you try to redeem the rewards. Look for a card with high limits or no limits on rewards from spending, and with no annual fee or reward redemption fee. In addition to the above, you build good credit history with good spending patterns. However, your credit score can fluctuate wildly, because on one day you have very low leverage (percent of credit limit used), and on the next you've bought $200 in groceries and so your leverage went up 20% on a card with a $1000 limit. Leverage under 10% is good, leverage under 40% is OK and leverage over that starts looking bad. With a $1000 limit, with you maxing it out and then paying it off, your credit score can fluctuate by 30 points on any given day."}
{"id": "72315", "text": "\"Me: \"\"they pay it as regular income **rather than LTCG**\"\"  You: \"\"There's no LTCG tax on Roth accounts.\"\"  Me: \"\"they pay it **as regular income** rather than LTCG\"\"  You: \"\"You're only taxed once on the money\"\"  Me: \"\"**they pay it as regular income rather than LTCG**\"\"  You: \"\"The main advantage of 401ks is that you don't ever pay capital gains tax.\"\"  Congrats, you managed to say **exactly** what I did, with at least two completely irrelevant asides (I never mentioned Roth *or* taxable funds - Though what I said *does* also apply to Roth, despite your increasingly curious protestations).  But please, keep digging...\""}
{"id": "72372", "text": "Stock values are generally reflective of a company's overall potential; and to some extent investor confidence in the prospect of a continued growth of that potential. Sales over such a short period of time such as a single weekend do not noticeably impact a stock's valuation.  A stock's value has more to do with whether or not they meet market expectations for sales over a certain period of time (generally 1 quarter of a year) than it does that they actually had sales (or profits) on any given day. Of course, catastrophic events, major announcements, or new product releases do sometimes cause significant changes in a stock's value.  For this reason you will often see stocks have significant volatility in periods around earnings announcements, merger rumors, or when anything unexpected happens in the world that might benefit or hurt their potential sales and growth. But overall a normal, average weekend of sales is already built into the price of a stock during normal trading."}
{"id": "72391", "text": "As far as accounting  goes, if you speak with a CPA, you may be able to reduce the business tax liability.  So... the company buys the truck, deducts it, and the adjusted gross income drops, so he'd pay less tax.  Or something.  You said anything helps, hope you meant it!"}
{"id": "72984", "text": "What you need to do is register as a sole trader. This will automatically register you for self assessment so you don't have to do that separately. For a simple business like you describe that's it.  Completing your self assessment will take care of all your income tax and national insurance obligations (although as mentioned in your previous question there shouldn't be any NI to pay if you're only making \u00a3600 or so a year)."}
{"id": "73252", "text": "The FSA can only pay for expenses incurred after it was open.  This also applies in case of a mid-year change in election (such as due to marriage, divorce, child birth, etc.) For example, according to this page: You can only be reimbursed for qualifying expenses, from the election that was in place at the time the expense was incurred. So, say you had $500 available from January to June, then on July 1 had a qualifying event, you then elected $2000.  You can be reimbursed for up to $500 in expenses incurred prior to July 1, and then an additional $1500 in expenses incurred after (up to $2000 if you didn't use your full $500). More specifically, from the IRS Publication: Generally, distributions from a health FSA must be paid    only to reimburse you for qualified medical expenses you    incurred during the period of coverage. -- The HSA question is more complicated. I would talk to a tax accountant, or at minimum your benefits coordinator.  Also read the publication I linked above, the first part is about HSAs.  The short answer to your specific question: stop contributing to the HSA, unless you were contributing well under the limit of the HSA.  If you know your limit, and you know you're under it, you can continue contributing until April 15 of next year: If you fail to be an eligible individual during    2013, you can still make contributions, up until April 15,    2014, for the months you were an eligible individual. The general rule is you can contribute up to (1/12)*(your limit)*(number of months you were eligible).  So, if you changed jobs Oct 1, and you're single, then you could contribute (3250)*(1/12)*(9), or just over $2400 in total for the year.  If you've contributed less than that to date, you may continue contributing up to that amount - but again, contact your benefits coordinator or preferably a tax accountant, as the rules can be complicated. You definitely cannot deduct any expenses from the account that you incur after you are no longer eligible, and the rules on distributions are pretty complicated - and if you get it wrong, you may owe a 10% penalty on top of the tax you would normally owe, so there is significant incentive not to get it wrong."}
{"id": "73256", "text": "I would expect that your position will be liquidated when the option expires, but not before. There's probably still some time value so it doesn't make sense for the buyer to exercise the option early and take your stock. Instead they could sell the option to someone else and collect the remaining time value. Occasionally there's a weird situation for whatever reason, where an option has near-zero or negative time value, and then you might get an early exercise. But in general if there's time value someone would want to sell rather than exercise. If the option hasn't expired, maybe the stock will even fall again and you'll keep it. If the option just expired, maybe the exercise just hasn't been processed yet, it may take overnight or so."}
{"id": "73344", "text": "\"Unless your 401(k) plan is particularly good (i.e. good fund choices with low fees), you probably want to contribute enough to get the maximum match from your employer, then contribute to an IRA through a low-cost brokerage like Vanguard or Fidelity, then contribute more to your 401(k). As JoeTaxpayer said, contributions to a Roth IRA can be withdrawn tax- and penalty-free, so they are useful for early retirement. But certainly use your 401(k) as well--the tax benefits almost certainly outweigh the difficulty in accessing your money. JB King's link listing ways to access retirement money before the traditional age is fairly exhaustive. One of the main ways you may want to consider that hasn't been highlighted yet is IRS section 72(t) i.e. substantially equal periodic payments (SEPP). With this rule you can withdraw early from retirement plans without penalties. You have a few different ways of calculating the withdrawal amount. The main risk is you have to keep withdrawing that amount for the greater of five years or until you reach age 59\u00bd. In your case this is is only 4-5 years, which isn't too bad. Finally, in addition to being able to withdraw from a Roth IRA tax- and penalty-free, you can do the same for Roth conversions, provided 5 years have passed. So after you leave a job, you can rollover 401(k) money to a traditional IRA, then convert to a Roth IRA (the caveat being you have to pay taxes on the amount as income at this point). But after 5 years you can access the money without penalty, and no taxes since they've already been paid. This is commonly called a \"\"Roth conversion ladder\"\".\""}
{"id": "73505", "text": "Ask your bank or credit union. Mine will let me issue recurring payments to anyone, electronically if they can, if not a check gets mailed and (I presume) I get billed for the postage."}
{"id": "73723", "text": "I will answer my own question. After calling my broker, they explained me this:"}
{"id": "74054", "text": "ok fuck it then, you'd rather discuss how to pass the CFA five times a week? enjoy!  by the way - if you're going to be so condescending with your information - at least be correct when doing so. Ireland and Greece have both taken on debt to support failing banks - whether or not they did before the crisis, and whether or not it is only a small  % of total deficit, is irrelevant to his question. this is the entire reason direct recapitalizing has been implemented with ESF - to prevent further deterioration of country balance sheets"}
{"id": "74248", "text": "To start with gold has value because it is scarce, durable, attractive and can be made into jewellery. But that does not explain its current value. In the current economic climate, it is difficult for many investors to get a positive return on conventional investments such as equities or bonds. I theorise that, in such conditions, investors decide to park their money in gold simply because there are few other good options. This in itself drives the price of gold up, making it a better investment and causing a speculative boom. As you will see here, here, and here the gold price is negatively correlated with stock market indices."}
{"id": "74266", "text": "The value does change from 12.61% to 13.48%. The difference between re-investing cashflows at 14% vs 12% is not big enough to change the rounded value. Edit: The initial cashflow is discounted at t0, meaning it's already equal to its present value and the finance rate doesn't have an effect. It does impact future outgoing cashflows, as you've noted."}
{"id": "74369", "text": "\"JoeTaxpayer's answer adequately explained leverage and some of your risks.   Your risks also include: The firm's risk is that you will figure out a way to leave them with a negative account that contributes to another customer's profit and yet you disappear in a way that makes the negative account impossible to collect. Another risk is that you are not who you say you are, or that the money you invest is not yours.  These are called \"\"know your customer\"\" risks.\""}
{"id": "74517", "text": "The home owner will knock 20% off the price of the house. If the house is worth $297K, then 20% is just a discount your landlord is offering.  So your actual purchase price is $237K, and therefore a bank would have to lend you $237K. Since the house is worth more than the loan, you have equity.  20% to be more accurate.  Another way to say is, the bank only wants to loan you 80% of the value of the item securing the loan. If you default on day one, they can sell the house to somebody else for $296K and get a 20% return on their loan. So this 20% you are worried about isn't actually money that anybody gives anybody else, it is just a concept."}
{"id": "74660", "text": "Uh - yeah, and free land. Trust me. If Bezos said that he would build in Houston, or Memphis - the cities in question would immediately sign over the deed to hundreds of acres of land at no charge.    Walmart does the same shit when the open distribution centers."}
{"id": "74688", "text": "\"A.1 and B.1 are properly balanced, but \"\"Business Expense\"\" is an expense, not an asset. The T entries should be timestamped.  The time should be equal to the time on the credit card receipts.  This will make audit and balancing easier. A or B can be used, but if the the business is to be reimbursed for personal expenses, the accounts should be renamed to reflect that fact. More explicit account names could be \"\"Business expense - stationary\"\" and \"\"Personal expense - lunch\"\" or even better \"\"Personal expense - cammil - lunch\"\".  With a consistent format, the account names can be computer parsed for higher resolution and organization, but when tallying these high resolution accounts, debits & credits should always be used. When it comes time to collect from employees, only accounts with \"\"Personal expense\"\" need be referenced.  When it comes time to collect from \"\"cammil\"\", only net accounts of \"\"Personal expense - cammil\"\" need be referenced. An example of higher resolution, to determine what \"\"cammil\"\" owes, would be to copy the main books, reverse any account beginning with \"\"Personal expense - cammil\"\", and then take the balance.  Using the entries in the question as an example, here's the account to determine \"\"cammil\"\"'s balance: Now, after all such balancing entries are performed, the net credit \"\"Personal expense - cammil\"\" is what \"\"cammil\"\" owes to the business. The scheme for account names should be from left to right, general to specific.\""}
{"id": "74801", "text": "What are you babbling about? He's saying that buybacks are essentialy a return of capital, which is what they are. Only to go one with arguments that do not debunk and are heavily intertwined with personal beliefs and subjectivism doesn't nothing to change this."}
{"id": "74975", "text": "Banking, transactions carried on by any individual or firm engaged in providing financial services to consumers, businesses, or government enterprises. In the broadest sense, banking consists of safeguarding and transfer of funds, leading or facilitating loans, guaranteeing creditworthiness, and exchange of money. These services are provided by such institutions as commercial banks, savings banks, trust companies, finance companies, and merchant banks or other institutions engaged in investment banking. A narrower and more common definition of banking is the acceptance, transfer, and, most important, creation of deposits. This includes such depository institutions as commercial banks, savings and loan associations (more common in the United States), building societies, and mutual savings banks. All countries subject banking to government regulation and supervision, normally implemented by central banking authorities. For further information on central banks and investment banking, see the relevant articles."}
{"id": "75005", "text": "If you and your wife are owners, your tickets might be a business expense against the rental income. 'Might' as in the IRS will be happy to audit you, seeing the kids went as well and prorating the expense as say 25% was really business, the rest, family vacation.  If this $4000 write off is the make or break for this deal, don't do it."}
{"id": "75024", "text": "Assuming that you have capital gains, you can expect to have to pay taxes on them. It might be short term, or long term capital gains. If you specify exactly which shares to sell, it is possible to sell mostly losers, thus reducing or eliminating capital gains.  There are separate rules for 401K and other retirement programs regarding down payments for a house. This leads to many other issues such as the hit your retirement will take."}
{"id": "75195", "text": "I have a very similar situation doing side IT projects.  I set up an LLC for the business, created a separate bank account, and track things separately.  I then pay myself from the LLC bank account based on my hours for the consulting job.  (I keep a percentage in the LLC account to pay for expenses.)  I used to do my taxes myself, but when I created this arrangement, I started having an accountant do them.  An LLC will not affect your tax status, but it will protect you from liability and make things more accountable come tax time."}
{"id": "75476", "text": "I am not going to discuss legality, because with family members you are able to give a lot of guidance and assistance without running into legal issues.  The biggest problem is that when they transfer the funds to you and you invest the money, all the tax rates and tax limits are determined by your situation; plus you have more investments than you should have so you hit those limits and brackets quicker. For example: In the United states a person can put $5,500 or $6,500 into a IRA or Roth IRA each year. If you combine the funds for three with your funds then you are giving up three quarters of the amount that you can invest in that type of account. The decision regarding Roth or not depends on age and income level. But now their decision is related to what is best based on your situation. The ability to even deduct IRA deposits would be based on your situation. Of course for taxable accounts the tax rate is determined by your income, not theirs. If they want you to have the ability to make investment decisions for them, then power of attorney is the way to go. The money is deposited in their name, and all the rules and tax rates are determined by their situation. You make sure they have all the information they need to login and review the accounts, but you make the all the moves within and between accounts."}
{"id": "75522", "text": "\"Imagine two restaurants. One has prices 15% higher than the other, and the owner pays this 15% to his wait staff in the form of higher wages. The other has lower prices, but the average customer gifts 15% to their waiter. Clearly, in the first restaurant, the 15% the wait staff receives is taxable income. It is traditional salary. What legitimate, economic justification is their for treating the second restaurant any differently? Imagine a grocery store in a small town that offered long-time customers a \"\"pay nothing\"\" option but made it clear that they'd be subject to social ostracism and no longer welcome in the store if they didn't gift 85% of the usual cost of the items. The customers would save on sales tax and the grocer would argue that all that money was gifts, not income. Of course this doesn't work. The IRS, and the laws, don't care very much about what you call things. They care about the underlying economic reality. If the money was part of the payment for the services rendered, regardless of how it was delivered, what the parties called it, or whether the obligation to pay was legal or social, it's still a payment for the service and it's still taxable. You would have to be able to argue to the IRS that it really was a gift and wasn't any form of payment for the service received. Otherwise, it's just a scheme to evade taxes.\""}
{"id": "75686", "text": "Are there any other losses that can be expected beyond the above? The lender may have to invest some money into the house in order to get it in shape to sell. Also, while the lender possesses the house they are liable to the property taxes and possibly utilities. are there any statutes or pressures to motivate the financial institution to get fair price when the property is sold? The lender is motivated to at least break even when selling the property in order to limit losses on their investment. This means they are very motivated to seek a higher price, but they're also motivated to sell the property quickly in order to limit their losses due to property taxes. Usually the lender takes a loss of the investment if foreclosure occurs; only 10 percent to 20 percent  of auctioned foreclosed houses did yield a surplus. When the lender sells the foreclosed property using a realtor, they're motivated to sell it as quickly as possible so long as they break even. In this case there is little motivation to sell the property for a surplus. If the property is being sold via auction, then time is not a factor and the lender will just sell to the highest bidder."}
{"id": "75754", "text": "She seems to be paying an inordinate amount of money for car payments. $850/month is just too high. She may be able to get by on public transit, depending on where she lives, but if not, she needs to look at selling her car and picking up a cheap second-hand vehicle. Public transit would probably save her $750/month. Going to a cheaper car should still save her $300 - $400/month. Next, phone and cable. These are certainly nice, but they are rarely necessities. I do not have cable t.v., for example. I do have a cell phone, and I do have Internet (a requirement of my job), but no cable t.v. She may be able to save some money there. My guess is that she could save $125/month here, though I may be biased on how much it costs to heat a Canadian home in our cold, cold winters. And, of course, the college payment. $900 - $1000 a month? I understand that she is paying this so that your sister can attend college. That's very nice, but it certainly sounds like your mother cannot afford that. On the other hand, if this is repayment of college expenses already incurred, there may be no choice here. Rent, at $1625/month. I have no idea what that gets you in NJ, but perhaps she could rent out a room. It's not inconceivable that she could bring in $1000/month from doing so, though obviously that's going to very much depend on the real estate/rental market where you live. Alternatively, she could move out and move in with someone else and that should certainly get her share of the rent down to $800 - $1000/month or thereabouts, and most likely cut her utility bills, also. I've identified a number of places where she can save money. No doubt, the budget is tight, but I think she's spending on far more than just bare essentials. One thing that concerns me here is that she appears to have no emergency funds and very little for entertainment, other than cable t.v. If at all possible, she needs to cut her budget down so that she is not living paycheque to paycheque and has money to cover, for example, emergency car repairs. And I'd really like to see her have more than $50/month for expenses (which I'm guessing is entertainment). It may not be possible, of course, but I would most definitely say she should not be paying for your sister's college if this places her in such dire financial risk. Easier said than done, of course. Most certainly, I would not even consider cutting the health insurance, by the way. Another approach would be to look at how her expenses will go down when your sister is done school and perhaps cleared up other expenses. It may be worth borrowing from family and friends, knowing that in a year, her expenses will go down $500/month. That makes her budget manageable. Additionally, the debt repayment presumably will finish at some point. The point I'm trying to make is that, in a year, her budget will be just about manageable, and she may be able to get there with smaller trims in the immediate future."}
{"id": "75884", "text": "I remember like 20 years ago someone did an experiment where Peter Lynch, elementary school kids, and an ape, all picked stocks in a situation similar to this. The result was almost the same, with the elementary school kids coming out slightly better  Picking correct stocks is a craps shoot, as the market is an emotional entity, and in the short run, even educated guesses don't give an edge. People like Peter Lynch eventually win of course because of discipline, long term goals, and knowledge of tools like derivatives"}
{"id": "76049", "text": "The cost of an extra 30 days is $1459.80"}
{"id": "76257", "text": "I live in one of the highest cost of living areas in my country.  For the cost of less than half the down payment my spouse and I have saved up for a house we could easily buy a home in most of the lower cost of living areas (and several homes in, say, Detroit). As for the rest of your question, though, we've chosen not to live that way.  Because, like all high cost of living areas, ours is near a city there are more free and inexpensive things to do than you would think at first.  While others in our area think a great time is pre-gaming drinks at a nice bar, an expensive restaurant, then some more drinks we've taught ourselves how to make great meals from scratch using sale and inexpensive ingredients from the grocery store and often do that on weekends, topped off by a movie from the redbox that we promptly return the next day.  We have chosen friends who will hang out with us over potluck dinners and board games instead of out on the town.  On weekend days we visit free museums, do hikes, wander around revitalized downtown strips, or play at the local parks.  Our groceries, as I mentioned, are sale items or use coupons and we go for less expensive meats and produce.  We visit our local farmer's market for fun, not to buy the expensive produce.  We might find ourselves wandering through the mall to window shop, but when it comes time to actually buy clothing or goods for the apartment we shop around for up to months to find a good deal. Plenty of our friends have money enough to spend, and the most debt they are usually wallowing in is a big car payment, no consumer debt.  At the same time I have trouble imagining some of them buying a house any time soon, because they simply can't be saving all that much (since I know their incomes).  They may eventually be able to afford a condo and ride rising housing prices to a townhome and then a house - it's what lots of people do around here, loosing buckets money in realtor fees and closing costs along the way.  Even with these choices, it's hard to view my friends as selfish knowing that most of them give around 10% of their income to charity. There are probably plenty of people around here swimming in debt (somebody recently asked in a Q&A with the local paper editors how she could stop going to the city's most expensive restaurants and start living within her means when she only liked expensive places), but lots of folks can stretch themselves and afford to get by while wasting a lot of money.  It's not what my spouse and I have chosen to do, because we want to be able to live very responsibly and plan for a rainy day, but the longer you live with and around the money that tends to permeate high cost of living areas, the more it will seem normal to you. Also, if it's really $1000/mo for a 2 br. apartment, your cost of living is still lower than mine is. If I were you I wouldn't try to acclimate myself to the spendy habits of your surroundings.  Instead I'd find friends who are frugal and work on maintaining your good financial habits.  If you ever want one of those $4, $5, or $6K (plus!) houses, you're going to need them."}
{"id": "76283", "text": "House as investment is not a good idea. Besides the obvious calculations don't forget the property tax, home maintenance costs and time, insurance costs, etc. There are a lot of hidden drains on the investment value of the house; most especially the time that you have to invest in maintaining it. On the other hand, if you plan on staying in the area, having children, pets or like do home improvements, landscaping, gardening, auto repair, wood/metal shopping then a house might be useful to you. Also consider the housing market where you are. This gets a bit more difficult to calculate but if you have a high-demand rental market then the house might make sense as an investment if you can rent it out for more than your monthly cost (including all of those factors above). But being a landlord is not for everyone. Again more of your time invested into the house, you have to be prepared to go months without renting it, you may have to deal with crazy people that will totally trash your house and threaten you if you complain, and you may need to part with some of the rent to a management company if you need their skills or time. It sounds like you are just not that interested right now. That's fine. Don't rush. Invest your money some other way (i.e.: the stock market). More than likely when you are ready for a house, or to bail your family out of trouble (if that's what you choose to do), you'll have even more assets to do either with."}
{"id": "76285", "text": "You will need to buy a stock before the ex-dividend date to receive the dividends. You can sell a stock on the ex-dividend date or after and you will receive the dividends. So if the ex-dividend date is the 5th August, you need to buy before the 5th and you can sell on the 5th or after, to receive the dividends. Definitions from the ASX: Record date The Record Date is 5.00pm on the date a company closes its share   register to determine which shareholders are entitled to receive   the current dividend.  It is the date where all changes to   registration details must be finalised.   Ex dividend date The ex dividend date occurs two business days before the company's   Record Date. To be entitled to a dividend a shareholder must have   purchased the shares before the ex dividend date. If you purchase   shares on or after that date, the previous owner of the shares (and   not you) is entitled to the dividend. A company's share price may move up as the ex dividend date approaches   and then fall after the ex dividend date."}
{"id": "76414", "text": "As someone in the very same position as you here is what I suggest: Have $1,000 for each possible large expense you currently have. For example, house, car, pregnant wife, etc. As someone who only has a car (living at home still) I only have $1,000 in my eFund (emergency fund). The ABSOLUTE rest of my money goes to paying off the loans as soon as possible. I mean ever single dollar. There is no point for investing unless you have a really good return on investment. I am not too sure how common returns of 6.8% are, but that seems above average. If in fact you're just stashing it in a bank account at ~1%, you're doing it wrong.  Getting out of debt is not only just about the financial benefits but the emotional benefits too. It feels really nice to not owe anybody anything.  Good luck man!    P.S. Try using a tracker like ReadytoZero to show how much you're losing a day by remaining in debt. This will better help you understand if your investments are making you money or losing your money."}
{"id": "76466", "text": "\"It looks like these types of companies have to disclose the health of their accounts to CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission). That is the gist I get at least from this article about the traders that lost money due to the Swiss removing the franc\u2019s cap against the euro. The article says about the U.S. retail FOREX brokerage: Most of FXCM\u2019s retail clients lost money in 2014, according to the company\u2019s disclosures mandated by the CFTC. The percentage of losing accounts climbed from 67 percent in the first and second quarters to 68 percent in the third quarter and 70 percent in the fourth quarter. Side note: The Swiss National Bank abandoned the cap on the currency's value against the euro in mid-January 2015. But above paragraph provides data on FXCM\u2019s retail clients in 2014. It could consequently be concluded that, even without \"\"freak events\"\" (such as Switzerland removing the franc cap), it is more likely for an investor to NOT make a profit on the FOREX market. This is also in line with what \"\"sdfasdf\"\" and \"\"Dario Fumagalli\"\" say in their answers.\""}
{"id": "76486", "text": "I am not a lawyer.  I do however own an LLC. It's setup as a partnership with 50/50 ownership.  You can do it as a sole proprietorship.    In basic terms, if you separate your money and assets from the money and assets of the company then you are personally immune from lawsuit and thus your personal assets are safe.  You have to set it up right (fairly cheap) and keep the records right (ie never mix personal and company assets ) but it provides a nice legal buffer and in some cases tax benefits.    Do not construe this as legal or accountanting advice.  Speak with pros to understand and get it set up right.  But it's worth it."}
{"id": "76556", "text": "Stuff I wish I had known, based on having done the following: Obtained employment at a startup that grants Incentive Stock Options (ISOs);  Early-exercised a portion of my options when fair market value was very close to my strike price to minimize AMT; made a section 83b) election and paid my AMT up front for that tax year. All this (the exercise and the AMT) was done out of pocket. I've never see EquityZen or Equidate mention anything about loans for your exercise. My understanding is they help you sell your shares once you actually own them. Stayed at said startup long enough to have my exercised portion of these ISOs vest and count as long term capital gains;  Tried to sell them on both EquityZen and Equidate with no success, due to not meeting their transaction minimums.  Initial contact with EquityZen was very friendly and helpful, and I even got a notice about a potential sale, but then they hired an intern to answer emails and I remember his responses being particularly dismissive, as if I was wasting their time by trying to sell such a small amount of stock. So that didn't go anywhere. Equidate was a little more friendly and was open to the option of pooling shares with other employees to make a sale in order to meet their minimum, but that never happened either.  My advice, if you're thinking about exercising and you're worried about liquidity on the secondary markets, would be to find out what the minimums would be for your specific company on these platforms before you plunk any cash down. Eventually brought my request for liquidity back to the company who helped connect me with an interested external buyer, and we completed the transaction that way. As for employer approval - there's really no reason or basis that your company wouldn't allow it (if you paid to exercise then the shares are yours to sell, though the company may have a right of first refusal). It's not really in the company's best interest to have their shares be illiquid on the secondary markets, since that sends a bad signal to potential investors and future employees."}
{"id": "76695", "text": "I don't have any experience in this, but this is my academic understanding of business pricing.  The LOWEST amount a seller would accept is the liquidation value. For a B&B, what would the value of the land, the house, the furnishings, accounts payable, etc. be if it had to be sold today, minus any liabilities.  The amount the seller would like to pay for is going to be a multiple of its annual earnings. One example of this is the discounted cash flow analysis. You determine the EBITDA, the earnings a company generated, before interest,  depreciation, taxation and amortization.  Once you have this amount, you can project it out in perpetuity, or you use an industry multiplier.  Perpetuity:  You project this value out in perpituity, discounted by the going interest rate. In other words, if you project the business will earn $100,000/year, the business should grow at a 5% rate, and the going interest rate is 8%. Using a growing perpetuity formula, one value of a business would be: 100,000 / (.08 - .03) = $2,000,000.  This is a very high number, and the seller would love to get it.  It's more common to do a multiple of the EBIDTA. You can do some research into the valuation of the particular industry to figure out the EBIDTA multiplier for the industry. For example, this article suggests that the 2011 EBITDA multiplier for hospitality industries is 13.8. (It's valuing large hotel chains, but it's a start). So the value of this B&B would be around $1,380,000. Here is an online SME valuation tool to help with the EBIDTA multiple based valuation. Also, from my research, it looks like many small business use Seller Discretionary Earnings  (SDE) instead of EBITDA. I don't know much about it, but it seems to serve a similar purpose as EBITDA.  A potential buyer should request the financial statements of the business for the last few years to determine the value of the business, and then can negotiate with the owner a price. You would probably want to enlist a broker to help you with the transaction."}
{"id": "76738", "text": "From a wealth management perspective, almost every one of my clients that owns a business has it in some sort of trust. Mostly for estate planning purposes. So it wouldn't surprise me if that's what he was talking about.  But I would straight up just ask to clarify. Can't hurt to ask, and I'd love to hear what he meant."}
{"id": "76954", "text": "\"After looking at the comments, and your replies it seems that your mind is made up: \"\"You will always be able to obtain 0% credit, and nothing bad will ever happen\"\". Credit cards that offer 0% on balance transfers are very rare.  Most have a transfer fee of some kind, which acts like an interest rate.  This is a change that probably happened 10 years ago without much fanfare.  From this you can draw a lesson: what changes will come in the future? This site and others a full of \"\"tales of woe\"\" where people were playing musical chairs with credit, and when the music stopped, there was no chairs in sight.  Job loss, medical expenses, unexpected taxes, natural disasters can all effect one's ability to make payments on time and happen.  Once payments start being missed or are late, things tend to avalanche from there.  It has happened to me, and loved ones. The pain and suffering is not worth it.  Get out of debt. You claim that you are investing the money instead of paying on the debt, and you are making the delta between your prevailing investment rate 7%.  Did you include the balance transfer fee in your calculations?    First off your investments could lose money.  While 2015 was mostly flat, we have not had a correction in a long time.  Some say we are long overdue.   Secondly, how much money are we really talking about here?  Say there is not a balance transfer fee, you could be guaranteed 7%, and you are floating $10K.  Congratulations in this mythical scenario you just made $700. If $700 changes your life dramatically perhaps it is time for a second job.  This way you can earn that every two weeks (working part time) rather than every year.  Now that will really change your life.  By applying this amount of mental energy to make $700, what opportunities are you missing?   Pay off the debt, you will be much better off in the long run.\""}
{"id": "76996", "text": "\"If the OP is saving 33% if his/her current income, he/she doesn't want or need yet more income from investments right now. The advice on \"\"diversifying\"\" in the other answers is the standard \"\"investment advisor\"\" response to beginner's questions, and has two advantages for the advisor: (1) they won't get sued for giving bad advice and (2) they can make a nice fat commission selling you some very-average-performance products (and note they are selling you \"\"investment industry products,\"\" not necessarily \"\"good investment opportunities\"\" - advisors get paid commission and bonuses for selling more stuff, not for selling good stuff).  My advice would be to drip-feed some of your excess income into the emerging market sector (maybe 1/3 or 1/4 of the excess), with the intention of leaving it there untouched for up to 20 or 30 years, if need be. At some unknown future time, it is almost certain there will be another EM \"\"boom,\"\" if only because people have short memories. When that happens, sell up, take your profits, and do something less risky with them.  You might consider putting another slice of your excess income into the commodities sector. I don't know when the oil price will be back at $150 or $200 a barrel, but I would be happy to bet it will happen sometime in the OP's lifetime... Since you apparently have plenty of income and are relatively young, that is the ideal time to adopt a risky investment strategy. Even if you lose your entire investment over the next 5 years, you still have another 20 years to recover from that disaster. If you were starting to invest at age 56 rather than 26, the risk/reward situation would be very different, of course.\""}
{"id": "77044", "text": "There are different options here.  Either way, ensure that you have a paper trail of all your payments. When in doubt, speak to a lawyer, there are many who offer free consultations."}
{"id": "77052", "text": "Your rate of return for paying off this loan is 9%, and that's guaranteed. For reference, the best rate of return on a 10-year FDIC-insured certificate of deposit today is 3%. There's definitely something out there with better returns than paying off your loans, but there's definitely not going to be anything with better risk-adjusted returns than paying off your loans. Investors dream of guaranteed 9% rates of return. If you had something that could provide a guaranteed 9% rate of return, wannabe investors would be lining up at your door and tripping over each other to outbid each other until it actually closer to a 3% rate of return. :P (Postscript. Depending on whether your loans are tax-deductible and what your inflation expectations are, you could adjust those rates to make the comparison more accurate. But at 3% vs 9% the picture's pretty clear.)"}
{"id": "77212", "text": "\"To be able to truly short something you technically need to be able to borrow the security so you can sell it.  There needs to be a system for borrowing in place to be able to do this which is very robust for large U.S. stocks but doesn't exist for CDOs mainly due to the complex legal structures around them.   However, the word \"\"short\"\" is commonly used in finance to mean profiting from a loss of value of something.  So the use in the movie title, though a bit confusing, was fine. Credit Default Swaps are not technically insurance as you don't need own the thing you are \"\"insuring\"\" (and for a few other reasons).  However, I agree with the movie that thinking of them as insurance is a pretty good way to understand them.  As you are playing a monthly premium to for a contract that pays out when something goes very wrong.   However, the movie was a little fast a loose as CDS of various types were regularly traded well before the bubble even started.  Though maybe not that particular type of CDS.  So while they may have been \"\"expensive\"\" it was the easiest route and reasonable idea.\""}
{"id": "77248", "text": "\"You are right on track with your idea of setting up a separate account for invoiced income. Create a new account with the type other asset and call it \"\"Receivables\"\" (or something similar). Every time you invoice a client, enter a credit to this account with the amount of the invoice. Once the client pays and you deposit a check, enter a transfer from the \"\"Receivables\"\" account to the bank account. EDIT I overlooked that you wish to account for not-yet-invoiced income. I think that's a bad idea. It will become confusing and will give you the false sense that your financial condition is better than it really is. There are plenty of stories about businesses that have stellar sales, but fail because of lack of cash flow (the business' bills become due before it gets paid by its own customers).\""}
{"id": "77488", "text": "If the firm treats you as an employee then they are treated as having a place of business in the UK and therefore are obliged to operate PAYE on your behalf - this rule has applied to EU States since 2010 and the non-EU EEA members, including Switzerland, since 2012. If you are not an employee then your main options are: An umbrella company would basically bill the client on your behalf and pay you net of taxes and NI.  You potentially take home a bit less than you would being 100% independent but it's a lot less hassle and potentially makes sense for a small contract."}
{"id": "77573", "text": "The key word you forgot to include from Slide 29 is: Free-Riding Investopedia defines free-riding as: In the context of a brokerage firm, a free rider problem refers to a situation where a client has been allowed to purchase shares without actually paying for them, and then subsequently sells the shares (ideally for profit). The problem with this scenario is that the client, if allowed to free ride, can profit from a stock trade without actually using any of his or her own capital. This is illegal. I have not heard of any issues with this type of action being a problem with trading accounts in Australia, nor have I been able to find any such rules on the ASX website or any of by brokers websites. So I think this may be an issue in the USA but not Australia. You should check the rules in any other countries you wish to trade in."}
{"id": "78053", "text": "\"Joke warning: These days, it seems that rogue trading programs are the big market makers (this concludes the joke) Historically, exchange members were market makers. One or more members guaranteed a market in a particular stock, and would buy whatever you wanted to sell (or vice-versa). In a balanced market -- one where there were an equal number of buyers and sellers -- the spread was indeed profit for them. To make this work, market makers need an enormous amount of liquidity (ability to hold an inventory of stocks) to deal with temporary imbalances. And a day like October 29, 1929, can make that liquidity evaporate. I say \"\"historically,\"\" because I don't think that any stock market works this way today (I was discussing this very topic with a colleague last week, went to Wikipedia to look at the structure of the NYSE, and saw no mention of exchange members as market makers -- in fact, it appears that the NYSE is no longer a member-based exchange). Instead, today most (all?) trading happens on \"\"electronic crossing networks,\"\" where the spread is simply the difference between the highest bid and lowest ask. In a liquid stock, there will be hundreds if not thousands of orders clustered around the \"\"current\"\" price, usually diverging by fractions of a cent. In an illiquid stock, there may be a spread, but eventually one bid will move up or one ask will move down (or new bids will come in). You could claim that an entity with a large block of stock to move takes the role of market maker, but it doesn't have the same meaning as an exchange market maker. Since there's no entity between the bidder and asker, there's no profit in the spread, just a fee taken  by the ECN. Edit: I think you have a misconception of what the \"\"spread\"\" is. It's simply the difference between the highest bid and the lowest offer. At the instant a trade takes place, the spread is 0: the highest bid equals the lowest offer, and the bidder and seller exchange shares for money. As soon as that trade is completed, the spread re-appears. The only way that a trade happens is if buyer and seller agree on price. The traditional market maker is simply an entity that has the ability to buy or sell an effectively unlimited number of shares. However, if the market maker sets a price and there are no buyers, then no trade takes place. And if there's another entity willing to sell shares below the market maker's price, then the buyers will go to that entity unless the market's rules forbid it.\""}
{"id": "78224", "text": "Stock price is based on supply and demand. Unless the stock you are looking to buy usually has very low volume trading 100 shares isn't likely to have any effect on price. There are many companies that have millions or tens of millions of shares trade daily. For stocks like that 100 shares is barely a trivial percentage of the daily volume. For thinly traded stocks you can look at the bid and ask size but even that isn't likely to get you an exact answer. Unless you are trading large volumes your trade will have no effect on the price of shares."}
{"id": "78259", "text": "Are there particular, established businesses that provide these   services? Yes! There are many fee-based financial advisors that provide such services. These might help:  http://www.ricedelman.com/galleries/default-file/how-to-choose-financial-advisor.pdf http://www.ricedelman.com/cs/education/article?articleId=990#.Us7cyPRDt1Y"}
{"id": "78312", "text": "\"A **Synthetic CDO** is the devil incarnate.  From the CDS buyer (aka Insurance buyer's) point of view: if you want *protection* on some credit/debt-security/loan and **can't find a willing counterparty**, just get \"\"investors in a CDO\"\" to supply it, in small portions in mass!  The poor tranche buyers won't even be aware that their **\"\"tranche LOSS\"\"** constitutes final full default-recovery payment on the defaulted credit to the CDS buyer.   CDOs are making a come back (slowly but surely) b/c there's a lot of \"\"JUNK\"\" accumulated in the **\"\"Levered Loan/Mezzanine Market\"\"**. So industry finds it's favored vehicle to dispose of said junk, hiding behind two counterparties couched in different semantic cloaks: \"\"CDS BUYER\"\" on one side, and \"\"CDO INVESTOR\"\" on the other.  To boot, red-meat free-market publications like WSJ then say (asif) \"\"O, buyers are dying for yield, there's great demand\"\". LOL. This completely obfuscates fact that a humble cdo investor is **entering the INSURANCE BIZ** against some very dodgy \"\"assets\"\".  (would you insure stage IV cancer patients for $1mn at annual premium of, say $5000?)\""}
{"id": "78486", "text": "Given your clarifying points, it sounds like you are running both businesses as one combined business. As such, you should be able to get just a single HST number and use that. However, let me please urge you to contact a professional accountant and possibly a lawyer, as it is very unusual to be performing these services without a business license, and you may be exposing yourself to civil penalties and placing your personal assets (e.g. your house) at risk. Additionally, it may be beneficial for you to run these as businesses as you can likely write off (more of) your expenses."}
{"id": "78520", "text": "FI funds don't always drop in rising rate environments, and can outperform thanks to simple bond math and the way the indexes are built.  It's one of the places where it's very easy to argue in favour of some form of active management."}
{"id": "78713", "text": "I believe it.  Violin lessons - $5k/year Piano lessons - $5K/year Sports - $5k/year (or more) daycare/kindergarten - $10-20-?/year (depending on where you live) private school (or higher taxes if you want a decent public school) - ??? a lot...   and either one of the parents has to go part time and lose income,you you have to hire someone to help (just taking kids to all the lessons is a second job...)"}
{"id": "78769", "text": "The question is always one of whether people think they can reliably predict that the option will be a good bet. The closer you get to its expiration, the easier it is to make that guess and the less risk there is. That may either increase or decrease the value of the option."}
{"id": "78837", "text": "The value premium would state the opposite in fact if one looks at the work of Fama and French. The Investment Entertainment Pricing Theory (INEPT) shows a graph with the rates on small-cap/large-cap and growth/value combinations that may be of interest as well for another article noting the same research. Index fund advisors in Figure 9-1 shows various historical returns up to 2012 that may also be useful here for those wanting more detailed data. How to Beat the Benchmark is from 1998 that could be interesting to read about index funds and beating the index in a simpler way."}
{"id": "78842", "text": "If you're talking about an ETF trading on Arca, it's probably because of the opening auction: The match price is the price that maximizes the volume that can be executed within the Auction Collars. The Core Open Auction will use the match price closest to the closing price of the previous trading day (based on normal market hours) if more than one indicative match price is valid. The core opening auction doesn't really take the opening session activity into account, as you can see - the market runs an auction and whatever price clears the most volume, within certain limits, is the opening print."}
{"id": "78865", "text": "I have sold cars before to individuals and always just received cash.  I would think as long as the amount is less than $10,000.00 and the buyer is serious they will get there with the cash.  Of course there is no possible way to guarantee the cash will not be counterfeit."}
{"id": "79111", "text": "In the short term the market is a popularity contest In the short run which in value investing time can extend even to many years, an equity is subject to the vicissitudes of the whims by every scale of panic and elation. This can be seen by examining the daily chart of any large cap equity in the US.  Even such large holdings can be affected by any set of fear and greed in the market and in the subset of traders trading the equity. Quantitatively, this statement means that equities experience high variance in the short rurn. in the long term [the stock market] is a weighing machine In the long run which in value investing time can extend to even multiple decades, an equity is more or less subject only to the variance of the underlying value. This can be seen by examining the annual chart of even the smallest cap equities over decades.  An equity over such time periods is almost exclusively affected by its changes in value. Quantitatively, this statement means that equities experience low variance in the long run."}
{"id": "79363", "text": "Mathwise, I absolutely agree with the other answers.  No contest, you should keep getting the match.  But, just for completeness, I'll give a contrarian opinion that is generally not very popular, but does have some merit.   If you can focus on just one main financial goal at a time, and throw every extra dollar you have at that one focus (i.e., getting out of debt, in your case), you will make better progress than if you're trying to do too many things at once.  Also, there something incredibly freeing about being out of debt that has other beneficial impacts on your life. So, if you can bring a lot of focus to the credit card debt and get it paid off quickly, it may be worth deferring the 401(k) investing long enough to do that, even though it doesn't make as much mathematical sense.  (This is essentially what Dave Ramsey teaches, BTW.)"}
{"id": "79375", "text": "The presence of the 401K option means that your ability to contribute to an IRA will be limited, it doesn't matter if you contribute to the 401K or not. Unless your company allows you to roll over 401K money into an IRA while you are still an employee, your money in the 401K will remain there. Many 401K programs offer not just stock mutual funds, but bond mutual funds, and international funds. Many also have target date funds. You will have to look at the paperwork for the funds to determine if any of them meet your definition of low expense. Because any money you have in those 401K funds is going to remain in the 401K, you still need to look at your options and make the best choice. Very few companies allow employees to invest in individual stocks, but some do. You can ask your employer to research other options for the 401K. The are contracting with a investment company to make the plan. They may be able to switch to a different package from the same company or may need to switch companies. How much it will cost them is unknown. You will have to understand when their current contract is up for renewal.  If you feel their current plan is poor, it may be making hiring new employees difficult, or ti may lead to some employees to leave in search of better options. It may also be a factor in the number of employees contributing and how much they contribute."}
{"id": "79378", "text": "\"1) Don't buy a house as an investment. Buy a house because you've reached the point in your life where you don't expect to move in the next five years and you'd prefer to own a house (with its advantages/disadvantages) than to rent (with its advantages/disadvantages). Thinking of houses primarily as investments is what caused the housing bubble, crash, and Great Recession. 2) Before buying a house for cash, look at the available mortgage interest rates versus market rate of return. Owning the house outright is slightly lower stress, but using the house as the basis for a \"\"leveraged investment\"\" may be financially wiser. (I compromised; I paid 50% down and took a mortgage for the other 50%.) 3) 1 year is short-term. Your money doesn't belong in the market if you're going to need it in the short term. If you really intend to pull it back out that soon, I'd stick with CD/money-market kinds of instruments. 4) Remember that while a house is illiquid, it is possible to take out home equity loans... so money you put into a house isn't completely inaccessible. You just can't move elsewhere as easily.\""}
{"id": "79411", "text": "\"This is not an end-all answer but it'll get you started I have been through accounting courses in college as well as worked as a contractor (files as sole proprietor) for a few years but IANAA (I am not an accountant). Following @MasonWheeler's answer, if you're making that much money you should hire a bean counter to at least overlook your bookkeeping. What type of business? First, if you're the sole owner of the business you will most likely file as a sole proprietorship. If you don't have an official business entity, you should get it registered officially asap, and file under that name. The problem with sole proprietorships is liability. If you get sued, not only are your business' assets vulnerable but they can go after your personal assets too (including house/cars/etc). Legally, you and your business are considered one and the same. To avoid liability issues, you could setup a S corporation. Basically, the business is considered it's own entity and legal matters can only take as much as the business owns. You gain more protection but if you don't explicitly keep your business finances separate from your personal finances, you can get into a lot of trouble. Also, corporations generally pay out more in taxes. Technically, since the business is it's own entity you'll need to pay yourself a 'reasonable salary'. If you skip the salary and pay yourself the profits directly (ie evade being taxed on income/salary) the IRS will shut you down (that's one of the leading causes of corporations being shut down). You can also pay distribute bonuses on top of that but it would be wise to burn the words 'within reason' into your memory first. The tax man gets mad if you short him on payroll taxes.  S corporations are complicated, if you go that route definitely seek help from an accountant. Bookkeeping If you're not willing to pay a full time accountant you'll need to do a lot of studying about how this works. Generally, even if you have a sole proprietorship it's best to have a separate bank account for all of your business transactions. Every source/drain of money will fall into one of 3 categories... Assets - What your business owns: Assets can be categorized by liquidity. Meaning how fast you can transform them directly into cash. Just because a company is worth a lot doesn't necessarily mean it has a lot of cash. Some assets depreciate (lose value over time) whereas some are very hard to transform back into cash based on the value and/or market fluctuations (like property). Liabilities - What you owe others and what others owe you: Everything you owe and everything that is owed to you gets tracked. Just like credit cards, it's completely possible to owe more than you own as long as you can pay the interest to maintain the loans. Equity - the net worth of the company: The approach they commonly teach in schools is called double-entry bookkeeping where they use the equation: In practice I prefer the following because it makes more sense: Basically, if you account for everything correctly both sides of the equation should match up. If you choose to go the sole proprietorship route, it's smart to track everything I've mentioned above but you can choose to keep things simple by just looking at your Equity. Equity, the heart of your business... Basically, every transaction you make having to do with your business can be simplified down to debits (money/value) increasing and credits (money/value) decreasing. For a very simple company you can assess this by looking at net profits. Which can be calculated with: Revenues, are made up of money earned by services performed and goods sold. Expenses are made up of operating costs, materials, payroll, consumables, interest on liabilities, etc. Basically, if you brought in 250K but it cost you 100K to make that happen, you've made 150K for the year in profit. So, for your taxes you can count up all the money you've made (Revenues), subtract all of the money you've paid out (Expenses) and you'll know how much profit you've made. The profit is what you pay taxes on. The kicker is, there are gray areas when it comes to deducting expenses. For instance, you can deduct the expense of using your car for business but you need to keep a log and can only expense the miles you traveled explicitly for business. Same goes for deducting dedicated workspaces in your house. Basically, do the research if you're not 100% sure about a deduction. If you don't keep detailed books and try to expense stuff without proof, you can get in trouble if the IRS comes knocking. There are always mythical stories about 'that one guy' who wrote off his boat on his taxes but in reality, you can go to jail for tax fraud if you do that. It comes down to this. At the end of the year, if your business took in a ton of money you'll owe a lot in taxes. The better you can justify your expenses, the more you can reduce that debt. One last thing. You'll also have to pay your personal federal/state taxes (including self-employment tax). That means medicare/social security, etc. If this is your first foray into self-employment you're probably not familiar with the fact that 1099 employers pick up 1/2 of the 15% medicare/social security bill. Typically, if you have an idea of what you make annually, you should be paying this out throughout the year. My pay as a contractor was always erratic so I usually paid it out once/twice a year. It's better to pay too much than too little because the gov't will give you back the money you overpaid. At the end of the day, paying taxed sucks more if you're self-employed but it balances out because you can make a lot more money. If as you said, you've broken six figures, hire a damn accountant/adviser to help you out and start reading. When people say, \"\"a business degree will help you advance in any field,\"\" it's subjects like accounting are core requirements to become a business undergrad. If you don't have time for more school and don't want to pay somebody else to take care of it, there's plenty of written material to learn it on your own. It's not rocket surgery, just basic arithmetic and a lot of business jargon (ie almost as much as technology).\""}
{"id": "79453", "text": "Automated Clearing House transactions are used in the US for direct deposit of pay checks and direct debit of many payments for accounts such as mortgages, credit cards, car loans, insurance premiums, etc. The reason they take one or more business days to clear is that the transactions are accumulated by each processor in the network during the day and processed as a batch at the end of each business day.  The ACH network processes 20+ billion transactions per year worth $40 trillion, (estimates based on 2012 figures)."}
{"id": "79623", "text": "No chance.. cars are much easier to repossess and the cost of doing so is less. People aren't quite as leveraged on autos as they were on homes. Even with a worst case scenario 7 year loan people are usually in par within 3-4 years, in that timeframe on a 30 year mortgage you've barely started paying the interest down. Even at the height of the housing crisis auto loan losses were manageable.. when people were losing their homes at a record pace you'd think they would skip the car payments to make the mortgage. That wasn't the case, people generally kept paying their car notes even when the house was going away. Losing your car is actually much more troublesome to most people.. they will make that payment over all others."}
{"id": "79764", "text": "Yes in order for you to short a stock, some one has to be willing to lend it to you to short, the more people that want to short this stock, the higher the borrowing rate is to short it. in some instances such as groupon so many people are shorting it that there are practically no shares left to short and if you do end up getting some it would be at a very high borrowing cost."}
{"id": "79807", "text": "The daily Volume is usually compared to the average daily volume over the past 50 days for a stock.  High volume is usually considered to be 2 or more times the average daily volume over the last 50 days for that stock, however some traders might set the crireia to be 3x or 4x the ADV for confirmation of a particular pattern or event. The volume is compared to the ADV of the stock itself, as comparing it to the volume of other stocks would be like comparing apples with oranges, as difference companies would have different number of total stocks available, different levels of liquidity and different levels of volatility, which can all contribute to the volumes traded each day."}
{"id": "79998", "text": "The beta of a stock can be interpreted as the average relative movement of a stock with respect to the movement of a market index. In your case, the stock will move on average by 0.8. Thus over a longer time horizon, not on a daily, weekly basis."}
{"id": "80014", "text": "The alternative isn't too bad. Invest in a regular account. The dividends and cap gains will see favorable tax treatment. In my opinion, much of the magic of the retirement account is with 401(k) matched deposits.  The benefit you'll miss is the long term opportunity to skim income off the top, at say, 25%, have it grow, and then withdraw it at a much lower average tax rate. If that benefit doesn't outweigh the fear of the 10%, stick with my first thought above."}
{"id": "80269", "text": "Better in terms of what? less taxes paid? or more money to save for retirement? In terms of retirement, it would be better for you to keep the condo you currently have for at least two reasons: You wouldn't incur the penalties and fees from buying and selling a home. Selling and buying a home comes with a multitude of fees and expenses that aren't included in your estimation. You aren't saddled with a mortgage payment again. You aren't paying a mortgage payment right now. If you set aside the amount you would be paying towards that, it more than covers your taxes, with plenty left over to put towards retirement."}
{"id": "80289", "text": "In theory*, if a company has 1m shares at $10 and does a 10 for 1 split, then the day after it has 10m shares at $1 (assuming no market move). So both the price and the number of share change, keeping the total value of the company unchanged. Regarding your BIS, I suspect that the new number of shares has not been reported yet because it's an ETF (the number of shares in issue changes everyday due to in/out flows). Your TWX example is not ideal either because there was a spin off on the same day as the stock split so you need to separate the two effects. * Some studies have documented a positive stock split effect - one of the suggested reasons is that the stock becomes more liquid after the split. But other studies have rejected that conclusion, so you can probably safely consider that on average it will not have a material effect."}
{"id": "80538", "text": "\"If you forgot to put the name on the \"\"pay to the order of\"\" line then anybody who gets their hands on the check can add their name to the check and deposit it at their bank into their account. If it goes to the correct person they will have an easy time making sure that the check is made out correctly. They don't have to worry about that picky teller who doesn't know what to do with a check made out to Billy Smith and a drivers license for Xavier William Smith. On the other hand... a criminal will also be able to make sure it is processed exactly the way they want it. If I made it out to a small business or a person I would let them know. You might not have a choice but to wait and see what happens if it was sent to a large business, the payment processing center could be a long way from where you will be calling.\""}
{"id": "80871", "text": "long deep ITM calls is equivalent to owning the equity.  You're going to pay alot and hence will start off in a hole already, and you aren't getting too much leverage there at all depending how deep ITM you go.  Covariance scales, but assuming B-S in order to get nice scaling and ignoring the risks you are actually taking with options (unlimited down-size ie you can lose your entire investment in the option, people forget this) will screw you unless you really know what you are dong.  Leverage means increasing your risk.  long dep ITM is not obtaining much leverage and therefore not risking too much.  but you aren't going ot get 3-4x leverage this way.  you get leverage by saying: oh, i have 100, i could invest in 1 share of stock OR I could buy 100 worth of some option.  If I pick a deep ITM (think strike = 0) it's identical to owing the stock.  If i pick ATM, i have a ~50/50 chance of wining, so i should be able to double my upside.  If I go OTM, i can increase my exposure to the upside while increasing hte chance that my options expire worthless.  So really, i have no idea why deep ITM do what you are trying to do.  and If you don't either, you probably shouldn't do it."}
{"id": "81101", "text": "So from Investopedia - Who actually declares a dividend states that the Board of Directors of a company sets the 4 key dates: As these dates are chosen by the Board of Directors, either by internal corporate convention or special situation. Conceivably a Board may choose a Payable Date greater than 2 weeks which may make sense if their accounting partners are unavailable, i.e. extended national holiday. I assume that any period of time longer that what may seem reasonable and customary will be a topic at the next shareholder meeting."}
{"id": "81353", "text": "When you sell a stock that you own, you realize gains, or losses. Short-term gains, realized within a year of buying and selling an asset, are taxed at your maximum (or marginal) tax rate. Long term-gains, realized after a year, are taxed at a lower, preferential rate. The first thing to consider is losses. Losses can be cancelled against gains, reducing your tax liability. Losses can also be carried over to the next tax year and be redeemed against those gains. When you own a bunch of the same type of stock, bought at different times and prices, you can choose which shares to sell. This allows you to decide whether you realize short- or long-term gains (or losses). This is known as lot matching (or order matching). You want to sell the shares that lost value before selling the ones that gained value. Booking losses reduces your taxes; booking gains increases them. If faced with a choice between booking short term and long term losses, I'd go with the former. Since net short-term gains are taxed at a higher rate, I'd want to minimize the short-term tax liability before moving on to long-term tax liability. If my remaining shares had gains, I'd sell the ones purchased earliest since long-term gains are taxed at a lower rate, and delaying the booking of gains converts short-term gains into long-term ones. If there's a formula for this, I'd say it's  (profit - loss) x (tax bracket) = tax paid"}
{"id": "81414", "text": "The value to you of a tax free fund is going to depend largely on your current marginal tax bracket. For example if you had a regular MM that was paying 1% and it was taxable, then your net off that one percent would be  If the tax free MM fund pays .75% then you would be a tiny bit ahead using it, if you are in the 28% bracket, but you would be behind if you are in anything lower than 25%   The primary market (IMHO) for Tax Free money market funds is for high wealth individuals who are in the 33 OR 35 percent brackets"}
{"id": "81530", "text": "\"Anytime you do work without any payment until the work is complete, you are effectively extending credit to the party receiving your service. How much credit you are willing to extend will vary greatly, depending on the amount and the trustworthiness of the party. For example, if you are charging $50 for something, you probably won't bother to collect money upfront, whereas if you are charging $5,000 you probably would collect some upfront. But if the party you are working for is a large financially sound company, the number may be even much higher than $5K as you can trust you will be paid. Obviously there are many factors that go into how much credit you are willing to extend to your customer. (This is why credit reports exist for banks to determine how much credit to extend to you.) As for the specific case you are asking about, which may be classified as a decent amount of work for a small business, I would default to having a written scope of work, a place in the document for both parties to sign, and specify 50% upfront payment and 50% payment at completion. When you receive the signed document and the upfront payment (and possibly even after the check clears), you begin work. I would call this my \"\"default contract\"\" and adjust according to your needs depending on the size of the job and the trustworthiness of the customer. As for your question about how to deposit the check, that depends on what type of entity you are. If you are a sole proprietor you should ask for the checks to be made out to you. If you are a business then the checks should be made out to your business name. You don't need \"\"in trust\"\" or anything similar because your customer, after paying the upfront fee, must trust that you will do the work you promise to do, just like you have to trust that after completing the work you will receive the final payment. This is the reason the default is 50% before and after. Both parties are risking (roughly) the same amount. Tip: having done the \"\"default\"\" contract many times in my career, both as a sole proprietor and a business owner, I can assure you there is a big difference between a potential customer agreeing to something in advance, and actually writing a check. The upfront payment definitely helps weed out those that were never going to end up paying you, even if their intentions were good. Tip 2: be as specific as possible as to what the scope of work will include. If you don't, particularly with software, they'll be adding feature after feature and expecting it to be \"\"included\"\".\""}
{"id": "81554", "text": "Heck no, don't spend more! I saved a ton of money when I got my first real job. You won't always be able to do this.  Save a bundle while you can."}
{"id": "81570", "text": "\"Oh I see, as a \"\"Chicagoan\"\"? Well I guess if you were from Detroit, Stockton, Mammoth Lakes, Jefferson County, Harrisburg, Central Falls, or Boise County you might understand why it might be necessary to force a government entity to actually back up their retirement plans with real investments.\""}
{"id": "81599", "text": "Seek professional advice as duffbeer703 has suggested already.  Very important! Consider incorporating.  If your income will fluctuate year to year, you can keep profit in the corporation, taxed in its hands at the Canadian small business rate, since such corporate income below $500,000 would likely qualify for the small business deduction. You could pay  retained earnings to yourself as dividends over more than one year in order to lessen the personal tax burden. If you don't incorporate, all your profits in the year they are earned are taxed at personal income tax rates, and with our progressive income tax system, taking the tax hit all in one year can be expensive.  However, if this project is a one-off and you're not likely to continue working like this, you might not want the overhead of a corporation.  Taxes aside, there are also legal issues to consider vis-a-vis incorporating, or not. A professional can help you make this decision.   Yes, you can claim deductions for reasonable business expenses, whether or not you are incorporated. No, you can't do free work on the side and claim it as donations.  It's nice to volunteer, but you wouldn't get a charitable tax credit for your time, only for money or goods donated. Consider opening an RRSP so you can start saving for retirement and get a tax deduction for any contributions you make.  This is but one strategy to reduce your tax.  There are others.  For instance, if you are a student, you perhaps have some unused tuition credits that you could claim in your first year with higher income. Oh, and seek professional advice! \u00a0 ;-)"}
{"id": "81662", "text": "&gt; QE is used to buy debt.  That's correct.  Those mortgage securities are **owed** to the US.   The difference in interest between the mortgage interest and the interest the treasury is paying out is returning   &gt; How about we go the route Japan has gone?  Non-sequitur.  And I notice you didn't answer the question, perhaps due to the typo.  Why do \\[you\\] conflate QE with the debt?"}
{"id": "81924", "text": "\"I believe that your option contracts will become \"\"non-standard\"\" and will be for a combination of ACE stock and cash.  The allocation between stock and cash should follow that of the acquisition parameters of the underlying - probably with fractional shares converted to cash. Hence 1 call contract for 100 shares of CB will become 1 call contract for 60 shares of ACE + $6293 cash + a cash correction for the 0.19 fractional share of ACE that you would have had claim to get.  The corrections should be 0.19 sh x $62.93/sh.\""}
{"id": "82025", "text": "\"First, one would 'not' want to be the guarantor as it would likely appear as a debt on their credit. In some cases this can be good, but not always.  I'd suggest a homeowners meeting. A reverse auction where you say \"\"Would anyone like to get the condo fee waived for 12 months in return for guaranteeing the loan?\"\" If no hands go up, you have an issue. But if even one hand goes up, you have the guarantor. Then you ask if there are any objections. Anyone who objects is welcome to bid fewer, say 10 months. Ideally, you see a dozen hands go up, and you just count down until one one remains. When I lived in a condo the fee was $250. If I were one of the older residents who planned to stay, I'd do it for one or two month's fees.\""}
{"id": "82070", "text": "Never said I was, I'm definitely not. I'm an engineer and I do this on the side. But professionals go broke every day, and let's have this discussion again after silver and gold go past $300 and $5000 for the 1000th time in history of this system."}
{"id": "82227", "text": "Patti - I realize, of course, that you pose an either/or question. It seems the question closes the door on other potential solutions."}
{"id": "82251", "text": "Scenario #2 is most likely will generate the best long-term financial outcome. If your friends emergency fund is truly excessive and can afford to be reduced by the amount required to payoff the vehicle loan then that will save a few dollars. Scenario #3 is not an approach I would recommend. However, if your friend has to choose between paying off the loan or maxing his Roth... Making a few assumptions regarding the loan, I figure it is probably a 4 year - $13.5k. Which means he is paying somewhere below $40 a month in interest.  As JAGnalyst speaks to people often over estimate the spread they can make with another investment compared to the interest rate on a loan. However, the effect of compounded, tax-free returns can not be ignored when you are discussing a 22 year old person contributing to a Roth IRA.  Doing some calculations, assuming the car is being paid off on the first payment your friend will save just under $1000. The total interest that would have been paid over the life of the loan. If your friend adds $3600, approximately one year of payments, to their Roth IRA contributions -- just once. Assuming a 3.5% avg return and a retirement age of 65, the $3600 will be worth just south of $16k; a $12,400 return. Using the same investment return and tax assumptions and simplifying the $1000 savings as if it was all realized as a lump sum at the time of paying off the loan. That $1000 invested in a non-tax-advantaged investment (because the whole discussion is based on if the friend had to pick and lose the opportunity for the one year to make the additional Roth IRA contribution) would return $3047."}
{"id": "82284", "text": "\"See Publication 505, specifically the section on \"\"Annualized Income Installment Method\"\", which says: If you do not receive your income evenly throughout the year (for example, your income from a repair shop you operate is much larger in the summer than it is during the rest of the year), your required estimated tax payment for one or more periods may be less than the amount figured using the regular installment method. The publication includes a worksheet and explanation of how to calculate the estimated tax due for each period when you have unequal income.  If you had no freelance income during a period, you shouldn't owe any estimated tax for that period. However, the process for calculating the estimated tax using this method is a good bit more complex and confusing than using the \"\"short\"\" method (in which you just estimate how much tax you will owe for the year and divide it into four equal pieces).  Therefore, in future years you might want to still use the equal-payments method if you can swing it.  (It's too late for this year since you missed the April deadline for the first payment.)  If you can estimate the total amount of freelance income you'll receive (even though you might not be able to estimate when you'll receive it), you can probably still use the simpler method.  If you really have no idea how much money you'll make over the year, you could either use the more complex computation, or you could use a very high estimate to ensure you pay enough tax, and you'll get a refund if you pay too much.\""}
{"id": "82482", "text": "You should talk to a financial fiduciary (make sure they are a fiduciary, not all planners are) about investing your money.  Even ultra safe investments such as treasury bonds will beat the 1% interest rate offered by your savings account (the yield on the 5 year treasury is currently around 2%)."}
{"id": "83046", "text": "If you know what you are doing, bear markets offer fantastic trading opportunities. I'm a futures and futures options trader, and am equally comfortable trading long or short, although I have a slight preference for the short side, in that moves are typically much quicker to the down side."}
{"id": "83059", "text": "Consider the following scenario at a small business: As a business owner I have 10k in the bank at the moment. I have a one time expense of 4k that will not directly impact the growth of my business. I can choose to pay the 4k out of the 10 in the bank and then put the rest towards business growth. Assuming a 10% annual return on capital at the end of this transaction I am left with $6,600. Now if instead I chose to pay the 4k with a business credit card I have that only carries a 7.9% interest rate what would happen is that I incur a 4k balance that I have to pay off in a year and put 10k towards my business. Now, this is a simplified case that does not take into account the effective interest on the card and the minimum monthly payments. That being said, what happens in the end of the year is that I owe $4316 to my credit card but I now have 11k  in the bank, due to business growth. That leaves me with $6,684 after a year's worth of operations, which is better than my original $6,600. This is a small scale scenario though, but the basic idea is that if you can put the money towards growth that is better than the interest you are paying to the card, you win. The risks of course include missing a payment and incurring a penalty, not being able to grow your money at the rate you thought, and so on. Hope this explains things a bit."}
{"id": "83079", "text": "Check out some common portfolios compared: Note that all these portfolios are loosely based on Modern Portfolio Theory, a theory of how to maximize reward given a risk tolerance introduced by Harry Markowitz. The theory behind the Gone Fishin' Portfolio and the Couch Potato Portfolio (more info) is that you can make money by rebalancing once a year or less.  You can take a look at 8 Lazy ETF Portfolios to see other lazy allocation percentages. One big thing to remember - the expense ratio of the funds you invest in is a major contributor to the return you get.  If they're taking 1% of all of your gains, you're not.  If they're only taking .2%, that's an automatic .8% you get.  The reason Vanguard is so often used in these model portfolios is that they have the lowest expense ratios around.  If you are talking about an IRA or a mutual fund account where you get to choose who you go with (as opposed to a 401K with company match), conventional wisdom says go with Vanguard for the lowest expense ratios."}
{"id": "83316", "text": "Always a good time to buy gold. Think less in terms of commodities, more in terms of true money that can not be inflated out of existence. Buy it as cheap as you can, hold it for as long as possible. The historical graphs never lie and it proves time and time again its a good store of value. I would never think of it in terms of a speculative bet though. If it does reward you, its because the global currency system is broken. I think its broken, it may reward you. But never expect it to reward you. In the short term (2-3 years), the gold price can be manipulated. In the long term (10 years) less so."}
{"id": "83330", "text": "If interest rates are negative, a 0% load might still be profitable."}
{"id": "83492", "text": "Hey iDade  I work for a bulge bracket firm on a top 10 institutional consulting team in the United States, before I go in depth on anything, I would like to know what exactly you do not fully understand in this list. I do not want to offend you by going into basics, but I also do not want to give you information you already are comfortable with."}
{"id": "83543", "text": "\"In the Netherlands specifically, there are several reasons to pay extra off on your mortgage. First, house prices have dropped significantly in the last several years.  They are rising slowly now, but it's region specific and you can still borrow more than 100% of the price of the house.  Under these conditions, if you choose to sell your house and the outstanding mortgage amount is greater than the value of your house, you are left with a gap (restschuld) to finance.  I think the rules have changed recently around this, allowing you to finance this gap with a new mortgage, but this is not a good idea.  The tax implications of this are likely to be complicated in the long run and your new house may not cover this gap for some time. Second, the less you owe on your house, the lower mortgage rates you can get.  Mortgages in the Netherlands usually fall into categories based on percentage of the auction price at a foreclosure sale (executiewaarde).  If you pay more of your mortgage off, you may qualify for a lower interest rate, possibly making refinancing interesting.  This is especially important if interest rates continue to drop but the value of your house does not increase or even decreases. Third, if you choose to keep your house and rent it out, the banks in the Netherlands have very strict rules on this if you want to do it above board.  I've read that some banks require the mortgage amount (NB not the value you may have built up in a linked savings or insurance account) to be less than 50% of the foreclosure auction price (executiewaarde).  Also, related to point 2, if you have something other than a linear or annuity mortgage, you will need to refinance to do this as the tax advantages around savings mortgages ([bank]spaarhypotheken) do not apply if it is not used as your own residence. Finally, if you choose to sell and you are in the happy position of having the value of your house be greater than the value of your mortgage (you have an overwaarde), there may still be some obstacles.  Any value you have accumulated in a linked savings or life insurance account is not available until after you sell your house.  Extra value derived purely from the difference between mortgage value and sale price may be easier to deal with. EDIT: As a final note, I've made extra payments on both a \"\"Spaarhypotheek\"\" (linked life insurance) and a \"\"Bankspaarhypotheek\"\" (linked savings account).  In one, the principal paid each month reduced and the mortgage lifetime stayed the same.  In the other, the principal paid each month stayed the same and the lifetime reduced.  In both cases, interest payments were less each month.  I would contact your mortgage provider to understand what the expected impact of extra payments will be.\""}
{"id": "83564", "text": "Since I'm a glass half full kind of guy --- take this opportunity to learn WHY ~~investing~~ gambling the majority of your money in a 3x levered ETF is a terrible idea.  Consider the $3k cheap tuition that can save you from being a moron later once you actually have some capital to invest.  This sub can help with some suggested reading."}
{"id": "83587", "text": "You are calculating using different methods.  For example, to obtain 6.45% 6.44647 This is effectively the same as the money-weighted return calculation. In arriving at 6.06% you have calculated the true time-weighted return. Both answers are right, but they are different measures. To use time-weighted returns you need to know the value of the investment at the time of every cash flow. Modified Dietz uses a simple approximation to avoid that requirement.  Money-weighted return gives results that are more accurate for back calculating than Modified Dietz, (also without requiring interim valuations), but the calculation is more complex. See How to Calculate your Portfolio's Rate of Return for a decent reference."}
{"id": "83733", "text": "Taxes are the least of your concerns. Your friends need licenses. Although this COULD be avoided entirely with certain craftily worded disclaimers and exemptions and the WAY that money is given to them."}
{"id": "83796", "text": "The other commenters have a point.  You're going to have a hard time succeeding without the right structure at work.  That said, you can look into sales methodologies like MEDDIC.  These methods are commonly deployed at B2B companies which it sounds like you are."}
{"id": "84250", "text": "Is investing in a Roth retirement account only better if you will be in a higher    tax bracket in retirement? If you are pushing up against the contribution limits, a Roth account may allow you to save more money in tax-advantaged accounts. In your example, you are putting $100 pre-tax in a traditional account vs $85 post-tax in a Roth account. But if there are limits, and the limits are the same for traditional or Roth accounts (as they currently are for US 401(k) accounts), you can effectively put more into a Roth account, where the limit applies to the post-tax amount, than a traditional account, where the limit applies to the pre-tax amount. If so, is there any case in which a traditional retirement account is better than a Roth account? It is smart to have some money in a traditional account, because the first amount of money you earn or withdraw each year (up to the standard deduction) is taxed at 0%, which is probably less than your current rate. And the next bit of money is taxed at only 10%, which may also be less than your current marginal rate. Of course, things may change by the time you retire, but it is probably safe to assume that we will still have some kind of progressive (income bracketed) tax structure."}
{"id": "84630", "text": "It depends on how much equity you have in your home. Scenario 1: Your home is worth $100K, and your current mortgage is for $100K (or more which means you are underwater.) In this case you can't get a 2nd mortgage because: That being said, you can use different portions of equity in your home as collateral for multiple mortgages, as long as none of the equity overlaps, but you may need permission from the primary mortgage bank first, for example: Scenario 2: Your home is worth $100K, and your current mortgage is for $80K meaning you currently have $20K in equity. It is possible to get a 2nd mortgage or home equity line of credit for $20K. As a side note, if your loan agent is telling you to use a different bank, it sounds like she is trying (and willing) to do something shady. If you are in Scenario 1, I'd find a new agent."}
{"id": "84800", "text": "\"Your broker, Ameritrade, offers a variety of Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) that you can buy and sell with zero commission.  An ETF is like a mutual fund, but you buy and sell shares the same way you buy and sell shares of stocks.  From your point of view, the relevance of this is that you can buy and sell as many or as few shares as you like, even down to a single share.  Note that to get the commission-free trades on the available ETFs you have to sign up for it in your account profile.  Be sure to do that before you enter any buy orders. You'll want to start by looking at the Ameritrade's list of commission-free ETFs.  Notice that they are divided into different categories:  stocks, bonds, international, and commodities.  Which categories you pick from will depend on your personal investing goals, time horizon, risk tolerance, and so on.  There are lots of questions and answers on this site that talk about asset allocation.  You should read them, as it is the most important decision you will make with your portfolio. The other thing you want to be aware of is the expense ratio for each fund.  These expenses reduce the fund's return (they are included in the calculation of the net asset value of the shares), so lower is definitely better.  Personally, I wouldn't even consider paying more than about 0.10% (commonly read \"\"10 basis points\"\" or \"\"10 bp\"\") for a broad-based domestic stock fund.  For a sectoral fund you might put up with as much as 20 bp in expenses.  Bond funds tend to be a little more expensive, so maybe allow as much as 25 bp, and likewise for international funds.  I've never invested in commodity funds, so I'll let someone else opine on appropriate expense ratios for those. Once you've decided what funds you want (and have signed up for commission-free trades), all you have to do is enter the trade orders.  The website where you manage your account has tutorials on how to do that.  After that you should be all set. Good luck with your investing!\""}
{"id": "84870", "text": "My interpretation of that sentence is that you can't do the buying/selling of shares outright (sans margin) because of the massive quantity of shares he's talking about.  So you have to use margin to buy the stocks. However, because in order to make significant money with this sort of strategy you probably need to be working dozens of stocks at the same time, you need to be familiar with portfolio margin.  Since your broker does not calculate margin calls based on individual stocks, but rather on the value of your whole portfolio, you should have experience handling margin not just on individual stock movements but also on overall portfolio movements. For example, if 10% (by value) of the stocks you're targeting tend to have a correlation of -0.8 with the price of oil you should probably target another 10% (by value) in stocks that tend to have a correlation of +0.8 with the price of oil.  And so on and so forth.  That way your portfolio can weather big (or even small) changes in market conditions that would cause a margin call on a novice investor's portfolio."}
{"id": "84967", "text": "My employer matches 6% of my salary, dollar for dollar. So you have a great benefit. The self-directed side has no fees but $10 trades. No option trading. Yours basically allows you to invest your own funds, but not the match. It's a restriction, agreed, but a good plan."}
{"id": "85014", "text": "I am a very light TurboTax user and have expensed a laptop in the past (since it was used exclusively for work) and used the itemized deduction there and has no issues.  Just not sure if there was a limit or anything of note to realize ahead of time.  Thanks!"}
{"id": "85214", "text": "I'm the contrarian in the crowd. I think credit scores and debt are the closest thing to evil incarnate. You're in good company. The absence of a credit score simply means the agencies have insufficient data in their behavioral model to determine how profitable your business would be to the bank. The higher your score, the more likely the bank is to make a profit from your loan.  IMHO, you're better off building up cash and investment reserves than a credit history. With sufficient reserves,  you will be able to shop around for a bank that will give you a good rate, if you ever do need a loan.  You'll be surprised at how quickly you get in a position where you don't need a loan if you save and invest wisely. I used to have a (high) credit score,  and I was miserable about it because there were always bills due. I gave up debt 14 years ago, paid the last debt 7 years ago, and have never. been happier. Raising kids without debt (or credit score) is much more fun than with debt."}
{"id": "85504", "text": "I live in MA. Median price value here is $410K. Depending on location a $410K house here can be a ranch from 1950 needing a complete overhaul, a 1970's split level, a 4 bedroom Colonial in Central MA or a condo somewhere close to Boston. These homes are decidedly nothing special, and certainly not where the 1% live. There are plenty of houses that list in the $750s in my town that go on and off the market really quickly, generally purchased by a two-earner family making decent (but not 1%er) money. Think engineers, doctors, sales and marketing execs, managers.   Source : https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2017/07/25/median-home-price-massachusetts-tops-for-first-time/rVsP7BwWZCtKwP9BqZQOKJ/story.html"}
{"id": "85621", "text": "\"5-8 years is not quite long term.  Until the naughts (the 2001-10 decade), advisors were known to say that the S&P was always positive given a 10 year holding period. Now, we're saying 15 years is always positive looking back.  One can easily pull S&P return data which would let you run numbers showing the range of returns for the 5-8 yr period you have in mind. A bit of extra effort and you can include the dollar cost averaging factor.  This wouldn't produce a guarantee, but a statistical range of expected returns over your time horizon. Then a decision like \"\"with a 1/4 chance of losing 25% of my money, should I stay with this plan?\"\" This is just an example. The numbers for 1900-2014 look like this -  In any 5 year period, an average return of 69.2% (note 1.69 means a 69% gain). Of the 111 5 year periods, 14 were negative with the worst being a 46% loss. I maintain 5 years is not really long term, but the risk is relatively low of being in the red.\""}
{"id": "85639", "text": "\"Each individual situation merits a fresh approach.  Working in venture capital, I've learned that the weights are always shifting and taking a \"\"one size fits all\"\" approach to business is probably the most foolish thing one can do.\""}
{"id": "85655", "text": "We specialize in the events and wedding parties producing newness photo booths &amp; other equipment for fun purposes using high technology. Our organization has a wedding photographer in USA. A contract should also include a copy of the photographer's terms and conditions and this must be visible to the clients before they sign the contract. The professional companies or as individual freelancers and you can select from any one of these. Some couples tend to look at the cheaper affordable photographers to serve at the lucky occasion."}
{"id": "85672", "text": "I'm also self employed. Your circumstances may be different, but my accountant told me there was no reason to pay more than 100% of last years' taxes. (Even if this years' earnings are higher.) So I divide last year by 4 and make the quarterlies. As an aside, I accidentally underpaid last year (mis-estimated), and the penalty was much smaller than I expected."}
{"id": "85697", "text": "You don't need a credit score. After I paid off my house mortgage many years ago I had this discussion with my mortgage agent (now bank VP). Your credit score is not a measure your ability to repay. It is a behavioral model and a statistical measure of the likelihood that the banks will make money off of you when they give you a loan, and a marketing tool that the banking industry uses to sell you long term and short term debt (mortgages and credit cards). Statistically speaking, people who close out major loans change their behaviors, and the model captures this change in behavior. In my own case, even though I have a credit history and sufficient cash is the bank to buy my next home outright, I have no credit score . What the model says is that people with my behavioral profile are not likely to take a loan, and if they did take one, they would pay it back so quickly that the bank would not even recoup the cost of initiating the loan. In short, people with my profile are bad news for the loans side of the bank. Thanks @quid for suggesting I capture this and post it as an answer"}
{"id": "85783", "text": "The contract is not very clear. As much as I can understand it will still help if you make part prepayments. In an Rule 78 or Actuarial method, the schedule is drawn up front and the break-up of interest and principal for each month is calculated ahead. At the beginning both the reducing balance method as well as Actuarial method will give the same schedule.  However in Actuarial method, if you make part prepayments, they get applied to the future principals, the interest are ignored. However the future interests are not reduced. Example: Say your schedule looks something like this; Monthly Payments say 100; Month | Principal | Interest 1 | 10 | 90 2 | 20 | 80 3 | 30 | 70 4 | 40 | 60 5 | 50 | 50 6 | 60 | 40 7 | 70 | 30 8 | 80 | 20 9 | 90 | 10 So lets say you have made 3 payments of 100, in the 4th month if you make 150 [in addition to 100], it would get applied to the principal of 4th, 5th and 6th month. So essentially you would save interest of 4th, 5th and 5th month. It would also reduce the total payments to 6. i.e. you will only have 7th, 8th, 9th due. The next payment you make of 100 will get applied to row 7. The disadvantage of this method over reducing balance is that the interest calculated for rows 7,8,9 don't change compared to reducing balance. However if you prepay in full, the unearned interest is calculated and returned as per the Actuarial Tables."}
{"id": "85990", "text": "I assert not so. Even if we assume a zero sum game (which is highly in doubt); the general stock market curves indicate the average player is so bad that you don't have to be very good to have better that 50/50 averages. One example: UP stock nosedived right after some political mess in Russia two years ago. Buy! Profit: half my money in a month. I knew that nosedive was senseless as UP doesn't have to care much about what goes on in Russia. Rising oil price was a reasonable prediction; however this is good for railroads, and most short-term market trends behave as if it is bad."}
{"id": "86088", "text": "I was specifically talking about property tax which doesn't increase that much with income. But state and local income taxes ratio makes a lot of sense since there are still lots of people that depend on a salary at 1million$ AGI."}
{"id": "86497", "text": "I actually used to work at SBUX back in the day, it was pretty heavily emphasized in training -- we were instructed to explain that to customers when they ask, and I am pretty sure it is all over their bags / boards in the shops."}
{"id": "86621", "text": "Residents of Canada must pay Canadian income tax on their worldwide income (source: Wikipedia). However, there is a tax treaty between the U.S. and Canada; I haven't read it, but my guess is that it will allow you to claim a tax credit in Canada for the capital gains tax you have paid to the U.S."}
{"id": "86632", "text": "Haven't read this but will, thanks.  I would agree with you that there are certain aspects and forms of private equity that could be considered reprehensible. First, carried interest probably isn't the fairest thing in the world. But that's not going to last much longer. I think you could also argue that SOME hostile takeovers approach the reprehensible. An example off the top of my head would be Carl Icahn and TWA. I would argue on the whole, however, that most hostile takeovers are accretive in the sense that you're taking out management that is either being tremendously negligent, or destroying value all together.   In both of those instances you can make succinct and well thought out arguments. But this isn't what's happening with Bain. On the whole I would disagree and argue that PE backed restructurings are accretive to the economy as a whole."}
{"id": "86639", "text": "Experience and friendly service \u2013 As not many people would be aware of the process, it is important for every individual to be aware of the norms before starting online incorporation. A professional organization can give you better information and education about the process, as Delaware incorporation comes with a lot of norms to be followed by every firm or a company."}
{"id": "86852", "text": "\"Unfortunately, Australian bureocrats made it impossible to register a small business without making the person's home address, full name, date of birth and other personal information available to the whole world. They tell us the same old story about preventing crime, money laundering and terrorism, but in fact it is just suffocating small business in favour of capitalistic behemoths. With so many weirdos and identity thieves out there, many people running a small business from home feel unsafe publishing all their personal details. I use a short form of my first name and real surname for my business, and reguraly have problems cashing in cheques written to this variation of my name. Even though I've had my account with this bank for decades and the name is obviously mine, just a pet or diminitive form of my first name (e.g. Becky instead of Rebecca). This creates a lot of inconvenience to ask every customer to write the cheque to my full name, or make the cheque \"\"bearer\"\" (or not to cross \"\"or bearer\"\" if it is printed on the cheque already). It is very sad that there is protection for individual privacy in Australia, unless you can afford to have a business address. But even in this case, your name, date of birth and other personal information will be pusblished in the business register and the access to this information will be sold to all sorts of dubious enterprises like credit report companies, debt collectors, market researchers, etc. It seems like Australian system is not interested in people being independent, safe, self-sufficient and working for themselves. Everyone has to be under constant surveliance.\""}
{"id": "86909", "text": "I don't see anything in this forum on the leverage aspect, so I'll toss that out for discussion.  Using generic numbers, say you make a $10k down payment on a $100,000 house. The house appreciates 3% per year. First year, it's $103,000. Second year, $106090, third it's 109,272.70. (Assuming straight line appreciation.) End of three years, you've made $9,272.70 on your initial $10,000 investment, assuming you have managed the property well enough to have a neutral or positive cash flow. You can claim depreciation of the property over those rental years, which could help your tax situation.   Of course, if you sell, closing costs will be a big factor. Plus... after three years, the dreaded capital gains tax jumps in as mentioned earlier, unless you do a 1031 exchange to defer it."}
{"id": "87160", "text": "\"You have a few correlated questions here:  Yes you can. There are only a few investment strategies that require a minimum contribution and those aren't ones that would get a blanket recommendation anyway. Investing in bonds or stocks is perfectly possible with limited funds. You're never too young to start. The power of interest means that the more time you give your money to grow, the larger your eventual gains will be (provided your investment is beating inflation). If your financial situation allows it, it makes sense to invest money you don't need immediately, which brings us to: This is the one you have to look at most. You're young but have a nice chunk of cash in a savings account. That money won't grow much and you could be losing purchasing power to inflation but on the other hand that money also isn't at risk. While there are dozens of investment options1 the two main ones to look at are: bonds: these are fixed income, which means they're fairly safe, but the downside is that you need to lock up your money for a long time to get a better interest rate than a savings account index funds that track the market: these are basically another form of stock where each share represents fractions of shares of other companies that are tracked on an index such as the S&P 500 or Nasdaq. These are much riskier and more volatile, which is why you should look at this as a long-term investment as well because given enough time these are expected to trend upwards. Look into index funds further to understand why. But this isn't so much about what you should invest in, but more about the fact that an investment, almost by definition, means putting money away for a long period of time. So the real question remains: how much can you afford to put away? For that you need to look at your individual situation and your plans for the future. Do you need that money to pay for expenses in the coming years? Do you want to save it up for college? Do you want to invest and leave it untouched to inspire you to keep saving? Do you want to save for retirement? (I'm not sure if you can start saving via IRAs and the like at your age but it's worth looking into.) Or do you want to spend it on a dream holiday or a car? There are arguments to be made for every one of those.  Most people will tell you to keep such a \"\"low\"\" sum in a savings account as an emergency fund but that also depends on whether you have a safety net (i.e. parents) and how reliable they are. Most people will also tell you that your long-term money should be in the stock market in the form of a balanced portfolio of index funds. But I won't tell you what to do since you need to look at your own options and decide for yourself what makes sense for you. You're off to a great start if you're thinking about this at your age and I'd encourage you to take that interest further and look into educating yourself on the investments options and funds that are available to you and decide on a financial plan. Involving your parents in that is sensible, not in the least because your post-high school plans will be the most important variable in said plan. To recap my first point and answer your main question, if you've decided that you want to invest and you've established a specific budget, the size of that investment budget should not factor into what you invest it in. 1 - For the record: penny stocks are not an investment. They're an expensive form of gambling.\""}
{"id": "87187", "text": "\"The \"\"easier\"\" way is to sell the house, and pay back the 95K to the mortgage company. Your taxable gain (if any) is calculated as the difference between the sales price minus the purchased price of 150K. There is a further deduction for any selling expenses, before you have to pay income tax. If you liquidate your other investments to raise the 95K and prepay the mortgage, you might realize, and be taxed on gains on **those ** investments. That's something you might not want. On the other hand, if you have some investments that can be liquidated at a loss, you might want to sell those to generate a tax loss, then prepay all or part of the 95K. Bear in mind that there are limitations of 3K a year for certain types of losses. So see a tax adviser before using this course of action.\""}
{"id": "87238", "text": "what reason would I have in buying an ETF? Apart from the efforts, the real reason is the ticket size. One can't buy shares in fraction. To truly reflect the index in equal weight, the amount to invest will be in multiples of millions [depending on the Index and the stock composition]   This related question should help you understand why it is difficult even for large fund house to exactly mimic the index. Why do passive ETFs require so much trading (and incur costs)?"}
{"id": "87260", "text": "All other things being equal, you might be better off contributing to a IRA that is a brokerage account.  You will have lots of flexibility in your investments and there would probably not be fees for the account itself.  You might incur commissions for trading and/or owning mutual funds that are charged by the funds themselves.   You won't be able to borrow from an IRA, as opposed to a 401K.  IMHO, that is a good thing. Are you suggesting that you would withdraw early from a retirement account?  You'd probably be better off not doing that.  Assuming a large salary, you would be paying 43% to withdraw your money early.  Would you accept a loan at 43% interest?   You are probably better off not putting the money in in the first place to accomplish your goals, then withdrawing it early. Most people opt for a 401K for two reasons.  The company match and ease of investment make a compelling argument.  Keep in mind if a 401K is available to you, regardless if you particpate, you start phasing out your IRA deduction at 60K a year (single) or 96K (married).  Given your huge salary comments I imagine an IRA would not be an option in your scenario. Given that, if you leave a job, you can roll your 401K balance into a trading account."}
{"id": "87466", "text": "I beg to differ: Israel has an incredibly well managed central bank, and the usury market is wonderfully competitive.  It's a shame Stanley Fischer has retired.  His management is the case study in central bank management. Rates are low because inflation is low.  The nominal rate is irrelevant to return because a 2% nominal return with 1% inflation is superior to a 5% nominal return with 9% inflation. A well-funded budget is the best first step, so now a tweak is necessary: excess capital beyond budgeting should be moved quickly to internationally diversified equities after funding, discounted and adjusted, longer term budgets. Credit will not pay the rate necessary for long term investment.  Higher variance is the price to pay for higher returns."}
{"id": "87675", "text": "Same question had popped up in our office,and we got an answer from one of the senior colleague. He said that we can call it CARC (Compounded Annual Rate of Change)."}
{"id": "87915", "text": "\"Typically investing in only two securities is not a good idea when trying to spread risk. Even though you are in the VTI which is spread out over a large amount of securites it should in theory reduce portfolio beta to zero, or in this case as close to it as possible. The VTI however has a beta of 1.03 as of close today in New York. This means that the VTI moves roughly in exact tandem as \"\"the market\"\" usually benched against the S&P 500, so this means that the VTI is slightly more volatile than that index. In theory beta can be 0, this would be akin to investing in T-bills which are 'assumed' to be the risk free rate. So in theory it is possible to reduce the risk in your portfolio and apply a more capital protective model. I hope this helps you a bit.\""}
{"id": "88095", "text": "\"The answer is, there are a lot of answers! It always seems so daunting to start saving when you're living paycheck to paycheck and anticipate more bills on the way (kids are expensive!!). Start small, and make it automatic if you can. If you can take $25 out of every paycheck and put it into a savings account, and do this automatically using your bank's Bill Pay system, that will go a long way. It's about setting up a new habit for yourself, and increasing as you can. One way I've heard it phrased is \"\"Pay yourself first\"\".  Don't set unrealistic expectations for yourself, either. You need to start building a savings account to cover emergencies, not just future purchases. If something happens and you can't get a paycheck for a week, a month, 2 months, how will you pay your bills? Set up a savings account just for that purpose and don't touch it unless it's a true emergency. There are several banks out there that will let you set up multiple savings accounts and mark them for specific purposes, like CapitalOne's 360 accounts. Set one up for the emergency account that gets your automatic per-paycheck deposit, then set up another one for \"\"fun money\"\" or \"\"new home fund\"\" or whatever else you want to save up for.  Starting the savings process is hard, no doubt about it. You need to learn how to budget with the money you have after \"\"paying yourself first\"\". But the important part is to stick with it. Consider your savings account as another \"\"mandatory\"\" utility. You have to pay it $25/mo or risk...I don't know...a smack on the back of the head. If you wait until the end of the month to see what you have left after everything else, you'll find you don't have anything left. If you can set it up through your bank so when you get your paycheck it automatically puts $25 into a savings account, then you'll never have that $25 burning a hole in your pocket. If your paychecks aren't direct deposit, and you're physically cashing them when you receive them, then tell the bank teller to put $25 into your savings account.  You can do it! Make sure your wife is on board and you communicate the importance of setting up a savings account and work together to make it happen. Be patient, and realize that $25 may seem like a trivial amount to put away now, but after 24 paychecks (1 year depending on pay schedule), that's $600! (Plus interest but rates are too low now to worth noting that).\""}
{"id": "88455", "text": "\"Overoptimism, making mistakes and wrong assumptions, being taken by lies, all of that is legal and, in a lot of ways, very human and forgivable.  But when they \"\"buried her findings ... before, during and after the financial crisis, and even into 2012\"\" from senior management whose job it is to look out for bad investments, \"\"buying mortgages from outside lenders with doctored tax forms, phony appraisals and missing signatures\"\", \"\"systematically violating U.S. mortgage regulations\"\", and lying about losses while still taking money from the government, these are illegal and immoral practices with profit as a motive and with the knowledge that what they were doing was wrong.    Buying into something with all you've got is any business's prerogative.  Lying, manipulating, and willfully breaking the law, especially when the product and means to purchase directly impacts the customer, all to maximize profit is not.\""}
{"id": "88801", "text": "it depends on you, thats just the point, how risk averse you are determines how wide your risk premium needs to be to as you feel adequately compensate you for the risk you are taking. If I have some money i inherited from grandad and I want to make 15% on it then my required rate is 15% on top of the risk free rate. Thats what I require. Alternatively you could use a historic market rate to to determine the markets required return since on average that should be correct allowing you to sell your asset later to the average market participant. Thats easy for the equity investment. Because you have two different asset classes for your investments you could use different discount rates using the historic market risk premium in each asset's market or you can use the same discount rate for both which makes it easier to compare. In the second case I would discount using the equity required return since the equity investment you are not making is the opportunity cost of your real estate investment.   At the end of the day its a value judgment in my opinion and there isn't a right. Your understanding of the economics and from that what is important will inform what you use as a discount rate and that value judgment is kindha where an analyst adds value."}
{"id": "88947", "text": "At the end of each calendar year the mutual fund company will send you a 1099 form. It will tell you and the IRS what your account earned. You will see boxes for: You will end up paying taxes on these, unless the fund is part of a 401K or IRA. These taxes will be due even if you never sold any shares. They are due even if it was a bad year and the value of your account went down. Most if not all states will levy an income tax yon your dividends and capital gains each year. When you sell your shares you may also owe income taxes if you made a profit. The actual taxes due is a more complex calculation due to long term vs short term, and what other gains or losses you have. Partial sales also take into account which shares are sold."}
{"id": "88973", "text": "\"Check is an obligation to pay, and is unconditional. In the US, checks don't expire (there are countries where they do). Endorsements such as \"\"void after X days\"\" are meaningless and don't affect the obligation to pay. The bank is under no obligation to honor a check that is more than 6 months old (based on the date on the check, of course). This is from the Unified Commercial Code 4-404. However, this refers to the bank, not to the person who gave you the check. The bank may pay, if the check is deposited in good faith and there's nothing wrong with it or with the account. So the first thing you can do is deposit the check. If asked - you can say that the person just wrote the wrong date, which is true. Worst case the check bounces. If the check bounces - you can start with demand letters and small claim courts. The obligation to pay doesn't go away unless satisfied, i.e.: paid.\""}
{"id": "89008", "text": "I believe so (that you can, not that you are greedy) I run my own business and, generally speaking, am 'charging' my company 40p per mile as per the quote above. I did not know about the ability to claim the shortfall, as it is not relevant to me, but it makes perfect sense and I'm sure that a phone call to HMRC will help you understand how to claim.  As for the greedy question - personally I think that laws are there for a reason (both ways) so if there's money to be claimed - there's no reason not to do so, unless of course the hassle is greater than the potential gain. One last note - not sure exactly what the rules around this are, but I know that the allowance is not applicable for one's general commute and so if you're travelling to the same place over 40% of the time for more than two years you are no longer allowed to claim these miles."}
{"id": "89017", "text": "Employment, output and inflation are your feedback. Too little spending manifests as a an output gap with elevated unemployment and low inflation. Too much spending shows up as full employment, full capacity and rising inflation as additional dollars just bid up prices.  Get it right and you have full employment with price stability.  So are we there yet? Well, it's not a static point we reach and cross but a dynamic balance in every period based on what's going on in the non-government sectors. Lately we've been leaning towards too little and the result is a tepid, stagnant recovery dragging on for years with elevated unemployment, weak growth and a persistant [output gap](http://lostoutputclock.com/)."}
{"id": "89216", "text": "\"One possibility you may consider is to keep all of your funds in the stocks and shares ISA while investing that proportion you wish to keep in cash into a tradeable \"\"Money Market\"\" ETF. A Money Market ETF will give you rates comparable to interest rates on cash and at the same time it will give you \"\"instant access\"\" subject to normal 3 day settlement of equities.   This is not exactly a perfect solution.  Most Money Market ETFs will pay monthly dividends, so depending on your timing, you may have to give up some interest.  In the worst case, if you were to sell the day before going ex-dividend, then you would be giving up a months interest.  In the best case,  if you were to sell on the day of going ex-dividend, you would be giving up no interest.\""}
{"id": "89326", "text": "Checks are normally numbered sequentially, to keep them unique for record-keeping purposes. The check number takes as many digits as it takes, depending on how long the account has been open and thus how many checks have been written.  The most recent check I looked at had a four-digit number, but as has been pointed out businesses may run through thousands  per year. I recommend storing this in an unsigned long or long-long, which will probably be comparable to the bank's own limits. I don't know whether there is an explicit maximum value; we would need to find someone who knows the banking standards to answer that."}
{"id": "89378", "text": "It's a con being played upon the middle money people by the big money people and it's based on the Bernoulli Principle or Venturi Effect. Simply put -- and in analogous form -- if a lot of something goes in one direction, then a lot of other similar somethings will go in the same direction too. So, if a lot of big money gets invested into derivatives then other money will follow. That original big money is called the primer -- it primes the pump flow and gets the other money following it in. If the original money, the primer, gets removed from the process it doesn't stop the flow of other money into the flow because once the flow is going, any new money in the process acts like the original primer money, sucking in even more money; this is the Venturi Effect in action -- it's how most pumps work.  So, you prime the pump, get it flowing nicely, move your priming money out of the process and wait for the thing to suck out as much money as the economy can withstand and then *crash,* er, profit! If you've set your stakes correctly to benefit from the stopping of the flow -- the crash -- you can make billions with very little effort and practically no risk at all."}
{"id": "89484", "text": "You could have both options exercised (and assigned to you) on the same day, but I don't think you could lose money on both on the same day. The reason is that while exercises are immediate, assignments are processed after the markets close at the end of each day. See http://www.888options.com/help/faq/assignment.jsp for details. So you would get both assignments at the same time, that night. The net effect should be that you don't own any stock (someone would put you the stock, then it'd be called away) and you don't have the options anymore. You should have incoming cash of $1500 selling the stock to the call exerciser and outgoing cash of $1300 buying from the put exerciser, right? So you would have no more options but $200 more cash in your account in the morning. You bought at 13 and sold at 15. This options position is an agreement to buy at 13 and sell at 15 at someone else's option. The way you lose money is if one of the options isn't exercised while the other is, i.e. if the stock is below 13 so nobody is going to opt to buy from you at 15, but they'll sell to you at 13; or above 15 so nobody is going to opt to sell to you at 13, but they'll buy from you at 15. You make money if neither is exercised (you keep the premium you sold for) or both are exercised (you keep the gap between the two, plus the premium). Having both exercised is surely rare, since early exercise is rare to begin with, and tends to happen when options are deep in the money; so you'd expect both to be exercised if both are deep in the money at some point. Having both be exercised on the same day ... can't be common, but it's maybe most likely just before expiration with minimal time value, if the stock moves around quickly so both options are in the money at some point during the day."}
{"id": "89546", "text": "If you have made $33k from winning trades and lost $30k from loosing trades your net gain for the year would be $3k, so obviously you would pay taxes only on the net $3k gains."}
{"id": "89611", "text": "In the USA, you probably owe Self Employment Tax. The cutoff for tax on this is 400$. You will need to file a tax return and cover the medicaid expenses as if you were both the employer and employee.  In addition, if he earns income from self-employment, he may owe Self-Employment Tax, which means paying both the employee\u2019s and employer's share of Social Security and Medicaid taxes. The trigger for Self Employment Tax has been $400 since 1990, but the IRS may change that in the future. Also see the IRS website.  So yes, you need to file your taxes. How much you will pay is determined by exactly how much your income is.  If you don't file, you probably won't be audited, however you are breaking the law and should be aware of the consequences."}
{"id": "89628", "text": "\"The sentence is mathematically wrong and verbally unclear. Mathematically, you calculate the downwards percentage by So, it should be Verbally, the reporter should have written \"\"The stock is down by 25%\"\", not \"\"down by -25%\"\".\""}
{"id": "89973", "text": "\"I think Fidelity has a very nice introduction to Growth vs Value investing that may give you the background you need.  People love to put stocks in categories however the distinction is more of a range and can change over time. JB King makes a good point that for most people the two stocks you mentioned would both be considered value right now as they are both stable companies with a significant dividend.  You are correct though Pfizer might be considered \"\"more growth.\"\" A more drastic example would be the difference between Target and Amazon.  Both are retail companies that sell a wide variety of products.  Target is a value company: a established company with stable revenues that uses its income to give a fairly stable dividend.  Amazon is a growth company: that is reinvesting its revenues back into the corporation to grow itself as fast as possible.   The price of the Amazon stock reflects what people think will be future growth (future income) for the company.  Whereas Target's price appears to be based on the idea that future income will be similar to current income.  You can see why growth companies like Amazon might be more risky as that growth you paid a high price for may not be realized, but the payout may be much higher as well.\""}
{"id": "90066", "text": "This isn't a DIY area. You should talk to a lawyer about setting up a trust. Also, does the irresponsible person acknowledge that they are irresponsible? Are the legally competent? Or are you looking at a 20 year old with a big check coming down?"}
{"id": "90085", "text": "Employee Stock Purchase Plans (ESPPs) were heavily neutered by U.S. tax laws a few years ago, and many companies have cut them way back. While discounts of 15% were common a decade ago, now a company can only offer negligible discounts of 5% or less (tax free), and you can just as easily get that from fluctuations in the market. These are the features to look for to determine if the ESPP is even worth the effort: As for a cash value, if a plan has at least one of those features, (and you believe the stock has real long term value), you still have to determine how much of your money you can afford to divert into stock. If the discount is 5%, the company is paying you an extra 5% on the money you put into the plan."}
{"id": "90572", "text": "The creditors will not be able to go after his father's estate (assuming the father had nothing to do with the business), but at some point, the estate will be divided up. At that point, any money or assets that your husband inherits will be fair game, as they are now your husband's money or assets. I want to be clear; it's nothing to do with your husband being executor (or co-executor) of the estate. This does not contradict zeta-band's earlier answer; Zeta-band is talking about the estate before it is divided up, I'm just pointing out that there may be issues after it is divided up."}
{"id": "90858", "text": "\"First, consider what causes taxes to apply to a mutual fund, index or actively managed.  Dividends and capital gains are generally what will be distributed to shareholders given the nature of a mutual fund since the fund itself doesn't pay taxes.  For funds held in IRAs or other tax-advantaged accounts, this isn't a concern and thus people may not have this concern for those situations which can account for a lot of investing situations as people may have 401(k)s and IRAs that hold their investments rather than taxable accounts. Second, there can be tax-managed funds so there can be cases where a fund is managed with taxes in mind that is worth noting here as what is referenced is a \"\"Dummies\"\" link that is making a generalization.  For taxable accounts, it may make more sense to have a tax-managed fund rather than an index fund though I'd also argue to be careful of asset allocation as to maintain a purity of style can require selling of stocks that grow too big and thus trigger capital gains,e.g. small-cap and mid-cap funds that can't hold onto the winners as they would become mid-cap and large-cap instead of representing the proper asset class. A FUND THAT PLAYED IT SAFE--AND WAS SORRY would be a Businessweek story from 1998 of an actively managed fund that went mostly to cash and missed the rise of the stock market at that time if you want a specific example of what an actively managed fund can do that an index fund often cannot do.  The index fund is to track the index and stay nearly all invested all the time.\""}
{"id": "91012", "text": "Originally, stocks were ownership in a company just like any other business- you expected to make a profit from your investment, which is what we call dividends to stock holders. Since these dividends had real value, the stock price was based on what this return rate was, factoring in what it might be expected to be in the future, etc.  Nowdays many companies never issue any dividends, so you have to consider the full value of the company and what benefit could be gained by another company if it were to acquire it. the market will likely adjust the share price to factor in what the value of the company might be to an acquirer.  But otherwise, some companies today trading at an astronimical price, and which nevers pays a dividend- chalk it up to market stupidity. In this investor'd mind, there is no logical reason for these prices, except based on the idea that someone else might pay you more for it later... for what reason? I can't figure it out. Take it back to it's roots and imagine pitching a new business idea to you uncle to invest in- it will make almost nothing compared to it's share price, and even what it does make it won't pay anything to him for his investment. Why wouldn't he just laugh at you?"}
{"id": "91045", "text": "There are many different reasons to buy property and it's important to make a distinction between commercial and residential property. Historically owning property has been part of the American dream, for multiple reasons.  But to answer your questions, value is not based on the age of the building (however it can be in a historic district). In addition the price of something and it's value may or may not be directly related for each individual buyer/owner (because that becomes subjective). Some buildings can lose there value as time passes, but the depends on multiple factors (area, condition of the building, overall economy, etc.) so it's not that easy to give a specific answer to a general question.  Before you buy property amongst many things it's important to determine why you want to buy this property (what will be it's principal use for you). That will help you determine if you should buy an old or new property, but that pales in comparison to if the property will maintain and gain in value. Also if your looking for an investment look into REIT (Real Estate Investment Trust). These can be great. Why? Because you don't actually have to carry the mortgage. Which makes that ideal for people who want to own property but not have to deal with the everyday ins-and-outs of the responsibility of ownership....like rising cost. It's important to note that the cost of purchase and cost of ownership are two different things but invariably linked when buying anything in the material strata of our world. You can find publicly traded REITs on the major stock exchanges. Hope that helps."}
{"id": "91183", "text": "\"There is a very simple calculation that will answer the question: Is the expected ROI of the 401K including the match greater than the interest rate of your credit card? Some assumptions that don't affect the calculation, but do help illustrate the points. You have 30 years until you can pull out the 401K. Your credit card interest rate is 20% compounded annually.  The minimum payoffs are being disregarded, because that would legally just force a certain percentage to credit card. You only have $1000.  You can either pay off your credit card or invest, but not both.  For most people, this isn't the case.  Ideally, you would simply forego $1000 worth of spending, AND DO BOTH  Worked Example: Pay $1000 in Credit Card Debt, at 20% interest.   After 1 year, if you pay off that debt, you no longer owe $1200.  ROI = 20% (Duh!) After 30 years, you no longer owe (and this is pretty amazing) $237,376.31.  ROI = 23,638% In all cases, the ROI is GUARANTEED. Invest $1000 in matching 401k, with expected ROI of 5%. 2a. For illustration purposes, let's assume no match After 1 year, you have $1050 ($1000 principal, $0 match, 5% interest) - but you can't take it out. ROI = 5% After 30 years, you have $4321.94, ROI of 332% - assuming away all risk. 2b. Then, we'll assume a 50% match. After 1 year, you have $1575 ($1000 principle, $500 match, 5% interest) - but you can't take it out. ROI = 57% - but you are  stuck for a bit After 30 years, you have $6482.91, ROI of 548% - assuming away all risk. 2c. Finally, a full match After 1 year, you have $2100 ($1000 principle, $1000 match, 5% interest) - but you can't take it out. ROI = 110% - but again, you are stuck. After 30 years, you have $8643.89, ROI of 764% - assuming away all risk. Here's the summary - The interest rate is really all that matters.  Paying off a credit card is a guaranteed investment.   The only reason not to pay off a 20% credit card interest rate is if, after taxes, time, etc..., you could earn more than 20% somewhere else.   Note that at 1 year, the matching funds of a 401k, in all cases where the match exceeded 20%, beat the credit card. If you could take that money before you could have paid off the credit card, it would have been a good deal. The problem with the 401k is that you can't realize that gain until you retire. Credit Card debt, on the other hand, keeps growing until you pay it off. As such, paying off your credit card debt - assuming its interest rate is greater than the stock market (which trust me, it almost always is) - is the better deal. Indeed, with the exception of tax advantaged mortgages, there is almost no debt that has an interest rate than is \"\"better\"\" than the market.\""}
{"id": "91201", "text": "In this example you are providing 4x more collateral than you are borrowing.  Credit score shouldn't matter, regardless of how risky a borrower you are.  Sure it costs time and money to go to auction, but this can be factored into your interest rate / fees. I don't see how the bank can lose."}
{"id": "91208", "text": "Berkshire Hathaway issues first ever-negative coupon security from back in 2002 had this part: The warrants will give the holder the right to purchase either shares   of the Company's class A or class B common stock at the holder\u2019s   option. The initial exercise price represents a 15% premium over the   closing price of the class A shares on the NYSE on May 21, 2002. The   Notes will pay holders a 3.0% interest rate per annum and holders will   pay 3.75% installment payments per annum on the warrants. The warrant   payments due from holders will be greater than the coupon on the   senior notes, effectively making SQUARZ the first negative coupon   security. Berkshire Hathaway will use the net proceeds from the   issuance for general corporate purposes, including possible   acquisitions, none of which are pending. This would be an example where the strike price was 15% higher than the closing price yet the security sold well."}
{"id": "91325", "text": "\"This is going to depend on the tax jurisdiction and I have no knowledge of the rules in Illinois.  But I'd like to give you some direction about how to think about this.   The biggest problem that you might hit is that if you collect a single check and then distribute to the tutors, you may be considered their employer.  As an employer, you would be responsible for things like  This is not meant as an exhaustive list.   Even if not an employer, you are still paying them.  You would be responsible for issuing 1099 forms to anyone who goes above $600 for the year (source).   You would need to file for a taxpayer identification number for your organization, as it is acting as a business.  You need to give this number to the school so that they can issue the correct form to you.  You might have to register a \"\"Doing Business As\"\" name.  It's conceivable that you could get away with having the school write the check to you as an individual.  But if you do that, it will show up as income on your taxes and you will have to deduct payments to the other tutors.   If the organization already has a separate tax identity, then you could use that.  Note that the organization will be responsible for paying income tax.  It should be able to deduct payments to the tutors as well as marketing expenses, etc.   If the school will go for it, consider structuring things with a payment to your organization for your organization duties.  Then you tell the school how much to pay each tutor.  You would be responsible for giving the school the necessary information, like name, address, Social Security number, and cost (or possibly hours worked).\""}
{"id": "91388", "text": "So the bank can (theoretically) compare that signature to the ID you provide, showing that the names and signatures match and that you are the person to whom the check was written."}
{"id": "91576", "text": "Yes that is the case for the public company approach, but I was referring to the transaction approach:   Firm A and Firm B both have $100 in EBITDA. Firm A has $50 in cash, Firm B has $100 in cash.  Firm A sells for $500, Firm B sells for $600.  If we didn't subtract cash before calculating the multiple: Firm A: 5x Firm B: 6x  If we DO subtract cash before calculating the multiple: Firm A: 4.5x Firm B: 5x  So yea, subtracting cash does skew the multiple."}
{"id": "91717", "text": "Your son is completely free to pay off your mortgage if he wants. However in most jurisdictions it counts as a gift to you, and will be subject to gift tax, or its equivalent. This is why the bank doesn't want to receive payments directly from your son, so that they are not caught up in the reporting of this. If you are in the US, this is a good page about Gift Tax."}
{"id": "92201", "text": "Yes timing does matter. Using a simple Rate of Change indicator over the past 100 days and smoothed out with a 50 day Moving Average, I have plotted the S&P 500 since the start of 2007.  The idea is to buy when the ROC indicator crosses above the zero line and sell when the ROC indicator crosses below the zero line. I have compared the results below of timing the markets from the start of 2007 to dollar cost averaging starting from the start of 2007 and investing every 6 months. $80k is invested in both cases.  For the timing the market option $80k was invested at the start of 2007, then the total figure was sold out when a sell signal was given, then the total amount reinvested when a new buy signal was given. For the DCA option $5000 was invested every 6 months starting from the start of 2007 until the last investment at the start of July 2014. The results are below:  Timing the markets results in more than double the returns (not including dividends and brokerage). Edit It has been brought up that I haven't considered tax in my Timing the Market option. So I have updated my timing the market spread-sheet to take into account both long-term and short-term CGT in the USA for someone on the highest tax bracket. The results are below:  The result is still almost a 2x higher returns for the timing the markets option.  Also note that even with the DCA option you will have to sell one day and pay CGT on any profits there. However, the real danger with the DCA option is if you need to sell during a market downturn and not make any profits at all."}
{"id": "92284", "text": "You need to do a few things to analyze your results. First, look at the timing of the deposits, and try to confirm the return you state. If it's still as high as you think, can you attribute it to one lucky stock purchase?  I have an account that's up 863% from 1998 till 2013. Am I a genius? Hardly. That account, one of many, happened to have stocks that really outperformed, Apple among them.  If you are that good, a career change may be in order. Few are that good. Joe"}
{"id": "92442", "text": "Is there any benefit to investing in a Roth 401(k) plan, as opposed to a Roth IRA?  They have separate contribution limits, so how much you contribute to one does not change the amount you can contribute to the other.  Which is relevant to your question because you said  the earnings on that account compounded over the next 40 years growing tax-free will be much higher than what I'd save on current taxes on a traditional 401(k).   This is only true if you max out your contribution limits.  If you start with the same amount of money and have the same marginal tax rate in both years, it doesn't matter which one you pick.   Start with $10,000 to invest.  With the traditional, you can invest all $10,000.  With the Roth, you pay taxes on it and then invest it.  Let's assume a tax rate of 25%.  So invest $7500.   Let's assume that you invest either amount long enough to double four times (forty years at 7% return after inflation is about right).  So the traditional has $160,000 and the Roth has $120,000.   Now you withdraw them.  For simplicity's sake, we'll pretend it's all one year.  It's probably over several years, but the math is easier in a single year.  With the Roth, you have $120,000.  With the traditional, you have to pay tax.  Again, let's assume 25%.  So that's $40,000, leaving you with $120,000 from the traditional.  That is the same amount as the Roth!   So it would make sense to  If you can max out both, great.  You do that for forty years and your retirement will be as financially secure as you can make it.  If you can't max them out, the most important thing is the employer match.  That's free money.  Then you may prefer your Roth IRA to the 401k.   Note that you can also roll over your Roth 401k to a Roth IRA.  Then you can withdraw your contributions from the Roth IRA without penalty or additional tax.  Alternate source.   Beyond answering your question, I would still like to reiterate that Roth or traditional does not have a big effect on your investment unless you max them out or you have different tax rates now versus in retirement.  It may change other things.  For example, you can roll over a Roth 401k to a Roth IRA without paying taxes.  And the Roth IRA will act like it was contributed directly.  You have to check with your employer what their rollover rules are.  They may allow it any time or only at employment separation (when you leave the job).   If you do max out your Roth accounts, then they will perform better than the traditional accounts at the same nominal contribution.  This is because they are tax free while your returns in the other accounts will have to pay taxes. But it doesn't matter until you hit the limits.  Until then, you could just invest the tax savings of the traditional as well as the money you could invest in a Roth."}
{"id": "92549", "text": "It is absolutely worth it.  My wife and I have two of these accounts (different banks).  We are required to use our cards 20 times for one bank, and 15 for the other.  We have yet to miss the required transactions in a month (over 15 months of use now), and are actually considering getting a third account.  Between the two of us, we simply have to use our card on average once a day. Getting gas? Use your debit card. Getting stamps? Use your debit card? Self checkout? Use your debit card twice. Eating out? Use your debit card. If married, split the bill. As soon as we reach the minimum, we stop using the debit cards and switch to credit cards to further boost the rewards.  Maybe it's easier for us since we don't have kids and are out a lot, but 12 transactions is really simple to obtain.  We receive ~$100 a month from our two accounts, all for doing something we already do."}
{"id": "92670", "text": "I am close to retirement and sell cash secured puts and covered calls on a regular basis.  I make 15 % plus per year from the puts.  Less risky than buying stocks, which I also do.  Riskier than bonds, but several times the income. Example:  I owned 4,000 shares of XYZ, which I bought last year at 6.50 and was at 7.70 two months ago.  I sold 3,000 shares, sold 10 Dec puts @ 7.50 (1,000 shares) for $.90 per share and sold 10 Dec calls at 10.00 for $.20.  Now I had cash from the sale of 3,000 shares ($23,100) plus $900 cash from the sale of the puts, plus $200 cash from the sale of the calls.  Price is now at 6.25.  Had I held the 4,000 shares, I would be down $5,800 from when it was 7.70. Instead, I am down $1,450 from the held 1,000 shares, down $550 on the put and up $200 on the calls.  So down $1,800 instead of down $5,800.  I began buying XYZ back at 6.25 today."}
{"id": "92819", "text": "I was only able to find Maryland form 1 to fit your question, so I'll assume you're referring to this form. Note the requirement: Generally all tangible personal property owned, leased, consigned or   used by the business and located within the State of Maryland on   January 1, 201 must be reported. Software license (whether time limited or not, i.e.: what you consider as rental vs purchase) is not tangible property, same goes to the license for the course materials. Note, with digital media - you don't own the content, you merely paid for the license to use it. Design books may be reportable as personal tangible property, and from your list that's the only thing I think should be reported. However, having never stepped a foot in Maryland and having never seen (or even heard of) this ridiculous form before, I'd suggest you verify my humble opinion with a tax adviser (EA/CPA) licensed in the State of Maryland to confirm my understanding of this form."}
{"id": "92938", "text": "gnasher729's answer is fundamentally correct and deserves the checkmark, but I'd like to give an economic explanation for how this economically functions. The key point from gnasher729's answer's that the interest rate is 49.9% for one company. While this may be much higher than the equilibrium rate, the true market interest rate, it is not completely unreasonable because of the risk. For credit to be continually produced, default risk must be compensated because this is a cost to the lender.  Most are not in business to lose money, so making loans to borrowers that default 40% of the time would make this interest rate reasonable. For UK citizens, this would not be such a problem because the lender can usually pursue the borrower for the balance, but if the borrower can disavow the loan and leave the legal reach of the UK creditors, the collection rate is 0%. The guarantee by the foreign persons not present in the UK is incidental and probably more of a regulatory requirement since the inability to collect from them is just as unlikely. One should always look for the lowest price with at least minimum quality when shopping for anything, but you are right to be apprehensive legally.  Read every line and be sure that you yourself understand every clause before signing. If alternative cheaper financing is available, it is probably superior."}
{"id": "93073", "text": "You can invest more that 20,000 in Infrastructure bonds, however the tax benefit is only on 20,000. Further the interest earned is taxable. The best guaranteed post tax returns is on PPF. So invest a substantial sum in this. As your age group low you can afford to take risk and hence could also look at investing in ELSS [Mutual Fund].   A note on each of these investments:  LIC: If you have taken any of the endowment / Money Back plan, remember the returns are very low around 5-6%. It would make more sense to buy a pure term plan at fraction of the cost and invest the remaining premium into even PPF or FD that would give you more return.  NSC/Postal Savings: They are a good option, however the interest is taxable. There is a locking of 6 years.  PPF: The locking is large 15 years although one can do partial withdrawals after 7 years. The interest is not taxable.  ULIP: These are market linked plans with Insurance and balance invested into markets. The charges for initial few years is quite high, plus the returns are not comparable to the normal Mutual Funds. Invest in this only if one needs less paper and doesn't want to track things separately.  ELSS/Mutual Fund: These offer good market returns, but there is a risk of market. As you are young you can afford to take the risk. Most of the ELSS have given average results that are still higher than FD or PPF.  Pension Plan: This is a good way to accumulate for retirement. Invest some small amount in this and do not take any insurance on it. Go for pure equity as you can still take the risk. This ensures that you have a kit for retirement. Check out the terms and conditions as to how you need to purchase annuity at the term end etc."}
{"id": "93129", "text": "This is Rob Bennett, the fellow who developed the Valuation-Informed Indexing strategy and the fellow who is discussed in the comment above. The facts stated in that comment are accurate -- I went to a zero stock allocation in the Summer of 1996 because of my belief in Robert Shiller's research showing that valuations affect long-term returns. The conclusion stated, that I have said that I do not myself follow the strategy, is of course silly. If I believe in it, why wouldn't I follow it? It's true that this is a long-term strategy. That's by design. I see that as a benefit, not a bad thing. It's certainly true that VII presumes that the Efficient Market Theory is invalid. If I thought that the market were efficient, I would endorse Buy-and-Hold. All of the conventional investing advice of recent decades follows logically from a belief in the Efficient Market Theory. The only problem I have with that advice is that Shiller's research discredits the Efficient Market Theory. There is no one stock allocation that everyone following a VII strategy should adopt any more than there is any one stock allocation that everyone following a Buy-and-Hold strategy should adopt. My personal circumstances have called for a zero stock allocation. But I generally recommend that the typical middle-class investor go with a 20 percent stock allocation even at times when stock prices are insanely high. You have to make adjustments for your personal financial circumstances. It is certainly fair to say that it is strange that stock prices have remained insanely high for so long. What people are missing is that we have never before had claims that Buy-and-Hold strategies are supported by academic research. Those claims caused the biggest bull market in history and it will take some time for the widespread belief in such claims to diminish. We are in the process of seeing that happen today.  The good news is that, once there is a consensus that Buy-and-Hold can never work, we will likely have the greatest period of economic growth in U.S. history. The power of academic research has been used to support Buy-and-Hold for decades now because of the widespread belief that the market is efficient. Turn that around and investors will possess a stronger belief in the need to practice long-term market timing than they have ever possessed before. In that sort of environment, both bull markets and bear markets become logical impossibilities. Emotional extremes in one direction beget emotional extremes in the other direction. The stock market has been more emotional in the past 16 years than it has ever been in any earlier time (this is evidenced by the wild P/E10 numbers that have applied for that entire time-period). Now that we are seeing the losses that follow from investing in highly emotional ways, we may see rational strategies becoming exceptionally popular for an exceptionally long period of time. I certainly hope so! The comment above that this will not work for individual stocks is correct. This works only for those investing in indexes. The academic research shows that there has never yet in 140 years of data been a time when Valuation-Informed Indexing has not provided far higher long-term returns at greatly diminished risk. But VII is not a strategy designed for stock pickers. There is no reason to believe that it would work for stock pickers. Thanks much for giving this new investing strategy some thought and consideration and for inviting comments that help investors to understand both points of view about it. Rob"}
{"id": "93271", "text": "If we're including psychological considerations, then the question becomes much more complicated: will having a higher available credit increase the temptation to spend? Will eliminating 100% of a small debt provide more positive reinforcement than paying off 15% of a larger debt? Etc. If we're looking at the pure financial impact, the question is simpler. The only advantage I see to prioritizing the lower interest card is the float: when you buy something on a credit card, interest is often calculated for that purchase starting at the beginning of the next billing cycle, rather than immediately from the purchase date. I'm not clear on what policies credit card companies have on giving float for credit cards with a carried balance, so you should look into what your card's policy is.  Other than than, paying off the higher interest rate card is better than paying off the lower interest rate. On top of that, you should look into whether you qualify for any of the following options (presented from best to worst):"}
{"id": "93519", "text": "You are currently $30k in debt.  I realize it is tempting to purchase a new car with your new job, but increasing your debt right now is heading in the wrong direction.  Adding a new monthly payment into your budget would be a mistake, in my opinion. Here is what I would suggest.  Since you have $7k in the bank, spend up to $6k on a nice used car.  This will keep $1k in the bank for emergencies, and give you transportation without adding debt and a monthly payment.  Then you can focus on knocking out the student loans.   Won't it be nice when those student loans are gone?  By not going further into debt, you will be much closer to that day.  New cars are a luxury that you aren't in a position to splurge on yet."}
{"id": "93523", "text": "The simple answer is that you have to read the terms and conditions when you sign up for a checking account at the bank. The process of fraud investigation varies from bank to bank.  Ultimately most banks will refund the money if you are not deemed negligent. Some banks offer quick reimbursement during fraud claims, but many will not refund the money until the investigation is complete (which can take several weeks). Checking accounts are terrible security problems. If you're looking for ways to avoid a hassle, stop writing checks and using ATM/Debit cards. If you must send checks to pay bills, use the bill-pay system that is now common with most banks (they use a service to send checks on your behalf and don't even charge you for postage unless you ask for expedited processing)."}
{"id": "93564", "text": "It's not really that useful as a currency right now though, is it?    Leaving aside that you could only spend it in certain locations or the time it would take for a transaction to be confirmed, the fact that every transaction in which you pay with Bitcoin counts as a realization of the capital gain would make it quite cumbersome for most anyone to actually use it as a currency.  Then there's the issue of the fluctuating price of a bitcoin, which would make using it as a pricing mechanism quite cumbersome as well."}
{"id": "93727", "text": "I've looked into Thinkorswim; my father uses it. Although better than eTrade, it wasn't quite what I was looking for. Interactive Brokers is a name I had heard a long time ago but forgotten. Thank you for that, it seems to be just what I need."}
{"id": "93744", "text": "Yes you do. You're under the jurisdiction of at least one country where you're resident, or where you're citizen. You may be under jurisdiction of more than one country. Each country has its own laws about what and how should be taxed and countries have treaties between them to resolve jurisdiction issues and double taxation situations, so you should talk to a tax accountant licensed to provide you with an advice."}
{"id": "93890", "text": "\"The main difference between a bull market and a bear market is due the \"\"the leverage effect\"\". http://www.princeton.edu/~yacine/leverage.pdf The leverage effect refers to the observed tendency of an asset\u2019s   volatility to be negatively correlated with the asset\u2019s returns.   Typically, rising asset prices are accompanied by declining   volatility, and vice versa. The term \u201cleverage\u201d refers to one possible   economic interpretation of this phenomenon, developed in Black (1976)   and Christie (1982): as asset prices decline, companies become   mechanically more leveraged since the relative value of their debt   rises relative to that of their equity. As a result, it is natural to   expect that their stock becomes riskier, hence more volatile. More volatile assets in a bear market are not such good investments as less volatile assets in a bull market.\""}
{"id": "94062", "text": "200% margin for a short sale is outrageous. You should only need to put up 150% margin, of which 50% is your money, and the 100% is the proceeds.  With $100 of your money, you should be able to buy $100 of GOOG and short $100 of PNQI."}
{"id": "94117", "text": "This can be best explained with an example. Bob thinks the price of a stock that Alice has is going to go down by the end of the week, so he borrows a share at $25 from Alice. The current price of the shares are $25 per share. Bob immediately sells the shares to Charlie for $25, it is fair, it is the current market price. A week goes by, and the price does fall to $20. Bob buys a share from David at $20. This is fair, it is the current market value. Then Bob gives the share back to Alice to settle what he borrowed from her, one share. Now, in reality, there is interest charged be Alice on the borrowed value, but to keep it simple, we'll say she was a friend and it was a zero interest loan. So then Bob was able to sell something he didn't own for $25 and return it spending $20 to buy it, settling his loan and making $5 in the transaction. It is the selling to Charlie and buying from David (or even Charlie later, if he decided to dump the shares), without having invested any of your own money that earns the profit."}
{"id": "94159", "text": "\"I don't have anything definitive, but in general positions in a company are not affected materially by what is called a corporate action. \"\"Corp Actions\"\" can really be anything that affects the details of a stock. Common examples are a ticker change, or exchange change, IPO (ie a new ticker), doing a split, or merging with another ticker. All of these events do not change the total value of people's positions. If a stock splits, you might have more shares, but they are worth less per share. A merger is quite similar to a split. The old company's stock is converted two the new companies stock at some ratio (ie 10 shares become 1 share) and then converted 1-to-1 to the new symbol. Shorting a stock that splits is no different. You shorted 10 shares, but after the split those are now 100 shares, when you exit the position you have to deliver back 100 \"\"new\"\" shares, though dollar-for-dollar they are the same total value. I don't see why a merger would affect your short position. The only difference is you are now shorting a different company, so when you exit the position you'll have to deliver shares of the new company back to the brokerage where you \"\"borrowed\"\" the shares you shorted.\""}
{"id": "94230", "text": "If the question is where banks get the money used to pay interest they owe: they do so by lending that money to us at a higher interest rate. They make a gross profit from the interest we pay, they pass part of that to their depositors as interest, part of it goes to service their own debts, part of it may go to stockholders as dividends, and the rest is net profit."}
{"id": "94434", "text": "Here's a great Canadian college/university cost calculator I used; found at Canadian Business - they say: Our tool is divided into three easy   steps. First, calculate the tuition   cost for the university and faculty   you wish to attend. Then, calculate any additional fees   for residence (on campus student   housing), meal plans, athletics,   health and student services. This will   give you the total cost a student will   pay at a Canadian university in   2006/7. Once you know the total annual cost,   take the third step to calculate the   total cost for the duration of the   course of study. Of course, this only calculates what it will cost you NOW, not eighteen years from now, but it's a good start :)"}
{"id": "94520", "text": "\"Find approximate housing-cost difference, which is likely to swamp the tax differences. Find a cost-of-living measurement you believe for each state and figure appropriate state's sales tax on the non-housing portion of it (numbers can be found on line). Figure out roughly what your state income tax would be (forms on line). Figure city sales tax for each city you'd live in (again, numbers on line). Determine transportation cost differences. Determine entertainment cost differences (\"\"First prize: one week in Hackensack. Second prize: TWO weeks!\"\")  Mix and add seasonings to taste... Then remember that many people commute into the City, including from NJ, so run the numbers that way... and think about how much time you're willing to spend communting every day (and via which forms of transportation); the worse the commute, the less housing costs. Then remember that companies in NYC are aware of all the above, and are likely to adjust their salaries to partly offset it... because otherwise they couldn't recruit anyone who wasn't already a Noo Yawker... so the real question here is whether their adjustment, plus not living in Noo Joisey, is enough to make up the difference for you. To get more accuracy than that, you need to start nailing down specifics. Possible. Not trivial.\""}
{"id": "94630", "text": "This looks correct to me, for simple interest. If you are dealing with compound interest, the formula would be: So, A = 500000(1+0.036/365)^(30), or 501,481.57, or an interest of 1481.57, assuming the 3.6% is the annual nominal interest rate and it is compounded daily. Note that you are ignoring the depreciation and also ignoring the percentage of customers who will forfeit their debt in the 30 - 60 day period."}
{"id": "94690", "text": "The day trader in the article was engaging in short selling.  Short selling is a technique used to profit when a stock goes down.  The investor borrows shares of a stock from someone else and sells them.  After the stock price goes down, the investor buys the shares back and returns them, pocketing the difference. As the day trader in the article found out, it is a dangerous practice, because there is no limit to the amount of money you can lose. The stock was trading at $2, and the day trader thought the stock was going to go down to $1.  He borrowed and sold 8,400 shares at $2.  He hoped to buy them back at $1 and earn $8,400 profit.  Instead, the stock went up a lot, and he was forced to buy back the shares at $18.50 per share, or about $155,400.  He had had $37,000 with E-Trade, which they took, and he is now over $100,000 in debt."}
{"id": "94839", "text": "Why is it that people spend more time pricing their newest phone plan than their house, or educational costs.  You see students going to law school who have never job shadowed a real lawyer to even see what reality looks like and have no idea the real job prospects.  I'd feel bad, but it takes so little leg work and planning to keep yourself from self imposed financial doom."}
{"id": "94858", "text": "I'm not sure that you're considering all the options.   So you may not subtract $X from B, but you do compare NPV(B) to $Y.   Also, remember that we're not trying to figure out the return on B.  We're trying to figure out what to do next.  In terms of planning, the sunk cost is irrelevant.  But in terms of calculating return, A was a turkey.  And to calculate the return, we would include $X in our costs for B.  And for the second option, we'd subtract $X from $Y (may be negative).   Sunk costs are irrelevant to planning, but they are very relevant to retrospective analysis.  Please don't confuse the two.  When looking back, part of the cost for B will be that $X.  But in the middle, after paying $X and before starting B, the $X is gone.  You only have the building and have to make your decision based on the options you have at that moment.   You will sometimes hear $Y called the opportunity cost of B.  You could sell out for $Y or you could do B.  You should only do B if it is worth more than $Y.   The sunk cost fallacy would be comparing B to $X.  Assuming $Y is less than $X, this would make you not do B when it is your best path forward from that moment.  I.e. $Y < NPV(B) < $X means that you should do the project.  You will lose money (apparently that's a foregone conclusion), but you will lose less money than if you just sold out.   You should also do B if $Y < $X < NPV(B) or $X < $Y < NPV(B).  In general, you should do B any time $Y < NPV(B).  The only time you should not do B is if NPV(B) < $Y.  If they are exactly equal, then it doesn't matter financially whether you do B or not."}
{"id": "95116", "text": "Because you're not married, its a partnership agreement, and unless there's a written contract, either the two of you agree on how to handle the home, or it's off to court you go. If you were both supposed to pay for the home, and he failed to for a a while, that would put him in breach of contract which I would think gives you a good position in court. On the other hand, if you are at all concerned about your safety from this louse, remember, he knows exactly where the house is."}
{"id": "95282", "text": "\"Contribute as much as you can.  When do you want to retire and how much income do you think you'll need? A $1M portfolio yielding 5% will yield $50,000/year. Do some research about how to build a portfolio... this site is a good start, but check out books on retirement planning and magazines like Money and Kiplinger. If you don't speak \"\"money\"\" or are intimidated by investing, look for a fee-based financial advisor whom you are comfortable with.\""}
{"id": "95390", "text": "\"Where are you from? The Netherlands has tax treaties with different countries that may offer you some additional options. The Netherlands calculates a maximum tax free contribution to your pension each year based on your income. If you contributed less than you were allowed to (pensioengat), you can invest the difference between your actual and allowed contributions in special retirement investments that usually offer tax advantages. A gap like this can be due to getting a bonus or a raise. After looking around, the investments available are either a special savings account (banksparen) or an annuity (lijfrente).  Your allowed contributions to both will be tax deductible and the investment itself is excluded from wealth tax (box 3 taxes).  I also see Aegon offering an \"\"investment annuity\"\" that lets you invest in any of 7 of their mutual funds until a certain date at which time you liquidate and use the proceeds to fund an annuity. With the Dutch retirement options, wou will not in general get the same freedom of choice or low costs associated with IRAs in the US.  I'm not sure about ISAs in the UK.  It's also important to check any tax agreements between countries to ensure your chosen investment vehicle gets the tax advantaged treatment in your home country as it does in the Netherlands.  For US citizens, this is important even when living abroad.  For others, it is important if you return to your home country and still have this investment. If you are a US citizen, you have an additional option.  The US / Dutch tax treaty allows you to make these contributions to preexisting (i.e. you had these before moving to NL) retirement accounts in the US like an IRA. Note that in practice it may be difficult to contribute to an existing Roth IRA because you would need to have earned income after the foreign income tax deduction but less than the maximum income for a Roth contribution.\""}
{"id": "95441", "text": "It's income. It's almost certainly subject to income tax. As miscellaneous income, if nothing else. (That's what hobby income usually falls under.) If you kept careful records of the cost of developing the app, you might be able to offset those against the income... again, as with hobby income."}
{"id": "95598", "text": "\"Now store the money in -- okay here, think about a realistic worst case scenario.  Not zombie attack or meteor mega-strike, but the kinds  in which you are not entirely helpless: job loss stacked on top of the worst recession since the Great Depression, along with credit drying up so you can't just borrow your way through the hard times.   Store the money in an account and investment which is  relatively liquid, meaning you could extract cash value from it fairly easily in a worst case scneario.  Safe -- essentially impossible to lose significant value in a worst case scenario.  (or, you only count the part of its value that's sure to be there in a worst case.) If you're much too cool for an emergency fund, then sorry to waste your valuable time!    For the rest of us, it's a planning tool.   Even dot-coms do this: it's called a \"\"burn-rate\"\" and they know exactly how many more weeks their VC can fund operations.    Of course in practicality, it may not go to X months of routine expenses. Most of it may get burned up in month 2 on a new transmission.  You can't really predict this stuff, the \"\"X month\"\" paradigm is just an arm-wave.   For the financially uneducated, it's also a training tool.   In the US, school does not provide financial education.  Most people get financial habits from their parents, and like most family lessons, they are deeply emotionally wired, even if they are unconscious of that fact.  For instance, some people don't ask for the salaries they deserve, and spend lavishly until the checkbook is zero - they literally push money away.  Suffice it to say, it's a challenge to get some people to even realize that savings is a thing, when they have never in their whole lives been able to hold onto more than $20 for more than a week. The concept of an emergency fund is a sellable way to break through that \"\"I can't save\"\" mental-block. So I can see where you might think the emergency fund is greasy kidstuff.   Fair.  But it's not just that, it's also a very practical planning tool.\""}
{"id": "95724", "text": "You won't be paying any taxes for income generated in the US as long as you are not-resident in India. You pay US taxes. You can file a null return in India just in case (all zeroes). If you have any income in India - bank deposits in your name, house rental income and so on - that needs to be declared and tax needs to be paid in India."}
{"id": "95778", "text": "\"The expression \"\"in debt\"\" when talking about a person's financial affairs means that the sum of debit balances on all accounts exceeds the sum of credit balances on all accounts.    A mortgage account is not excluded from that. This definition also does not consider whether any of the debt is secured, or ownership of assets (shares, property, chattels, etc).   So, someone with a mortgage of one million dollars for a home that is worth two million is in debt by one million dollars, until they they sell the home (for that amount) and pay down the mortgage. That means \"\"in debt\"\" is not necessarily a statement about net worth.\""}
{"id": "95889", "text": "It's important to remember what a share is.  It's a tiny portion of ownership of a company. Let's pretend we're talking about shares in a manufacturing company.  The company has one million shares on its register.  You own one thousand of them.  That means that you own 1/1000th of the company. These shares are valued by the market at $10 per share.  The company has machinery and land worth $1M.  That means that for every dollar of the company you own, 10c of that value is backed by the physical assets of the company.  If the company closed shop tomorrow, you could, in theory at least, get $1 back per share.  The other $9 of the share value is value based on speculation about the future and current ability of the company to grow and earn income. The company is using its $1M in assets and land to produce goods which cost the company $1M in ongoing costs (wages, marketing, raw cost of goods etc...) to produce and make $2M per year in sales.  That means the company is making a profit of $1M per annum (let's assume for the sake of simplicity that this profit is after tax). Now what can the company do with its $1M profit?  It can hand it out to the owners of the company (which means you would get a $1 dividend each year for each share that you own) or it can re-invest that money into additional equipment, product lines or something which will grow the business.  The dividend would be nice, but if the owners bought $500k worth of new machinery and land and spent another $500k on ongoing costs and next year we would end up with a profit of $1.5M. So in ten years time, if the company paid out everything in dividends, you would have doubled your money, but they would have machines which are ten years older and would not have grown in value for that entire time.  However, if they reinvested their profits, the compounding growth will have resulted in a company many times larger than it started. Eventually in practice there is a limit to the growth of most companies and it is at this limit where dividends should be being paid out.  But in most cases you don't want a company to pay a dividend.  Remember that dividends are taxed, meaning that the government eats into your profits today instead of in the distant future where your money will have grown much higher. Dividends are bad for long term growth, despite the rather nice feeling they give when they hit your bank account (this is a simplification but is generally true). TL;DR - A company that holds and reinvests its profits can become larger and grow faster making more profit in the future to eventually pay out.  Do you want a $1 dividend every year for the next 10 years or do you want a $10 dividend in 5 years time instead?"}
{"id": "95910", "text": "We offer a far reaching scope of services including review and affirmation, bookkeeping, duty and business admonitory to customers extending from little nearby customers to huge multinational organizations. Further, through our VALIS Group Inc participation, we can join nearby mastery with the information and experience of individual VALIS Group Inc individuals around the world. The procedure Same day company formation of organization fuse in Wilmington, DE doesn't take long if every one of the reports are legitimately submitted and it can last half a month. The outside business visionaries must pick the correct sort of organization to build up considering different perspectives, for example, the offer capital, the destinations and the aggregate number of shareholders."}
{"id": "95948", "text": "If your criteria has changed but some of your existing holdings don't meet your new criteria you should eventually liquidate them, because they are not part of your new strategy. However, you don't want to just liquidate them right now if they are currently performing quite well (share price currently uptrending).  One way you could handle this is to place a trailing stop loss on the stocks that don't meet your current criteria and let the market take you out when the stocks have stopped up trending."}
{"id": "96017", "text": "Itunes U has some really good online classes on economics. And as with a lot of things check out Khanacademy.org. He has a whole financial section of really well made videos.   Good books to read regarding the financial crisis are The Big Short by Lewis and Too Big To Fail by Sorkin."}
{"id": "96021", "text": "I choose lifecycle funds because I am placing faith (perhaps foolishly) that a full time fund manager knows better what to pick than I.  The same reason I go with mutual funds in general apply to to why I also have the lifecycle funds.  Presently my diversification strategy is really just index funds and lifecycle funds. The radio advice guy Clark Howard often promotes them. http://www.wacotrib.com/none/content/shared/money/stories/clark/0601/060425money.html (I count in the intimidated group)"}
{"id": "96045", "text": "There's a lot going on here. I'd be making the maximum ($5500 for a single person under 50) contribution to the Roth IRA each year. Not too late to put in for 2014 before Wednesday, 4/15.  Not out of your income, but from the T Rowe Price account. As long as you have earned income, you can make an IRA deposit up to the limit, 5500, or up to that income. The money itself can come from other funds. Just explain to Dad, you're turning the money into a long term retirement account. I doubt that will trouble him.  Aside from that, too much will change when you are out of school. At 18, it's a matter of learning to budget, save what you can, don't get into debt for stupid things. (Stupid, not as I would judge, but as the 25 year old you will judge.)"}
{"id": "96822", "text": "If you are looking for a professional firm to represent you in an honest, legal, comprehensive, and timely fashion, where customer service and support is second to none, then you owe it yourself to have us here at Legacy Legal Services handle your credit issues."}
{"id": "96828", "text": "\"It's only a \"\"loss\"\" if you believe the purpose of indexes is to represent the basket of underlying companies with the highest returns.  But that's simply not true.  An index is just a rules-based way to track/measure a thing.  That thing could be the largest US companies, all the companies in a specific sector, all of the companies in the world, a commodity or basket of commodities... Pretty much anything.  Somebody just has to write down the explanation of what an index tracks, then create ETFs to track the index.  By being a \"\"passive investor\"\" you are still making active investing decisions to some degree, in that you need to decide which indexes to passively invest in.  If people are not going to attempt to understand the companies they invest in because they're almost certainly better off indexing (which is fine), then the responsibility must fall on someone to make decisions about what are the best rules for the indexes.  For most of the history of capital markets, good corporate governance has been enforced by shareholders.  If management did something bad, shareholders could vote to replace the Board of Directors and in general they had tools to hold management accountable.  Only in recent years, founders of companies like Google, Facebook, Snap, etc., have attempted to subvert this relationship (public shareholders give a company money, and in return the company must answer to the shareholders) and essentially take money for nothing.  So far (it's still a pretty short experiment) this has worked as long as the share price is going up, but what happens when it doesn't?  What happens when these companies screw up and stop performing well, and there's nothing shareholders can do about it?  Investors who intentionally own individual shares will have little to no leverage to demand change, and passive investors would be stuck with some of their money in these companies with terrible governance - and the precedent would only make dual-class and non-voting shares more attractive for future IPOs, making the problem more prevalent.  If you think it is in your best interest to own the entire S&amp;P 500, *plus* Snap, then just do that.  For every dollar you invest into SPDR or something similar, allocate something like $0.01 into Snap.  It's that simple.  But don't make this out to be a story about how S&amp;P is anti-free markets or doing a disservice to investors.  That's ridiculous.  If most Americans are just going to blindly put their retirement savings into index funds without bothering to understand them (again, which is fine) then somebody needs to make sure the companies in said indexes are good companies.  Historically, a company with zero corporate governance and entrenched management =/= a \"\"good company\"\".  S&amp;P realized this and decided to set a good precedent for US equity markets rather than a very bad precedent.  You wanna buy shares with no voting rights?  Go for it.  But that should be your decision, not a default inclusion in major indexes.\""}
{"id": "96926", "text": "The mutual fund will price at day's end, while the ETF trades during the day, like a stock. If you decide at 10am, that some event will occur during the day that will send the market up, the ETF is preferable. Aside from that, the expenses are identical, a low .14%. No real difference especially in a Roth."}
{"id": "97081", "text": "Here's a start at a high level: I have a few friends who have made a killing on GLD, and write options to make money off of the investment without incurring the capital gains penalties for selling. That's a little out of my comfort zone though."}
{"id": "97180", "text": "Using any simulator will never be exactly the same as real trading.  One reason is that a simulator will always execute your trades at the exact price you want, but that may not always happen in real life. For example, if you place a limit order to buy 1000 shares of a stock at 10.50, and the price drops down to exactly 10.50, then the simulator will execute your trade and you will have 1000 shares at 10.50.  But in real life, the price of the stock may drop to 10.50, but other people may have buy orders ahead of you.  If the price of the stock drops to 10.50 but then starts going up again, you may not get all the shares that you wanted (or you may not even get any shares at all) due to the fact that people were ahead of you. In real trading there is also slippage, which you don't see in a simulator.  For example, if you have a stop order to sell 1000 shares of a stock if it drops to 7.50, then the simulator will sell all 1000 shares at 7.50 if the price drops to 7.50.  But in real trading, if the price drops to 7.50, then you may not be able to sell all 1000 shares at 7.50 if there's not enough liquidity or the market is moving very fast.  You may end up selling 100 shares at 7.50, 100 shares at 7.49, 100 shares at 7.48, 50 shares at 7.47, 50 shares at 7.46, 200 shares at 7.45, and 400 shares at 7.44. Another thing is that you don't experience the emotional aspect of trading with a simulator.  If you buy a stock in a simulator and it goes down, it's not real money, so you may be more willing to hold it and wait for it to come back up.  But if you are trading real money and the stock goes down, you may not be so willing to hold if it goes down.  You may be more apt to sell the stock for a small loss before the loss gets too big."}
{"id": "97348", "text": "\"While you'd need to pay tax if you realized a capital gain on the sale of your car, you generally can't deduct any loss arising from the sale of \"\"personal use property\"\". Cars are personal use property. Refer to Canada Revenue Agency \u2013 Personal-use property losses.  Quote: [...] if you have a capital loss, you usually cannot deduct that   loss when you calculate your income for the year. In addition, you   cannot use the loss to decrease capital gains on other personal-use   property. This is because if a property depreciates through personal   use, the resulting loss on its disposition is a personal expense. There are some exceptions. Read up at the source links.\""}
{"id": "97402", "text": "\"That sounds about right. However, and this is just a quibble, it's not 90m notional of swap, or at least I've not heard it expressed quite that way for a total return instrument... generally I hear the word exposure, in this case the # of \"\"shares\"\" purchased at a specific index level. So 90mm exposure in S&amp;P 500 at today's closing price is: 90,000,000 / 2411.8 = a swap on 37, 317 shares.  If you want to maintain the 90mm exposure month to month, you will structure the instrument with a \"\"variable notional\"\". At each reset, the swap's # of shares will vary inversely with the index level to maintain the 90mm exposure.  You rightly point out that the financing is based on the 90mm figure.  As a final note, the dealer may also guarantee some profit by quoting a spread between the swap's initial index levels, depending on whether the portfolio wants to go long or short the index.\""}
{"id": "97534", "text": "You can't write exempt because according to the instructions on the W-4 I claim exemption from withholding for 2015, and I certify that I meet   both of the following conditions for exemption. You don't meet the second condition. But you can increase the number of allowance to reduce the amount of taxes. Just make sure you put enough money aside into a savings account so that you can pay the taxes in the spring."}
{"id": "97793", "text": "It depends how much risk you're prepared to accept. The short-term risk-free rate of return at present is something in the vicinity of 0.1% (three month US treasuries are currently yielding 0.08%), so anything paying a higher rate on money that's accessible quickly will involve some degree of risk -- the higher the rate then the higher the risk."}
{"id": "98130", "text": "\"They are not selling stocks. They are selling OJ futures contracts. Selling a futures contract at 142 gives the buyer the right to buy a fixed number of pounds of orange juice concentrate (\"\"OJ\"\") on a future date at 142 cents per pound. The seller has an obligation to suppy that fixed number of pounds of OJ to the buyer on the future date for 142 cents per pound. When the seller turns around and buys future contracts at 29, the seller gets the right to buy OJ on a future date at 29. This \"\"zeros his position\"\" -- meaning he's guaranteed himself the ability to deliver the pounds of OJ he was obligated to supply when he sold futures contracts at 142. And since he'll only have to pay 29 cents per pound, and he'll be selling the OJ for 142 per pound, he'll walk away with 113 cents of profit for every pound sold. You can read a blow-by-blow account of what Winthorpe and Valentine did at the end of \"\"Trading Places\"\" here and here. Note that what they did would not be legal today under the \"\"Eddie Murphy rule\"\", which prohibits trades based on illicitly obtained government information.\""}
{"id": "98294", "text": "Pay off the Highest interest loan rate first. You must be doing something funky with how long your terms are... If you give a bit more info about your loan's such as the term and how much extra you have right now to spend it could be explained in detail why that would be the better choice using your numbers. You have to make sure when you are analyzing your different loan options that you make sure you are comparing apples to apples. IE make sure that you are either comparing the present value, future value or amortization payments...  EDIT: using some of your numbers lets say you have 5000 dollars in your pocket you have 3 options. excel makes these calculations easier... Do nothing: in 80 months your Student Loan will be payed in full and you will have 54676.08 owing on your mortgage and 5000 in your pocket(assuming no bank interest)  for mortgage: Pay off Student loan and allocate Student loans amortization to Mortgage: in 80 months you will have $47,910.65 owing on mortgage and student loan will be paid in full For mortgage: Pay 5000 on Mortgage: in 80 months student loan will be paid in full and you will have $48,204.92 owing on mortgage For mortgage:"}
{"id": "98654", "text": "outstanding shares are the shares(regular shares) that are still tradable in the market, where the firm in question is listed. The term is primarily used to distinguish from shares held in treasury(treasury stock), which have been bought back(buybacks) from the market and aren't currently tradable in the market. Wikipedia is a bit more clearer and mentions the diluted outstanding shares(used for convertible bonds, warrants, etc) which is used to calculated diluted EPS."}
{"id": "98704", "text": "\"When you hear advice to buy index funds, that usually comes with two additional pieces of investment discipline advice that are important: These two elements are important to give you relative predictability in your outcome 20 years from now.  In this old blog post of mine I linked to Warren Buffett talking about this, also  mentioned it in a comment on another answer: http://blog.ometer.com/2008/03/27/index-funds/ It's perfectly plausible to do poorly over 20 years if you buy 100% stocks at once, without dollar-cost averaging or rebalancing. It's very very very plausible to do poorly over 10 years, such as the last 10 in fact. Can you really say you know your financial situation in 20-30 years, and for sure won't need that money? Because predictability is important, I like buying a balanced fund and not \"\"pure stocks\"\": http://blog.ometer.com/2010/11/10/take-risks-in-life-for-savings-choose-a-balanced-fund/ (feel a little bad linking to my blog, but retyping all that into this answer seems dumb!) Here's another tip. You can go one step past dollar cost averaging and try value averaging: http://www.amazon.com/Value-Averaging-Strategy-Investment-Classics/dp/0470049774 However, chances are you aren't even going to be good about rebalancing if it's done \"\"by hand,\"\" so personally I would not do value averaging unless you can find either a fund or a financial advisor to do it for you automatically. (Finance Buff blog makes a case for a financial advisor, in case you like that more than my balanced fund suggestion: http://thefinancebuff.com/the-average-investor-should-use-an-investment-advisor-how-to-find-one.html) Like rebalancing, value averaging makes you buy more when you're depressed about the market and less when it's exciting. It's hard.  (Dollar cost averaging is easily done by setting up automatic investment, of course, so you don't have to do it manually in the way you would with value averaging.) If you read the usual canonical books on index funds and efficient markets it's easy to remember the takeaway that nobody knows whether the market will go up or down, and yes you won't successfully time the market. But what you can do successfully is use an investment discipline with risk control: assume that the market will fluctuate, that both up and down are likely and possible, and optimize for predictability in light of that. Most importantly, optimize to take your emotions and behavior out of the picture. Some disciplines for example are: there are dozens out there, many of them snake oil, I think these I mentioned are valid. Anyway, you need some form of risk control, and putting all your money in stocks at once doesn't give you a lot of risk control. There's no real need to get creative. A balanced fund that uses index funds for equity and bond portions is a great choice.\""}
{"id": "98726", "text": "\"The way I am trading this is:  I am long the USD / EUR in cash. I also hold USD / EUR futures, which are traded on the Globex exchange. I am long US equities which have a low exposure to Europe and China (as I expect China to growth significantly slower if the European weakens).  I would not short US equities because Europe-based investors (like me) are buying comparatively \"\"safe\"\" US equities to reduce their EUR exposure.\""}
{"id": "98767", "text": "The problem is that you don't have the money now; so they can't know with 100% certainty that you will have it on settlement day.  What happens if you don't file the paperwork in time? or you change your mind because you think the company stock is going to go through the roof next quarter? They would have to pull the funding for the loan. The seller would be upset, and could even file for damages if the deal falls through.  It could even snowball because if they delay the sale then they can't buy the new place, which impacts another closing... Frequently lenders want to see the money for the down payment long before settlement.  They want to know the money is there, and it isn't a hidden loan. While you can point to the money in the ESPP, they would still like to see the money in a regular bank account. Even if you do convince them to delay their evaluation you can count on being asked to prove the existence of the funds in the days before closing, or they will delay giving the loan."}
{"id": "98816", "text": "Yes, PMI is what the lender requires to loan you more than 8O% of the home's value. I could easily present scenarios where it's exactly the right decision to use PMI and get the purchase done. A 100K mortgage at 90% LTV will cost you $521/year in PMI.  If you are renting and struggling to get a higher downpayment, it can take quite a long time to save the additional $11K to put down. Only the buyer can know if the house is such s bargain, or if rates have bottomed, but the decision isn't so clear cut."}
{"id": "99084", "text": "Join me for a look at the Quote for SPY.  A yield of 1.82%. So over a year's time, your $100K investment will give you $1820 in dividends.  The Top 10 holdings show that Apple is now 3% of the S&P. With a current dividend of 2.3%. Every stock in the S&P has its own different dividend. (Although the zeros are all the same. Not every stock has a dividend.) The aggregate gets you to the 1.82% current dividend. Dividends are accumulated and paid out quarterly, regardless of which months the individual stocks pay."}
{"id": "99132", "text": "If the stock starts to go down DO NOT SELL!! My reasoning for this is because, when you talk about the stock market, you haven't actually lost any money until you sell the stock. So if you sell it lower than you bought it, you loose money. BUT if you wait for the stock to go back up again, you will have made money."}
{"id": "99233", "text": "\"This has to do with the type of plan offered: is it a 401(k) plan or a profit-sharing plan, or both? If it's 401(k) I believe the IRS will see this distribution as elective and count towards the employee's annual elective contribution limit. If it's profit sharing the distribution would be counted toward the employer's portion of the limit. However -- profit sharing plans have a formula that's standard across the board and applied to all employees. i.e. 3% of company profits given equally to all employees. One of the benefits of the profit sharing plans is also that you can use a vesting schedule. I'd consult your accountant to see how this specifically impacts your business - but in the case you describe this sounds like an elective deferral choice by an employee and I don't see how (or why) you'd make this decision for them. Give them the bonus and let them choose how it's paid out. Edit: in re-reading your question it actually sounds like you're wanting to setup a profit sharing type situation - but again, heed what I said above. You decide the amount of \"\"profit\"\" - but you also have to set an equation that applies across the board. There is more complication to it than this brief explanation and I'd consult your accountant to see how it applies in your situation.\""}
{"id": "99266", "text": "LendingClub.com  I am an investor, 3 years now, and am making ~12%.  It takes a little savvy and some research, but I'm getting a far better return than any typical investment today.  As always, investors beware.  If you dump your money in and don't invest wisely, you'll get taken for a ride."}
{"id": "99448", "text": "\"Apparently box 39 does not receive half of box 38 if \"\"The price of the share or unit is less than its fair market value when the agreement was made.\"\" - the last point in paragraph 110(1)(d): *http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/pyrll/bnfts/fnncl/scrty/stckpt03-eng.html#dspst The employee can claim a deduction under paragraph 110(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act if all of the following conditions are met:\""}
{"id": "99463", "text": "It's harder than you think.  Once card companies start seeing your debt to credit line ratios climb, they will slash your credit lines quickly. Also, cash credit lines are always much smaller, so in reality, such a scheme would require you to buy goods that can be converted to cash, which dilutes your gains and makes it more likely that you're going to get detected and busted. Think of the other problems. Where do you store your ill-gotten gains? How do you get the money out of the country? How will your actions affect your family and friends? Also, most people are basically good people -- the prospect of defrauding $100k, leaving family and friends behind and living some anonymous life in a third world country isn't an appealing one. If you are criminally inclined, building up a great credit history is not very practical -- most criminals are by nature reactive and want quick results."}
{"id": "99716", "text": "The only ways to increase your after-tax income are to increase your tax-deferred savings (401k), increase your tax deductions, or increase your pre-tax income. Increasing tax-deferred savings is great for the long term, but will usually not result in a bigger paycheck (though net pay including the savings will go up). This is, however, probably your best bet for reducing current tax liability. Increasing deductions usually involves spending money--on charity, mortgage interest, other taxes, etc. So, while you may reduce your tax liability, you probably won't end up with more money in your pocket. Also, if you are single and aren't paying a mortgage, it probably won't be easy to exceed the Standard Deduction. Which pretty much leaves you with asking for a raise, getting a better paying job, or taking on a second job to increase your top-line income."}
{"id": "99803", "text": "Why does it take two weeks (from ex-date) for dividends to pay out? For logistical and accounting purposes. This article says on the payment date: This date is generally a week or more after the date of record so that the company has sufficient time to ensure that it accurately pays all those who are entitled. It is for the same reasons that there is a often a two-week period between the time an employee submits her time sheet and the employee's pay date. The company needs time to set and send the payment while minimizing accounting errors."}
{"id": "100057", "text": "You can easily build a Google Sheet spreadsheet to track what you want as Sheet has a 'googlefinance()' function to look-up the same prices and data you can enter and track in a Google Finance portfolio, except you can use it in ways you want. For example, you can track your purchase price at a fixed exchange rate, track the current market value as the product of the stock's price times the floating exchange rate, and then record your realized profit and loss using another fixed exchange rate.  You don't have to record the rates either, as googlefinance() func is able to lookup prices as of a particular date. You can access Google Sheet through a web browser or Android app."}
{"id": "100121", "text": "I would like to add to the answer provided by Dheer. I think under some ULIPs you need not pay premium after 3 years and you can take the money back after 5 years (something like that, read your policy statement of course). Since the money is invested in Stock markets and since generally people say the longer money stays in stocks, the better; you can keep the money with them without taking it back and without paying any further premium. That way, whatever you paid will be invested and you can get it back later when you feel you will make a profit."}
{"id": "100420", "text": "\"Profitable by design on slide 7, haha.  Yeah, no.  That's because you're purposely leaving out the maintenance and upkeep for the vehicles in the \"\"not yours fleet\"\", don't have \"\"drivers\"\" but instead contractors, and you thought you wouldn't have to pay taxes or fees in local cities for your \"\"not taxis\"\".\""}
{"id": "100452", "text": "A 1040X is the form and instructions you need.  Don't worry you can rescind the $3 presidential campaign contribution for both you and a spouse."}
{"id": "100485", "text": "On Monday, the 27th of June 2011, the XIV ETF underwent a 10:1 share split. The Yahoo Finance data correctly shows the historic price data adjusted for this split.  The Google Finance data does not make the adjustment to the historical data, so it looks like the prices on Google Finance prior to 27 June 2011 are being quoted at 10 times what they should be.   Coincidentally, the underlying VIX index saw a sudden surge on the Friday (24 June) and continued on the Monday (27 June), the date that the split took effect.  This would have magnified the bearish moves seen in the historic price data on the XIV ETF. Here is a link to an article detailing the confusion this particular share split caused amongst investors.  It appears that Google Finance was not the only one to bugger it up.  Some brokers failed to adjust their data causing a lots of confusion amongst clients with XIV holdings at the time. This is a recurring problem on Google Finance, where the historic price data often (though not always) fails to account for share splits."}
{"id": "101103", "text": "\"As a legal contract, a mortgage is a form of secured debt. In the case of a mortgage, the debt is secured using the property asset as collateral. So \"\"no\"\", there is no such thing as a mortgage contract without a property to act as collateral. Is it a good idea?  In the current low interest rate environment, people with good income and credit can obtain a creditline from their bank at a rate comparable to current mortgage rates.  However, if you wish to setup a credit line for an amount comparable to a mortgage, then you will need to secure it with some form of collateral.\""}
{"id": "101329", "text": "You can start a software company. Than your office will be around the world and you can work whenever you want. If you can appoint some people who can collect work from here and there and the coder around the world can give you the job done(this can be done by posting your work in various freelancing site). It is challenging, because you have to get yourself up-to-date with the technological things."}
{"id": "101580", "text": "\"The short of it is that bonds are valued based on a fundamental concept of finance called the \"\"time value of money\"\". Stated simply, $100 one year from now is not the same as $100 now. If you had $100 now, you could use it to make more money and have more than $100 in a year. Conversely, if you didn't invest it, the $100 would not buy as much in a year as it would now, and so it would lose real value. Therefore, for these two benefits to be worth the same, the money received a year from now must be more than $100, in the amount of what you could make with $100 if you had it now, or at least the rate of inflation. Or, the amount received now could be less than the amount recieved a year from now, such that if you invested this lesser amount you'd expect to have $100 in a year. The simplest bonds simply pay their face value at maturity, and are sold for less than their face value, the difference being the cost to borrow the cash; \"\"interest\"\". These are called \"\"zero-coupon bonds\"\" and they're around, if maybe uncommon. The price people will pay for these bonds is their \"\"present value\"\", and the difference between the present value and face value determines a \"\"yield\"\"; a rate of return, similar to the interest rate on a CD. Now, zero-coupon bonds are uncommon because they cost a lot. If I buy a zero-coupon bond, I'm basically tying up my money until maturity; I see nothing until the full bond is paid. As such, I would expect the bond issuer to sell me the bond at a rate that makes it worth my while to keep the money tied up. So basically, the bond issuer is paying me compound interest on the loan. The future value of an investment now at a given rate is given by FV = PV(1+r)t. To gain $1 million in new cash today, and pay a 5% yield over 10 years, a company or municipality would have to issue $1.629 million in bonds. You see the effects of the compounding there; the company is paying 5% a year on the principal each year, plus 5% of each 5% already accrued, adding up to an additional 12% of the principal owed as interest. Instead, bond issuers can offer a \"\"coupon bond\"\". A coupon bond has a coupon rate, which is a percentage of the face value of the bond that is paid periodically (often annually, sometimes semi-annually or even quarterly). A coupon rate helps a company in two ways. First, the calculation is very straightforward; if you need a million dollars and are willing to pay 5% over 10 years, then that's exactly how you issue the bonds; $1million worth with a 5% coupon rate and a maturity date 10 years out. A $100 5% coupon bond with a 10-year maturity, if sold at face value, would cost only $150 over its lifetime, making the total cost of capital only 50% of the principal instead of 62%. Now, that sounds like a bad deal; if the company's paying less, then you're getting less, right? Well yes, but you also get money sooner. Remember the fundamental principle here; money now is worth more than money later, because of what you can do with money between now and later. You do realize a lower overall yield from this investment, but you get returns from it quickly which you can turn around and reinvest to make more money. As such, you're usually willing to tolerate a lower rate of return, because of the faster turnaround and thus the higher present value. The \"\"Income Yield %\"\" from your table is also referred to as the \"\"Flat Yield\"\". It is a very crude measure, a simple function of the coupon rate, the current quote price and the face value (R/P * V). For the first bond in your list, the flat yield is (.04/114.63 * 100) = 3.4895%. This is a very simple measure that is roughly analogous to what you would expect to make on the bond if you held it for one year, collected the coupon payment, and then sold the bond for the same price; you'd earn one coupon payment at the end of that year and then recoup the principal. The actual present value calculation for a period of 1 year is PV = FV/(1+r), which rearranges to r = FV/PV - 1; plug in the values (present value 114.63, future value 118.63) and you get exactly the same result. This is crude and inaccurate because in one year, the bond will be a year closer to maturity and will return one less coupon payment; therefore at the same rate of return the present value of the remaining payout of the bond will only be $110.99 (which makes a lot of sense if you think about it; the bond will only pay out $112 if you bought it a year from now, so why would you pay $114 for it?). Another measure, not seen in the list, is the \"\"simple APY\"\". Quite simply, it is the yield that will be realized from all cash flows from the bond (all coupon payments plus the face value of the bond), as if all those cash flows happened at maturity. This is calculated using the future value formula: FV = PV (1+r/n)nt, where FV is the future value (the sum of the face value and all coupon payments to be made before maturity), PV is present value (the current purchase price), r is the annual rate (which we're solving for), n is the number of times interest accrues and/or is paid (for an annual coupon that's 1), and t is the number of years to maturity. For the first bond in the list, the simple APY is 0.2974%. This is the effective compound interest rate you would realize if you bought the bond and then took all the returns and stuffed them in a mattress until maturity. Since nobody does this with investment returns, it's not very useful, but it can be used to compare the yield on a zero-coupon bond to the yield on a coupon bond if you treated both the same way, or to compare a coupon bond to a CD or other compound-interest-bearing account that you planned to buy into and not touch for its lifetime. The Yield to Maturity, which IS seen, is the true yield percentage of the bond in time-valued terms, assuming you buy the bond now, hold it to maturity and all coupon payments are made on time and reinvested at a similar yield. This calculation is based on the simple APY, but takes into account the fact that most of the coupon payments will be made prior to maturity; the present value of these will be higher because they happen sooner. The YTM is calculated by summing the present values of all payments based on when they'll occur; so, you'll get one $4 payment a year from now, then another $4 in two years, then $4 in 3 years, and $104 at maturity. The present value of each of those payments is calculated by flipping around the future value formula: PV = FV/(1+r)t. The present value of the entire bond (its current price) is the sum of the present value of each payment: 114.63 = 4/(1+r) + 4/(1+r)2 + 4/(1+r)3 + 104/(1+r)4. You now have to solve for r, which is difficult to isolate; the easiest way to find the rate with a computer is to \"\"goal seek\"\" (intelligently guess and check).  Based on the formula above, I calculated a YTM of .314% for the first bond if you bought on Sept 7, 2012 (and thus missed the upcoming coupon payment). Buying today, you'd also be entitled to about 5 weeks' worth of the coupon payment that is due on Sept 07 2012, which is close enough to the present day that the discounted value is a rounding error, putting the YTM of the bond right at .40%. This is the rate of return you'll get off of your investment if you are able to take all the returns from it, when you receive them, and reinvest them at a similar rate (similar to having a savings account at that rate, or being able to buy fractional shares of a mutual fund giving you that rate).\""}
{"id": "101764", "text": "\"When you give a gift to another person or receive a gift from another person there is no impact on your taxes. You do not have to report certain amounts in your income, including the following: ...   -most gifts and inheritances; http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/rprtng-ncm/nttxd-eng.html If you give a gift to a charity or similar organization you can reduce your taxes. It is my recollection that when a family member gives a large amount of money to a child, tax on the income that money earns (typically interest) should be paid by the giver, not the child, but I can't find any publications to that effect on the CRA Site. There is a bit of language about \"\"Gifts\"\" from an employer that are really employment income: Gifts and other voluntary payments 1.3 The term gift is not defined in the Act. In common law jurisdictions, the courts have said that a bona fide gift exists when:   \u2022There is a voluntary transfer of property,   \u2022A donor freely disposes of his or her property to a donee, and   \u2022The donee confers no right, privilege, material benefit, or advantage on the donor or on a person designated by the donor. 1.4 Whether a transfer of property has been made voluntarily is a question of fact. In order for a transfer to be considered voluntary, there must be no obligation to make such a transfer. Amounts received as gifts, that is, voluntary transfers without consideration and which cannot be attributed to an income-earning source, are not subject to tax in the hands of the recipient. 1.5 However, sometimes individuals receive a voluntary payment or other valuable transfer or benefit by virtue of an office or employment from an employer, or from some other person. In such cases, the amount of the payment or the value of the transfer or benefit is generally included in employment income pursuant to subsection 5(1) or paragraph 6(1)(a). (See also Guide T4130, Employers\u2019 Guide - Taxable Benefits and Allowances.) Similarly, voluntary payments (or other transfers or benefits) received by virtue of a profession or in the course of carrying on a business are taxable receipts. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/tchncl/ncmtx/fls/s3/f9/s3-f9-c1-eng.html#N10244 If the people in question are adults who are not related to each other and don't have a business or employment relationship, then you should find that regardless of the amount of the gift, neither giver nor recipient will have a tax consequence.\""}
{"id": "101852", "text": "No. Investors purchase ETFs' as they would any other stock, own it under the same circumstances as an equity investment, collecting distributions instead of dividends or interest. The ETF takes care of the internal operations (bond maturities and turnover, accrued interest, payment dates, etc.)."}
{"id": "102138", "text": "\"Probably the most important thing in evaluating a dividend yield is to compare it to ITSELF (in the past). If the dividend yield is higher than it has been in the past, the stock may be cheap. If it is lower, the stock may be expensive. Just about every stock has a \"\"normal\"\" yield for itself. (It's zero for non-dividend paying stocks.) This is based on the stock's perceived quality, growth potential, and other factors. So a utility that normally yields 5% and is now paying 3% is probably expensive (the price in the denominator is too high), while a growth stock that normally yields 2% and is now yielding 3% (e.g. Intel or McDonald'sl), may be cheap.\""}
{"id": "102209", "text": "ode2k noted the liquidity can very wildly especially 9 months out and there will be little volume even in the largest stocks.  Victor noted standard measures of liquidity don't always apply cleanly to options as they are priced using a hybrid of model and market inputs.  So your question is generally very hard to answer on SE, but you can get an answer yourself without too much trouble. The best way to get a feel for slippage in your case is to just get quotes.  Most systems should let you get a quote for both buying and selling options at the same time.  This will give you a feeling for how much you are paying in spread.  Do the same for near dated options to get a feeling for spread size when you end up selling. You should factor in some widening of spreads at bad times, but this should get you a feeling for the scale of the slippage problem."}
{"id": "102237", "text": "An instant 15% profit sounds good to me, so you can't go wrong selling as soon as you are able. Here are a couple other considerations: Tax implications: When you sell the stock, you have to pay taxes on the profit (including that 15% discount). The tax rate you pay is based on how long you wait to sell it. If you wait a certain amount of time (usually 2 years, but it will depend on your specific tax codes) before you sell, you could be subject to lower tax rates on that profit. See here for a more detailed description. This might only apply if you're in the US. Since you work for the company, you may be privy to a bit more information about how the company is run and how likely it is to grow. As such, if you feel like the company is headed in the right direction, you may want to hold on the the stock for a while.  I am generally wary of being significantly invested in the company you work for. If the company goes south, then the stock price will obviously drop, but you'll also be at risk to be laid off. As such you're exposed much more risk than investing in other companies. This is a good argument to sell the stock and take the 15% profit.*  * - I realize your question wasn't really about whether to sell the stock, but more for when, but I felt this was relevant nonetheless."}
{"id": "102323", "text": "what I'm saying is my meager 1600 gain could have incurred an extra $170 in taxes if there was no capital gains tax.  It's basic math, not rocket science.  that's just the numbers at my current tax bracket(25%) which isn't that high.  I seriously don't get how you can't understand basic numbers and the fact that the capital gains tax is a huge advantage for a small time investor like me."}
{"id": "102326", "text": "What are the risks, if any The risks are exemplified by the outcomes presented on this website, including: There's a chance you will end up paying large mortgage payments on a house occupied by an ex-friend and paying large amounts of money to lawyers to try and get things straightened out. You could come out of it a lot poorer and with your credit rating wrecked."}
{"id": "102587", "text": "The assumption is not necessarily correct. While the seven years affects the credit report, the statute of limitations for collections may be different and is based on the State law where the debt was given (or a Federal law for NA banks). Keep in mind that the creditor can reset the clock any time by taking legal action, for example filing a lawsuit in a court to garnish some of his income or put a lien on some of his assets. Many  times, just contacting the debtor is enough to reset the clock. The statute of limitations on collections is a legal issue and he should talk to a lawyer about it. Different accounts may have different statutes affecting them."}
{"id": "102712", "text": "The S&P is cap-weighted. So it's not as simple as buying 1 share of each of 500 stocks. (If it were, getting started might be doable, although adding to your position would take time and another large unit of money.) Can you do it? Sure? Do you have enough money to actually do it? I don't know. I'm happy to pay my .02-.03% to not worry about such things."}
{"id": "102757", "text": "You bought the stock at some point in the past. You must have had a reason for this purchase. Has the recent change in price changed the reason you bought the stock? You must assume your losses are sunk costs. No matter what action you take, you can not recover your losses. Do not attempt to hold the stock in the hopes of regaining value, or sell it to stop losses. Instead approach this event as if this very day, you were given shares of the company's stock at their current market value for free as a gift. In this hypothetical situation, would you hold the shares, or sell them? Use that to judge your options. Not everyone, myself included, can handle the mental stress of watching share prices change. You can always consider trading index funds instead, which are much less volatile but will provide consistent, albeit, boring returns. This may or may not be you, but it's an option. Finally, do not keep money in the market you are not prepared to lose. It seems obvious, but if you lost 40% today, you could lose 100% tomorrow."}
{"id": "102830", "text": "It's because financing can fall through, and then the time between offer and closing is wasted. Often buyers will include preapprovals and other evidence of financing eligibility with their offer for this reason."}
{"id": "102995", "text": "I think I may have figured this out but if someone could double check my reasoning I'd appreciate it. So if my company makes $75000 and I decide to pay myself a $30000 salary, then the quarterly payment break down would be like this: 1040ES: Would pay income tax on non salary dividend ($45000) 941: Would pay income tax, SS, medicare on salary ($30000) (I'm the only person on payroll) So I think this answers my question in that after switching from filing as LLC to S-corp, I won't have to pay as much on 1040ES because some of it will now be covered on payroll."}
{"id": "103093", "text": "Staying with your numbers - a 7% long term return will have a tax of 15% (today's long term cap gain tax) resulting in a post tax of 5.95%. On the other hand, even if the student loan interest remains deductible, it's subject to phaseout and a really successful grad will quickly lose the deduction.  There's a similar debate regarding mortgage debt. When I've commented on my 3.5% mortgage costing 2.5% post tax, there's no consensus agreeing that this loan should remain as long as possible in favor of investing in the market for its long term growth. And in this case the advantage is a full 3.45%/yr. While I've made my decision, Ben's points remain, the market return isn't guaranteed, while that monthly loan payment is fixed and due each month.  In the big picture, I'd prioritize to make deposits to the 401(k) up to the match, if offered, pay down any higher interest debt such as credit cards, build an emergency account, and then make extra payments to the student loan.  Keep in mind, also - if buying a house is an important goal, the savings toward the downpayment might take priority. Student Loans and Your First Mortgage is an article I wrote which describes the interaction between that loan debt and your mortgage borrowing ability. It's worth understanding the process as paying off the S/L too soon can impact that home purchase."}
{"id": "103405", "text": "Only if your work on the side is making you at least \u00a360,000 profit a year. The overheads are just not worth it if you make less. Working as a sole trader, you can still claim for expenses incurred in the course of your business. You can also claim a percentage of your computer costs, even though you may use the computer for gaming. This is not unreasonable as the computer is necessary for your work. The Inland Revenue accept the fact that some assets are part work-related. In your case, as a web and mobile phone developer, I expect the percentage to be at least half, if not a lot more. If you need to travel in the course of your work you can claim a percentage for your car. You can include other small expenses such as telephone, stationery, electricity etc but don't go overboard. The important point to remember is that you must be able to defend the expenses claimed as work-related, so long as you can do this there is no problem. Remember to keep good records of all your expenses. This is on-going throughout the year and is much more work than filling out your tax return. The software on the IR self-assessment site is excellent, so it's conceivable that you may not need an accountant if you are prepared to do your own tax return. However, if you feel unsure employ an accountant initially and take it from there."}
{"id": "103437", "text": "Here is how it should look: 100 shares of restricted stock (RSU) vest. 25 shares sold to pay for taxes. W2 (and probably paycheck) shows your income going up by 100 shares worth and your taxes withheld going up by 25 shares worth. Now you own 75 shares with after-tax money. If you stop here, there would be no stock sale and no tax issues.  You'd have just earned W2 income and withheld taxes through your W2 job. Now, when you sell those 75 shares whether it is the same day or years later, the basis for those 75 shares is adjusted by the amount that went in to your W2.   So if they were bought for $20, your adjusted basis would be 75*$20."}
{"id": "103447", "text": "This is probably a very opinion-based Q&A. But anyway: My solution to such questions is to have multiple layers of emergency funds. I have one amount in a bank account that I do not like to tap, but can (and do) when I need money. This is most close to your infrequent but not completely surprising moments of cash need. I have a second layer in the form of stocks. As I understand that selling stocks should not be done when you need money, but when the stock price is good, this provides a fairly high barrier to selling it on a whim. Before I do so, especially if the stock price isn't at a local max, it would have to be an emergency. My third layer is even more fixed investment which I can't access with online brokerage. The physical aspect makes sure that it has to be a real, serious emergency before I turn that into cash. If you have such a layered approach, the question is not black and white anymore, and easier to answer."}
{"id": "103511", "text": "Pay off the credit card, tear it up and never get another one.  The rest of the money I would add to your emergency fund/save for the anticipated home repairs."}
{"id": "103590", "text": "Having a large state return also means that there is a potential income tax liability created at the federal level for the following year, as the situation resulted from the deduction of more on one's federal return than should have been deducted. The state refund is treated as federal income in the year it is refunded. http://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips/is-my-state-tax-refund-taxable-and-why-90/"}
{"id": "103668", "text": "I would deduct all the other payments out as subcontractors, but I typically have all the paperwork and entities set up to make that applicable. In Turbotax I do this with as subcontracting expense under my business entity, but for the IRS the categories of the deductions do not matter This isn't tax advice, it is what I would do, and how I would defend it under an audit. Everyone else that was paid also needs to report it. The lack of reciprocal filing (you deducted income paid to someone else, the person did not report that income, or reported it in a different way) is a number one thing to trigger IRS scrutiny. Although accurate, you need to be aware that you are shifting the tax burden away from yourself, by deducting it."}
{"id": "103680", "text": "Many small businesses are still cash and check.  For example my landlord does not take credit card or online transfer.   My choices are cash and check, and I prefer checks for the paper trail."}
{"id": "103706", "text": "Setting a precedence with demands at the beginning should not be undervalued. Agreed that you emphasize long term value but establishing your requests ( not in demand form) also plays into your long term value because it is retribution to what you offer."}
{"id": "103771", "text": "The government wants money and isn't particularly interested in you getting your deductions right. Doing the worksheet on the back of the W-4 will give you a much better idea of how many deductions you can take. While many people are excited to get a tax refund, a refund means you loaned the government money all year long without getting paid interest for your generosity. The IRS will penalize you for underpaying your taxes in amounts larger than $1000 or 10% of your income, but a good ballpark estimate aiming for about ~$100 in payment at tax time is a relatively safe way to get all your money sooner than later."}
{"id": "104094", "text": "\"Gee son. That's a potential for a better than 10% gain in a short amount of time. If bought within a tax advantaged account like a IRA then you don't even pay capital gains. Does Lube know? Last I checked he was obsessing over \"\"bowels\"\" or some shit.\""}
{"id": "104150", "text": "Will the investor beat the benchmark for a given period will follow a Bernoulli distribution -- each period is a coin toss, and heads mean the investor beat the market for that period.   I can't prove the negative that there is no investor ever whose probability function p = 1, but you can statistically expect a number of individual investors with p ~ 0.5 to have a sequence of many heads in a row, as a function of the total population.   By example, my father explained investment scams and hot-hand theory to me this way when I was younger:  Imagine an investor newsletter which mails out to a mailing list of 1024 prospects (or alternately, a field of 1024 amateur investor bloggers in a challenge).  Half the letters or bloggers state AAPL will go up this week, half that AAPL will go down this week.  In the newsletter case, next week ignore the people we got wrong.  In the blogger case, they're losers, so we don't pay attention to them.  Next week, similar split: half newsletters or bloggers claim GOOG go up, half GOOG go down.  This continues for a 10 week cycle.   Now, in week 10: the newsletter has a prospect they have hit correct 10x in a row: how much will he pay for a subscription?  Or, one amateur investor blogger has been on a 10 week winning streak and wins the challenge, so of course let's give her a CNBC show after Jim Cramer.  No matter what, next week, this newsletter or investor is shooting 50-50.   How do you know this person is not the statistically expected instance backed up by a pyramid of 1023 Bernoulli distribution losers?  Alternately, if you think you're going to be the winner, you've got a 1/1024 shot."}
{"id": "104188", "text": "This should all be covered in your stock grant documentation, or the employee stock program of which your grant is a part.   Find those docs and it should specify how or when you can sale your shares, and how the money is paid to you.  Generally, vested shares are yours until you take action.  If instead you have options, then be aware these need to be exercised before they become shares.  There is generally a limited time period on how long you can wait to exercise.  In the US, 10 years is common. Unvested shares will almost certainly expire upon your departure of the company.  Whether your Merrill Lynch account will show this, or show them as never existing, I can't say.  But either way, there is nothing you can or should do."}
{"id": "104198", "text": "Returns reported by mutual funds to shareholders, google, etc. are computed after all the funds' costs, including Therefore the returns you see on google finance are the returns you would actually have gotten."}
{"id": "104453", "text": "To sum up: My question came from misunderstanding what cost basis applies to. Now I get it that it applies to stocks as physical entities. Consider a chain of buys of 40 stock A with prices $1-$4-$10-$15 (qty 10 each time) then IRS wants to know exactly which stock I am selling. And when I transfer stocks to different account, that cost basis transfers with them. Cost basis is included in transfers, so that removes ambiguity which stock is being sold on the original account. In the example above, cost basis of 20 stocks moved to a new account would probably be $1 x 10 and $4 x 10, i.e. FIFO also applies to transfers."}
{"id": "104644", "text": "Sounds feasible.  I make $45000 a year, with two car payments, credit card and student loan debt.  Also, my wife doesn't work.  I was approved for a $116000 house with a USDA loan.  There are limits or how much debt you can have when applying for a USDA (sorry, I can't remember off the top of my head) and you'll also be getting the house inspected under different regulations.   For instance, we couldn't get approved until the seller put a handrail on a set of exterior stairs.  That regulation is specific to USDA along with a few others. I'm living in southern Indiana and this just happened a couple months ago for us. Make sure you have some money set aside for various things like a lawn mower and if the siding blows off the night after you move in (yup, that happened).  Also, shop around for homeowner's insurance.  We did some hunting, and we found a provider who was willing to price match and ended up saving some money on our car insurance as well."}
{"id": "104793", "text": "This situation, wanting desperately to have access to an investment vehicle in a 401K, but it not being available reminds me of two suggestions some make regarding retirement investing: This allows you the maximum flexibility in your retirement investing.  I have never, in almost 30 years of 401K investing, seen a pure cash investment, is was always something that was at its core very short term bonds. The exception is one company that once you had a few thousand in the 401K, you could transfer it to a brokerage account. I have no idea if there was a way to invest in a money market fund via the brokerage, but I guess it was possible. You may have to look and see if the company running the 401K has other investment options that your employer didn't select. Or you will have to see if other 401K custodians have these types of investments. Then push for changes next year. Regarding external IRA/Roth IRA: You can buy a CD with FDIC protection from funds in an IRA/Roth IRA. My credit union with NCUA protection currently has CDs and even bump up CDs, minimum balance is $500, and the periods are from 6 months to 3 years."}
{"id": "104806", "text": "I just switched CPA's and I am glad I did. My new CPA has made my life A LOT easier. If you're up for it, I can have my CPA call you. He's from California but works with many businesses in different states."}
{"id": "104857", "text": "\"A re-financing, or re-fi, is when a debtor takes out a new loan for the express purpose of paying off an old one. This can be done for several reasons; usually the primary reason is that the terms of the new loan will result in a lower monthly payment. Debt consolidation (taking out one big loan at a relatively low interest rate to pay off the smaller, higher-interest loans that rack up, like credit card debt, medical bills, etc) is a form of refinancing, but you most commonly hear the term when referring to refinancing a home mortgage, as in your example. To answer your questions, most of the money comes from a new bank. That bank understands up front that this is a re-fi and not \"\"new debt\"\"; the homeowner isn't asking for any additional money, but instead the money they get will pay off outstanding debt. Therefore, the net amount of outstanding debt remains roughly equal. Even then, a re-fi can be difficult for a homeowner to get (at least on terms he'd be willing to take). First off, if the homeowner owes more than the home's worth, a re-fi may not cover the full principal of the existing loan. The bank may reject the homeowner outright as not creditworthy (a new house is a HUGE ding on your credit score, trust me), or the market and the homeowner's credit may prevent the bank offering loan terms that are worth it to the homeowner. The homeowner must often pony up cash up front for the closing costs of this new mortgage, which is money the homeowner hopes to recoup in reduced interest; however, the homeowner may not recover all the closing costs for many years, or ever. To answer the question of why a bank would do this, there are several reasons: The bank offering the re-fi is usually not the bank getting payments for the current mortgage. This new bank wants to take your business away from your current bank, and receive the substantial amount of interest involved over the remaining life of the loan. If you've ever seen a mortgage summary statement, the interest paid over the life of a 30-year loan can easily equal the principal, and often it's more like twice or three times the original amount borrowed. That's attractive to rival banks.  It's in your current bank's best interest to try to keep your business if they know you are shopping for a re-fi, even if that means offering you better terms on your existing loan. Often, the bank is itself \"\"on the hook\"\" to its own investors for the money they lent you, and if you pay off early without any penalty, they no longer have your interest payments to cover their own, and they usually can't pay off early (bonds, which are shares of corporate debt, don't really work that way). The better option is to keep those scheduled payments coming to them, even if they lose a little off the top. Often if a homeowner is working with their current bank for a lower payment, no new loan is created, but the terms of the current loan are renegotiated; this is called a \"\"loan modification\"\" (especially when the Government is requiring the bank to sit down at the bargaining table), or in some cases a \"\"streamlining\"\" (if the bank and borrower are meeting in more amicable circumstances without the Government forcing either one to be there). Historically, the idea of giving a homeowner a break on their contractual obligations would be comical to the bank. In recent times, though, the threat of foreclosure (the bank's primary weapon) doesn't have the same teeth it used to; someone facing 30 years of budget-busting payments, on a house that will never again be worth what he paid for it, would look at foreclosure and even bankruptcy as the better option, as it's theoretically all over and done with in only 7-10 years. With the Government having a vested interest in keeping people in their homes, making whatever payments they can, to keep some measure of confidence in the entire financial system, loan modifications have become much more common, and the banks are usually amicable as they've found very quickly that they're not getting anywhere near the purchase price for these \"\"toxic assets\"\". Sometimes, a re-fi actually results in a higher APR, but it's still a better deal for the homeowner because the loan doesn't have other associated costs lumped in, such as mortgage insurance (money the guarantor wants in return for underwriting the loan, which is in turn required by the FDIC to protect the bank in case you default). The homeowner pays less, the bank gets more, everyone's happy (including the guarantor; they don't really want to be underwriting a loan that requires PMI in the first place as it's a significant risk). The U.S. Government is spending a lot of money and putting a lot of pressure on FDIC-insured institutions (including virtually all mortgage lenders) to cut the average Joe a break. Banks get tax breaks when they do loan modifications. The Fed's buying at-risk bond packages backed by distressed mortgages, and where the homeowner hasn't walked away completely they're negotiating mortgage mods directly. All of this can result in the homeowner facing a lienholder that is willing to work with them, if they've held up their end of the contract to date.\""}
{"id": "105011", "text": "What is my best bet with the 401K? I know very little about retirement plans and don't plan to ever touch this money until I retire but could this money be of better use somewhere else?  You can roll over a 401k into an IRA. This lets you invest in other funds and stocks that were not available with your 401k plan. Fidelity and Vanguard are 2 huge companies that offer a number of investment opportunities. When I left an employer that had the 401k plan with Fidelity, I was able to rollover the investments and leave them in the existing mutual funds (several of the funds have been closed to new investors for years). Usually, when leaving an employer, I have the funds transferred directly to the place my IRA is at - this avoids tax penalties and potential pitfalls.   The student loans.... pay them off in one shot?  If the interest is higher than you could earn in a savings account, then it is smarter to pay them off at once. My student loans are 1.8%, so I can earn more money in my mutual funds. I'm suspicious and think something hinky is going to happen with the fiscal cliff negotiations, so I'm going to be paying off my student loans in early 2013.  Disclaimer: I have IRA accounts with both Fidelity and Vanguard. My current 401k plan is with Vanguard."}
{"id": "105046", "text": "It is perfectly legitimate to adjust your 1099-B income by broker's fees.  Publication 17 (p 116) specifically instructs taxpayers to adjust their Schedule D reporting by broker's fees: Form 1099-B transactions.   If you sold property, such as stocks, bonds, or certain commodities, through a broker, you should receive Form 1099-B or substitute statement from the broker. Use the Form 1099-B or the substitute statement to complete Form 8949. If you sold a covered security in 2013, your broker should send you a Form 1099-B (or substitute statement) that shows your basis. This will help you complete Form 8949. Generally, a covered security is a security you acquired after 2010. Report the gross proceeds shown in box 2a of Form 1099-B as the sales price in column (d) of either Part I or Part II of Form 8949, whichever applies. However, if the broker advises you, in box 2a of Form 1099-B, that gross proceeds (sales price) less commissions and option premiums were reported to the IRS, enter that net sales price in column (d) of either Part I or Part II of Form 8949, whichever applies. Include in column (g) any expense of sale, such as broker's fees, commissions, state and local transfer taxes, and option premiums, unless you reported the net sales price in column (d). If you include an expense of sale in column (g), enter \u201cE\u201d in column (f). You can rely on your own records and judgment, if you feel comfortable doing so.  Brokers often make incomplete tax reporting.  This may have been simpler from their perspective if the broker fees were variable, or integrated, or unknown for a number of clients party to a transaction.  If a taxpayer has documentation of the expenses that justify an adjustment, then it's perfectly appropriate to include that in the calculations. It is not necessary to report the discrepancy, and it may increase scrutiny to include a written addendum.  The Schedule D, Form 8949, and Form 1099-B will probably together adequately explain the source of the deduction."}
{"id": "105391", "text": "MoneyChimp is great for this. It only offers full year returns, but it compounds the results correctly, including dividends.  For mid year results, just adjust a bit based on the data you can find from Google or Yahoo to add some return (or loss) for the months."}
{"id": "105634", "text": "Risk.  That's it.  No guarantees on the fund performance, while the mortgage has a guaranteed return of -3%.  I'm doing this very thing.  Money is cheap, I think it's wise to take advantage of it, assuming your exercise proper risk management."}
{"id": "105866", "text": "\"The trade-off seems to be quite simple: \"\"How much are you going to get if you sell it\"\" against \"\"How much are you going to get if you rent it out\"\". Several people already hinted that the rental revenue may be optimistic, I don't have anything to add to this, but keep in mind that if someone pays 45k for your apartment, the net gains for you will likely be lower as well. Another consideration would be that the value of your apartment can change, if you expect it to rise steadily you may want to think twice before selling. Now, assuming you have calculated your numbers properly, and a near 0% opportunity cost: 45,000 right now 3,200 per year The given numbers imply a return on investment of 14 years, or 7.1%. Personal conclusion: I would be surprised if you can actually get a 3.2k expected net profit for an apartment that rents out at 6k per year, but if you are confident the reward seems to be quite nice.\""}
{"id": "106007", "text": "From what I can understand you will be paying money to buy a business with more problems than assets. If it's all about the reviews then register an LLC yourself and do some marketing work, it will cost much less. If this business had clients and constant recurring revenue then that would be a different story."}
{"id": "106104", "text": "\"If you sold the stock for a profit, you will owe tax on that profit. Whether it is taxed as short-term or long-term capital gains depends on how long you held the stock before selling it. Presumably you're going to invest this money into mutual funds or something of that sort. Those may pay dividends which can be reinvested, and will grow in value (you hope) just as the individual stock shares would (you hope). Assuming the advice you've been given is at all reasonable, there's no need for buyer's remorse here; you're just changing your investing style to a different point on the risk-versus-return curve. (If you have to ask this question, I tend to agree that you should do more homework before playing with shares in individual companieS ... unless you're getting thess shares at employee discount, in which case you should still seriously consider selling them fairly quickly and reinvesting the money in a more structured manner. In a very real sense your job is itself an \"\"investment\"\" in your employer; if they ever get into trouble you don't want that to hit both your income and investments.)\""}
{"id": "106155", "text": "Lets say the hurdle rate for this company is 10% and the current return on assets is 8%. A linear increase in revenue and earnings would actually destroy some value as projects that have a 9% return are accepted even though they destroy value for the shareholder.  hope this helps!"}
{"id": "106161", "text": "I would have asked for the intended recipient's account number and pursue sending the money there. If it's the same as yours (except for one digit) that would be a good sign. But even here, the crook could send money to dozens of different accounts, all off by one digit, just to make it look authentic. I'm going with scam just to be safe. As for the checksum, it's used on paper checks (next to the last digit) but not necessarily the actual account. Credit card accounts use an algorithm, but online tools create as many legitimate character strings as you want. I used to work at a credit union, and when the time was just right, I opened account number 860000 (actual account number except for the second digit). All their account numbers were sequential, so the oldest account number was 000001. Sadly, many important systems are set up to meet the simple needs of the masses, and are easy to beat if you really want to. Check out If you dare hackers to hack you, they'll hack you good."}
{"id": "106198", "text": "For anyone in engineering, let this be a lesson. If your boss wants you to do something shady, refuse and if they persist quit. You go to jail while they claim they didn't know anything about it and their lawyers get them off."}
{"id": "106200", "text": "\"I don't live in Pennsylvania and I don't know anything about this particular tax, but just the name says that it is a \"\"local\"\" tax. TurboTax covers federal and state taxes, not local taxes. Many places have city, township, and/or county taxes that you are required to pay in addition to state and federal taxes.\""}
{"id": "106310", "text": "A lease payment is composed of an interest portion (borrowed money) and depreciation amount (purchase - residual). The Monthly payment is then Monthly Interest Cost + Monthly Depreciation Cost The Money Factor is used to estimate the amount of interest due in a single month of a lease so you can figure out the monthly payment. If you are borrowing $100,000 then over the entire loan of repayment from a balance of $100,000 to a balance of $0, the average amount you owed was $50,000 (1/2 of principal).   You are repaying this loan monthly (1/12 of a year) and percents are expressed as decimals (1/100). 6 * 1/2 (for principal) * 1/12 (for monthly) * 1/100 (to convert percentage from 6% to .06)  = 6 * 1/2400. 2400 is the product of 3 consecutive conversion (1/2 * 1/12 * 1/100) to convert from an interest rate to a money factor. 6/2400 = Money factor of 0.0025 which can be multiplied against the total amount being borrowed to know what the monthly interest would roughly equal. Some Money Factor info: https://www.alphaleasing.com/resources/articles/MoneyFactor.asp"}
{"id": "106424", "text": "Most 0% interest loans have quite high interest rates that are deferred. If you are late on a payment you are hit with all the deferred interest. They're banking on a percentage of customers missing a payment.  Also, this is popular in furniture/car sales because it's a way to get people to buy who otherwise wouldn't, they made money on the item sale, so the loan doesn't have to earn them money (even though some will). Traditional banks/lenders do make money from interest and rely on that, they would have to rely on fees if interest were not permitted."}
{"id": "106501", "text": "The $50k is subject to the appropriate income taxes, which may include FICA taxes including the employer share if you are self employed. The after tax money can then be invested with the amount invested being the cost basis (I.e., if you invest $40k you will have a cost basis of $40k).  In future years you will have taxes due if any of those investments pay dividends (or capital gain distributions). Once you sell you will have a capital gain or loss that you will pay taxes on (or take a deduction if a loss). Now you can improve this picture if you are able to put some of your money into a retirement account (either a tax deductible or a ROTH). With retirement accounts you do not pay tax on the capital gains or dividends. If you use a tax deferred account your tax is higher but that is because you were also investing Uncle Sam's portion of your pay check."}
{"id": "106541", "text": "Too much fiddling with your portfolio if the difference is 3-4% or less (as it's become in recent months).  Hands off is the better advice.  As for buying shares, go for whichever is the cheapest (i.e. Goog rather than Googl) because the voting right with the latter is merely symbolic.  And who attends shareholders' meetings, for Pete's sake? On the other hand, if your holdings in the company are way up in the triple (maybe even quadruple) figures, then it might make sense to do the math and take the time to squeeze an extra percentage point or two out of your Googl purchases.  The idle rich occupying the exclusive club that includes only the top 1% of the population needs to have somethinng to do with its time.  Meanwhile, the rest of us are scrambling to make a living--leaving only enough time to visit our portfolios as often as Buffett advises (about twice a year)."}
{"id": "106611", "text": "\"Retirement accounts often can be invested with pretax money, with the exception of Roth accounts that use post-tax and have tax-free growth if you follow the rules, rather than after tax money as well as provide a shelter so that you aren't having to pay annual taxes on dividends and other possible distributions. Another point would be to consider how much money you'd be investing as some funds may have institutional versions that can be much cheaper than others, e.g. compare Vanguard's index funds that the 500 Index in Investor shares, Admiral shares and institutional forms where the tickers would be VFINX, VFIAX, VINIX, VIIIX to consider. Some companies may have access to the institutional funds that aren't what you'd have unless you are investing millions of dollars upfront. Lastly, if there isn't an employer plan and you make a ton of cash, you may not qualify for a deductible IRA or Roth IRA contribution for something else that may happen if you want to start playing with, \"\"What if.\"\"\""}
{"id": "106620", "text": "\"The best predictor of mutual fund performance is low expense ratio, as reported by Morningstar despite the fact that it produces the star ratings you cite. Most of the funds you list are actively managed and thus have high expense ratios. Even if you believe there are mutual fund managers out there that can pick investments intelligently enough to offset the costs versus a passive index fund, do you trust that you will be able to select such a manager? Most people that aren't trying to sell you something will advise that your best bet is to stick with low-cost, passive index funds. I only see one of these in your options, which is FUSVX (Fidelity Spartan 500 Index Fund Fidelity Advantage Class) with an exceptionally low expense ratio of 0.05%. Do you have other investment accounts with more choices, like an IRA? If so you might consider putting a major chunk of your 401(k) money into FUSVX, and use your IRA to balance your overall porfolio with small- and medium-cap domestic stock, international stock, and bond funds. As an aside, I remember seeing a funny comment on this site once that is applicable here, something along the lines of \"\"don't take investment advice from coworkers unless they're Warren Buffett or Bill Gross\"\".\""}
{"id": "106800", "text": "That article misses the entire point of why (most) American's use credit cards: to spend money they don't have. All it spoke about was ease of use. If anything, you could change it to talk about *debit* cards and that might be true."}
{"id": "107213", "text": "\"The answer is \"\"Yes\"\", You can deduct them. As long as you showed that you put in effort to make a profit then you can deduct business expenses.\""}
{"id": "107377", "text": "The answer to your question as asked is no.  Call options, even those issued by the company, cannot create new shares unless they are employee stock options. Company-issued warrants, on the other hand, can create new shares."}
{"id": "107536", "text": "Supposedly this also means that I am free from having to pay   California corporate taxes? Not in the slightest. Since you (the corporate employee) reside in CA - the corporation is doing business in CA and is liable for CA taxes. Or, does this mean I am required to pay both CA taxes and Delaware   fees? (In this case, minimal, just a paid agent from incorporate.com) I believe DE actually does have corporate taxes, check it out. But the bottom line is yes, you're liable for both CA and DE costs of doing corporate business (income taxes, registered agents, CA corp fee, etc). Is there any benefit at all for me to be a Delaware C-Corp or should I   dissolve and start over. Or just re-incorporate as California LLC Unless you intend to go public anytime soon or raise money from VCs/investors - there's no benefit whatsoever in incorporating in DE. You should seek a legal advice with an attorney, of course, since benefits are legal issues (usually related to choosing jurisdiction for litigation etc). If you're a one-person freelancer, doing C-Corp was not the best decision as well. Tax-wise you'd be much better off with a S-Corp, or a LLC - both pass-through and have no (Federal) entity-level taxes. Corporate rates are generally higher than individual rates, and less deductions can be taken. In California, check with a CPA/EA licensed in the State, since both S-Corp and LLC would be taxed, and taxed differently."}
{"id": "107584", "text": "or just input it in my accounting software along with receipts, and   then when I'm doing taxes this would go under the investment or loses   (is it somewhere along that line)? Yes, this. Generally, for the long term you should have a separate bank account and charge card for your business. I started my business (LLC) by filing online, and paying a fee for a   registration, and that makes it a business cost right? Startup cost. There are special rules about this. Talk to your tax adviser. For the amounts in question you could probably expense it, but verify."}
{"id": "107688", "text": "Since you mention the religion restriction, you should probably look into the stock market or funds investing in it. Owning stock basically means you own a part of a company and benefit from any increase in value the company may have (and 'loose' on decreases, provided you sell your stock) and you also earn dividends over the company's profit. If you do your research properly and buy into stable companies you shouldn't need to bother about temporary market movements or crashes (do pay attention to deterioration on the businesses you own though). When buying stocks you should be aiming for the very long run. As mentioned by Victor, do your research, I recommend you start it by looking into 'value stocks' should you choose that path."}
{"id": "107817", "text": "You should look into an LLC.  Its a fairly simple process, and the income simply flows through to your individual return.  It will allow you to deduct supplies and other expenses from that income.  It should also protect you if someone sues you for doing shoddy work (even if the work was fine), although you would need to consult a lawyer to be sure. For last year, it sounds like your taxes were done wrong.  There are very, very few ways that you can end up adding more income and earning less after taxes. I'm tempted to say none, but our tax laws are so complex that I'm sure you can do it somehow."}
{"id": "107819", "text": "Private investors as mutual funds are a minority of the market.  Institutional investors make up a substantial portion of the long term holdings.  These include pension funds, insurance companies, and even corporations managing their money, as well as individuals rich enough to actively manage their own investments.   From Business Insider, with some aggregation:   Numbers don't add to 100% because of rounding.  Also, I pulled insurance out of household because it's not household managed.  Another source is the Tax Policy Center, which shows that about 50% of corporate stock is owned by individuals (25%) and individually managed retirement accounts (25%).   Another issue is that household can be a bit confusing.  While some of these may be people choosing stocks and investing their money, this also includes Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOP) and company founders.  For example, Jeff Bezos owns about 17% of Amazon.com according to Wikipedia.  That would show up under household even though that is not an investment account.  Jeff Bezos is not going to sell his company and buy equity in an index fund.   Anyway, the most generous description puts individuals as controlling about half of all stocks.  Even if they switched all of that to index funds, the other half of stocks are still owned by others.  In particular, about 26% is owned by institutional investors that actively manage their portfolios.   In addition, day traders buy and sell stocks on a daily basis, not appearing in these numbers.  Both active institutional investors and day traders would hop on misvalued stocks, either shorting the overvalued or buying the undervalued.   It doesn't take that much of the market to control prices, so long as it is the active trading market.  The passive market doesn't make frequent trades.  They usually only need to buy or sell as money is invested or withdrawn.  So while they dominate the ownership stake numbers, they are much lower on the trading volume numbers.   TL;DR:  there is more than enough active investment by organizations or individuals who would not switch to index funds to offset those that do.  Unless that changes, this is not a big issue."}
{"id": "108062", "text": "It depends on the finances involved, but particularly if you're not billing anything right now and may have no revenue this year, it's probably a good idea to bill his company. This is in part because some deductions or other tax treatments are only allowed if you have revenue and/or income.  The biggest example I can think of is the Solo 401k - you can only contribute up to your self employed income.  If you're planning to contribute to one (and you should, they're amazingly powerful tools for saving for retirement and for reducing your tax burden), you will have to have some revenue in order to have something to pay yourself with. I don't believe you have to charge him, though, if it makes more tax sense not to (for example, if his business is operating at a loss and cannot benefit from expensing it, but you'd then have to pay taxes on your own income from it)."}
{"id": "108302", "text": "\"I think you're thinking that \"\"in debt\"\" doesn't just mean \"\"owes a debt\"\" but somehow means \"\"owes more debt in total than the assets\"\". That condition, owing money without offsetting assets, is \"\"having a negative net worth\"\". If you have a mortgage then you have a debt and you are in debt. You may have a positive net worth, if you have equity in the house and your car and such like, and have cash in the bank. You may have a negative net worth if you owe more than you own. But either way you are technically in debt. Knowing that, it's not surprising that 75% of Americans are in debt. It's surprising that 25% are not. They have no credit card, no car loan, no mortgage, no line of credit, no student loans. Is it because they've paid all that off? Or because they are deadly poor and own nothing and can't be lent anything? You can't just say it's bad to have debt. It's bad to have too much debt, to have a negative net worth, to be in the habit of borrowing to finance a lifestyle you can't actually afford, and so on. But it's perfectly normal to have a debt or two. That's how our system mostly works.\""}
{"id": "108391", "text": "And on the last sentence, it doesn't matter when or where the money was earned (money is fungible, so there's generally not even any way to tell), but you do have to have sufficient earned income (that's basically money you earn from working, not from dividends and interest or selling stock and the like) in the contribution year to cover the IRA contribution."}
{"id": "108399", "text": "Some highly pessimistic things worth noting to go alongside all the stability and tax break upside that homes generally provide: Negative equity is no joke and basically the only thing that bankrupts the middle classes consistently en masse. The UK is at the end of a huge housing bull run where rents are extremely cheap relative to buying (often in the 1% range within the M25), Brexit is looming and interest rates could well sky rocket with inflation. Borrowing ~500k to buy a highly illiquid asset you might have to fire sale in case of emergency/job loss etc for 300k in a few years when lots of (relatively) cheap rental housing is available to rent risk free, could be argued to be a highly lopsided and dangerous bet vs the alternatives. Locking in 'preferential' mortgage rates can be a huge trap: low interest rates generally increase asset values. If/when they rise, assets fall in value as the demand shrinks, making you highly exposed to huge losses if you need to sell before it is paid off. In the case of housing this can be exceptionally vicious as the liquidity dramatically dries up during falls, meaning fire sales become much more severe than they are for more liquid assets like stock.  Weirdly and unlike most products, people tend to buy the very best house they can get leverage for, rather than work out what they need/want and finding the best value equivalent. If a bank will lend you \u00a320 a day to buy lunch, and you can just afford to pay it, do you hunt out the very best \u00a320 lunch you can every day, or do you make some solid compromises so you can save money for other things etc? You seem to be hunting very close to the absolute peak amount you can spend on these numbers. Related to above, at that level of mortgage/salary you have very little margin for error if either of you lose jobs etc.  Houses are much more expensive to maintain/trade than most people think. You spend ~2-5% every time you buy and sell, and you can easily spend 2-20k+ a year depending what happens just keeping the thing watertight, paid for, liveable and staying up. You need to factor this in and be pessimistic when you do.  Most people don't factor in these costs to the apparent 'index' rise in house values and what they expect to sell for in x years. In reality no buy and hold investor can ever realise even close to the quoted house price returns as they are basically stocks you have to pay 5% each time you buy or sell and then 1-20% percent a year to own - they have to rise dramatically over time for you to even break even after all the costs.  In general you should buy homes to make memories, not money, and to buy them at prices that don't cause you sleepless nights in case of disasters."}
{"id": "108514", "text": "Before we were married my wife financed a car at a terrible rate. I think it was around 20%. When trying to refinance it the remaining loan was much larger than the value of the car, so no one was interested in refinancing. I was able to do a balance transfer to a credit card around 10%. This did take on a bit of risk, which almost came up when the car was totaled in an accident. Fortunately the remaining balance was now less than the value of the car, otherwise I would have been stuck with a credit card payment and no vehicle."}
{"id": "109203", "text": "You could, but the bank won't let you... If you're a sole proprietor - then you could probably open a personal account and just use it, and never tell them that is actually a business. However, depending on your volume of operations, they may switch you on their own to business account by the pattern of your transactions. For corporations, you cannot use a personal account since the corporation is a separate legal entity that owns the funds. Also, you're generally required to separate corporate and personal funds to keep the limited liability protection (which is why you have the corporation to begin with). Generally, business accounts have much higher volumes and much more transactions than personal accounts, and it costs more for the banks to run them. In the US, some banks offer free, or very low-cost, business accounts for small businesses that don't need too many transactions. I'm sure if you shop around, you'll find those in Canada as well."}
{"id": "109455", "text": "\"You have heard the old adage \"\"Buy low, sell high\"\", right? That sounds so obvious that you'd have to wonder why they would ever bother coining such an expression. It should rank up there with \"\"Don't walk in front of a moving car\"\" on the Duh scale of advice. Well, your question demonstrates exactly why it isn't quite so obvious in the real world and that people need to be reminded of it.  So, in your example, the stock prices are currently low (relative to what they have been). So per that adage, do you sell or buy when prices are low? Hint: It isn't sell. Yes. Your gut is going to tell you the exact opposite thanks to the fact that our brains are unfortunately wired to make us susceptible to the loss aversion fallacy. When the market has undergone a big drop is the WORST time to stop contributing (buying stocks).  This example might help get your brain and gut to agree a little more easily: If you were talking about any other non-investment commodity, cars for instance.  Your question equates to.. I really need a car, but the prices have been dropping like crazy lately.    Maybe I should wait until the car dealers start raising their prices again before I buy one. Dollar Cost Averaging As littleadv suggested, if you have an automatic payroll deduction for your retirement account, you are getting the benefit of Dollar Cost Averaging. Because you are investing the same amount on a scheduled interval, you are buying more shares when they are cheap and fewer when they are expensive. It is like an automatic buy low strategy is built into the account. The alternative, which you are implying, is a market timing strategy. Under this strategy, instead of investing regularly you try to get in and out of investments right before they go up/drop. There are two MAJOR flaws with this approach:   1) Your brain will work against you (see above) and encourage you to do the exact opposite of what you should be doing.   2) Unless you are clairvoyant, this strategy isn't much better than gambling. If you are lucky it can work, but because of #1, the odds are stacked against you.\""}
{"id": "109468", "text": "\"Whoops, responded to the wrong person. Reposting for you in case you didn't see it.       Here's a source for the $3.7 trillion number.      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-08/u-s-municipal-bond-market-28-larger-than-estimated-federal-reserve-says.html    It's not 'incorrect data'.        EDIT:  Furthermore, in order to know the \"\"extent\"\" of the crime (your own admission) we NEED to know the size of the entire market otherwise you can't have any perspective or determine extent.  So there's no reason it shouldn't be mentioned in the article.\""}
{"id": "109540", "text": "Guaranteed 8.2% annual return sounds too good to be true. Am I   right? Are there likely high fees, etc.? You're right. Guaranteed annual return is impossible, especially when you're talking about investments for such a long period of time. Ponzi (and Madoff) schemed their investors using promises of guaranteed return (see this note in Wikipedia: In some cases returns were allegedly determined before the account was even opened.[72]). Her financial advisor doesn't charge by the hour--he takes a   commission. So there's obviously some incentive to sell her things,   even if she may not need them. Definitely not a good sign, if the advisor gets a commission from the sale then he's obviously not an advisor but a sales person. The problem with this kind of investment is that it is very complex, and it is very hard to track. The commission to the broker makes it hard to evaluate returns (you pay 10% upfront, and it takes awhile to just get that money back, before even getting any profits), and since you're only able to withdraw in 20 years or so - there's no real way to know if something wrong, until you get there and discover that oops- no money! Also, many annuity funds (if not all) limit withdrawals to a long period, i.e.: you cannot touch money for like 10 years from investment (regardless of the tax issues, the tax deferred investment can be rolled over to another tax deferred account, but in this case - you can't). I suggest you getting your own financial advisor (that will work for you) to look over the details, and talk to your mother if it is really a scam."}
{"id": "109546", "text": "I'm not sure I am fully understanding the nuance of your question, but based on your answer in the comments you and your business are not separate legal entities. So your income is the full $70K, there is no distinct business to have income. If you clarify your question to include why you want to know this I might be able to give a more meaningful answer for your situation."}
{"id": "109675", "text": "Whole life in most instances is a very bad plan. It's marketed as a life insurance policy wrapped in an investment but it does neither very well. The hidden caveat of whole life is that the investment goes away if you die.  Say for example I have a $100,000 whole life insurance policy and over the years I have paid in enough to have a $15,000 cash value on the policy. If I die, my family gets $100,000 and the cash value is lost. With term life you can get a substantially higher amount of coverage for a smaller payment. If you invest the difference you end up not only with better coverage, but a better cash value from the difference if you don't die (which is what we all hope for anyways). As JackiYo said, your insurance should be designed around replacing lost income/value.  You should get 10x your annual income in term life insurance."}
{"id": "109678", "text": "This depends entirely on what the market guesses the news will be and how much of that guess has already been factored into the price. There is no general answer beyond that.  Note that this explains the apparently paradoxical responses where a stock good down on good news (the market expected better) or up on bad news (the market expected worse)."}
{"id": "109903", "text": "It depends on the relative rates and relative risk. Ignore the deduction. You want to compare the rates of the investment and the mortgage, either both after-tax or both before-tax. Your mortgage costs you 5% (a bit less after-tax), and prepayments effectively yield a guaranteed 5% return. If you can earn more than that in your IRA with a risk-free investment, invest. If you can earn more than that in your IRA while taking on a degree of risk that you are comfortable with, invest. If not, pay down your mortgage. See this article: Mortgage Prepayment as Investment: For example, the borrower with a 6% mortgage who has excess cash flow would do well to use it to pay down the mortgage balance if the alternative is investment in assets that yield 2%. But if two years down the road the same assets yield 7%, the borrower can stop allocating excess cash flow to the mortgage and start accumulating financial assets. Note that he's not comparing the relative risk of the investments. Paying down your mortgage has a guaranteed return. You're talking about CDs, which are low risk, so your comparison is simple. If your alternative investment is stocks, then there's an element of risk that it won't earn enough to outpace the mortgage cost. Update: hopefully this example makes it clearer: For example, lets compare investing $100,000 in repayment of a 6% mortgage with investing it in a fund that pays 5% before-tax, and taxes are deferred for 10 years. For the mortgage, we enter 10 years for the period, 3.6% (if that is the applicable rate) for the after tax return, $100,000 as the present value, and we obtain a future value of $142,429. For the alternative investment, we do the same except we enter 5% as the return, and we get a future value of $162,889. However, taxes are now due on the $62,889 of interest, which reduces the future value to $137,734. The mortgage repayment does a little better. So if your marginal tax rate is 30%, you have $10k extra cash to do something with right now, mortgage rate is 5%, IRA CD APY is 1%, and assuming retirement in 30 years: If you want to plug it into a spreadsheet, the formula to use is (substitute your own values): (Note the minus sign before the cash amount.) Make sure you use after tax rates for both so that you're comparing apples to apples. Then multiply your IRA amount by (1-taxrate) to get the value after you pay future taxes on IRA withdrawals."}
{"id": "109938", "text": "\"I'm going to start with your title question: How can home buying be considered a sound investment with all of that interest that needs to be paid? If taken literally, this is a loaded question because if you pay cash for a home, you don't pay any interest. Furthermore, if your interest rate is 3% for 10 years you won't pay nearly as much interest as you will if your rate is 10% for 30 years, so \"\"all of that interest\"\" is relative to your personal situation. Having said that, of course I understand what you mean. Most people pay interest, and interest is expensive, so how do you calculate if it's worth it? That question has been asked and answered, but for your particular situation, you really have two separate questions: I believe you should answer these questions independently. If you move far away, it's probably the case that you can save a lot of money by either renting or buying in that location. So you should first consider if it's worth it to move, and then if it is, decide if it's worth it to rent or buy. If you decide not to move far away, then decide if maybe you can save money by renting somewhere near your current home. Since it sounds like if you move you may have to become a landlord, living close by to your tenant may also make it easier to deal with problems when they arise.\""}
{"id": "110061", "text": "It depends and I would not just jump into conclusion as I have seen cases where offering some services are not U.S. sourced income. I'll advise you speak with a knowledgeable tax professional."}
{"id": "110202", "text": "There's no additional income tax burden created when you decide to make Roth IRA contributions, your Roth IRA contributions are taxed at the same time all your income is taxed. If you earned that $100 by working a job, then your employer likely withheld taxes when they paid you. If you earned it through self-employment, then you'll pay estimated taxes on that income quarterly, etc. In any case when you file your annual tax return the actual taxes owed vs taxes paid gets reconciled and you're left with a refund or owe an additional sum."}
{"id": "110217", "text": "Just tried to buy lunch with some gold dust. They said they only take US dollars.  Gold is really no different than fiat paper/digital or even cryptocurrencies. Outside of the industrial uses for it, of which there are many but not so many that it would use up all the gold that's been mined shy of just using up all the gold that's been mined to use up all the gold that's been mined, its value is also based on perception and perceived value.. ..no different than anything else someone wants and is willing to do x in order to get it.  When push comes to shove, other things contain way more value than gold, and gold is just *a* medium with which to exchange those things for.. But, again, only because people agree for it *to* be a medium they're willing to accept.  Again, you can't eat, drink, fuck, shelter, etc yourself with gold, you can only get food, drink, sex with it.. ..if the other party is willing to accept it which, today, wasn't the case.  https://www.coindesk.com/gold-investor-john-hathaway-cryptocurrencies-garbage/"}
{"id": "110367", "text": "I'm an Aussie and I purchased 5 of these properties from 2008 to 2010. I was looking for positive cash flow on properties for not too much upfront investment. The USA property market made sense because of the high Aussie $$ at the time, the depressed property market in the US and the expensive market here.  I used an investment web-site that allowed me to screen properties by yield and after eliminating outliers, went for the city with the highest consistent yield performance. I settled on Toledo, Ohio as it had the highest yields and was severely impacted by the housing crisis. I bought my first property for $18K US which was a little over $17K AUD.  The property was a duplex in great condition in a reasonable location.  Monthly rentals $US900 and rents guaranteed and direct deposited into my bank account every month by section 8.  Taxes $900 a year and $450 a year for water. Total return around $US8,000.   My second property was a short sale in a reasonable area. The asking was $US8K and was a single family in good condition already tenanted.  I went through the steps with the bank and after a few months, was the proud owner of another tenanted, positive cash flow property returning $600 a month gross. Taxes of $600 a year and water about the same.  $US6K NET a year on a property that cost $AUD8K Third and fourth were two single family dwellings in good areas.  These both cost $US14K each and returned $US700 a month each.  $US28K for two properties that gross around $US15K a year.   My fifth property was a tax foreclosure of a guy with 2 kids whose wife had left him and whose friend had stolen the money to repay the property taxes.  He was basically on the bones of his butt and was staring down the barrel of being homeless with two kids.  The property was in great condition in a reasonable part of town.  The property cost me $4K.  I signed up the previous owner in a land contract to buy his house back for $US30K. Payments over 10 years at 7% came out to around $US333 per month.  I made him an offer whereby if he acted as my property manager, i would forgo the land contract payments and pay him a percentage of the rents in exchange for his services. I would also pay for any work he did on the properties.  He jumped at it.  Seven years later, we're still working together and he keeps the properties humming.  Right now the AUD is around 80c US and looks like falling to around 65c by June 2015.  Rental income in Aussie $$ is around $2750 every month. This month (Jan 2015) I have transferred my property manager's house back to him with a quit claim deed and sold the remaining houses for $US100K  After taxes and commission I expect to receive in the vicinity of AUD$120K  Which is pretty good for a $AUD53K investment.  I've also received around $30K in rent a year. I'm of the belief I should be buying when everybody else is selling and selling when everybody else is buying.   I'm on the look-out for my next positive cash flow investment and I'm thinking maybe an emerging market smashed by the oil shock.   I wish you all happiness and success in your investment. Take care. VR"}
{"id": "110394", "text": "Pick one stock (probably within Utilities) and know it well. Understand what it trades on (EV / EBITDA, P / E, P / Rev) and why. What are the typical margins for the industry? What are rev growth trends? What isn't priced in? I think studying one company deeply would be helpful  Other things to look at would be how your fund is structured, what it's benchmark is, voting structure, and how ideas are sourced  Good luck!"}
{"id": "110400", "text": "It seems you understand the risks, it seems like a fine enough idea.  Hopefully it works out for you. However, you may want to talk to a few local banks about getting a short term home equity loan.  I know someone who was able to do this getting a very low rate for 7 years.  At the time of the loan, the prevailing rate for a 15 year was 3.25, but they were able to get the HEL at 2.6 fixed.  There was no closing costs. The best part about it was the payment was not that much more.  While going from ~1200 to ~1800 is a 50% increase it was not that much in dollars in relationship to his household income.   Note that I did not say Home Equity Line of Credit, which are vairable rates and amount borrowed."}
{"id": "110628", "text": "&gt; Europe is a temporary problem.  Lol..  The better question for this thread is how is the European economy not utterly doomed?  I see no way at all of the Euro surviving.  Greece has already technically defaulted by saying it's not going to pay back all of it's debt.  They will officially default when Germany stops bailing them out.  Spain is in the exact same situation, just about a year behind.  They haven't technically defaulted yet, but they will.  They're receiving bailout after bailout and the Greece situation only makes their interest rates worse.  Italy is just barely behind Spain, the Greek default followed by the Spanish defualt will send Italian interest rates through the roof dooming them to the same fate.  This will eventually effect the US, but our borrowing rates are held artificially low due to the Fed just printing up more fake money and letting the US borrow as much as it wants.  If you don't see this scheme crumbling and collapsing, I'm just curious what you actually think *will* happen?"}
{"id": "110716", "text": "There are various exchanges around the world that handle spot precious metal trading; for the most part these are also the primary spot foreign exchange markets, like EBS, Thomson Reuters, Currenex (website seems to be down), etc. You can trade on these markets through brokers just like you can trade on stock markets.  However, the vast majority of traders on these exchanges do not intend to hold any bullion ownership at the end of the day; they want to buy as much as they sell each day.  A minority of traders do intend to hold metal positions for longer periods, but I doubt any of them intend to actually go collect bullion from the exchange.  I don't think it's even possible. Really the only way to get bullion is to pay a service fee to a dealer like you mentioned.  But on an exchange like the ones above you have to pay three different fees: So in the end you can't even get the spot price on the exchanges where the spot prices are determined.  You might even come out ahead by going to a dealer. You should try to find a reputable dealer, and go in knowing the latest trade prices.  An honest dealer will have a website showing you the current trade prices, so you know that they expect you to know the prices when you come in. For example, here's a well-known dealer in Chicago that happily shows you the spot prices from KITCO so you can decide whether their service fee is worth it or not."}
{"id": "110848", "text": "This question was asked three years ago, but now that it's 2017 there is actually a relatively easy, cheap and fast solution to at least the first half of your question. To cash the check: I've done this a half dozen times while abroad (from the US) without any problems."}
{"id": "110983", "text": "In the US, dividends have special tax treatment similar to, but not the same as Capital Gains. No easy way to transform one to the other, the very fact that you invested your money in a company that has returned part of your capital as income means it is just that, income. Also in the US, you could invest in Master Limited Partnerships. These are companies that make distributions that are treated as a return of capital, instead of dividends. Throughout the life of the investment you receive tax forms that assign part of the operating expense/loss of the company to you as a tax payer. Then at the end of the investment life you are required to recapture those losses as Capital Gains on sale of the stock. In some ways, these investments do exactly what you are asking about. They transform periodic income into later capital gains, basically deferring tax on the income until the sale of the security. Here is an article I found about MLPs coming to the UK through an ETF: Master Limited Partnerships in the UK"}
{"id": "111071", "text": "Welcome to Money.SE. As Dheer notes, we can come up with pretty good advice with more details.  Absent any more information, I'd offer this - money withdrawn today, from a traditional IRA, is subject to tax and 10% penalty. The day you turn 59-1/2, that 10% penalty evaporates.  Withdrawals at that time are still subject to ordinary tax at your marginal rate. If you happen to be in the 15% bracket, it may make sense (at 59.5) to withdraw enough to top off that bracket and use the extra money to supplement those payments. If you are already a 25%er, you have to decide whether this money is better spent paying the loans early. Much of that decision is based on the rates involved.  More important, in my opinion. what is the child doing? You borrowed money (I assume) to send a kid to college, and now he's out. Is he not able to chip in? $715K in retirement is pretty great, in the higher end of what pre-retirees have. It translates to just under $30K/yr in withdrawals at retirement. A decent number, really, but not a number that has you comfortably paying for this debt."}
{"id": "111157", "text": "Unfortunately this is something that should have been determined prior to the book tour. Your tax advisor or accountant could have assisted you in making sure you collected the documentation you needed.  You are going to have to sit down with your advisor with the documentation you have and determine what you can prove."}
{"id": "111301", "text": "To Chris' comment, find out if the assignment commission is the same as the commission for an executed trade. If that does affect the profit, just let it expire.  I've had spreads (buy a call, sell a higher strike call, same dates) so deep in the money, I just made sense to let both exercise at expiration. Don't panic if all legs ofthe trade don't show until Sunday or even Monday morning."}
{"id": "111350", "text": "If you want to 'offset' current (2016) income, only deductible contribution to a traditional IRA does that. You can make nondeductible contributions to a trad IRA, and there are cases where that makes sense for the future and cases where it doesn't, but it doesn't give you a deduction now. Similarly a Roth IRA has possible advantages and disadvantages, but it does not have a deduction now. Currently he maximum is $5500 per person ($6500 if over age 50, but you aren't) which with two accounts (barely) covers your $10k.  To be eligible to make this deductible traditional contribution, you must  have earned income (employment or self-employment, but NOT the distribution from another IRA) at least the amount you want to contribute NOT have combined income (specifically MAGI, Modified Adjusted Gross Income) exceeding the phaseout limit (starts at $96,000 for married-joint) IF you were covered during the year (either you or your spouse) by an employer retirement plan (look at box 13 on your W-2's). With whom. Pretty much any bank, brokerage, or mutual fund family can handle IRAs. (To be technical, the bank's holding company will have an investment arm -- to you it will usually look like one operation with one name and logo, one office, one customer service department, one website etc, but the investment part must be legally separate from the insured banking part so you may notice a different name on your legal and tax forms.) If you are satisified with the custodian of the inherited IRA you already have, you might just stay with them -- they may not need as much paperwork, you don't need to meet and get comfortable with new people, you don't need to learn a new website. But if they sold you an annuity at your age -- as opposed to you inheriting an already annuitized IRA -- I'd want a lot of details before trusting they are acting in your best interests; most annuities sold to IRA holders are poor deals. In what. Since you want only moderate risk at least to start, and also since you are starting with a relatively small amount where minimum investments, expenses and fees can make more of an impact on your results, I would go with one or a few broad (= lower risk) index (= lower cost) fund(s). Every major fund familly also offers at least a few 'balanced' funds which give you a mixture of stocks and bonds, and sometimes some 'alternatives', in one fund.  Remember this is not committing you forever; any reasonable custodian will allow you to move or spread to more-adventurous (but not wild and crazy) investments, which may be better for you in future years when you have some more money in the account and some more time to ponder your goals and options and comfort level."}
{"id": "111391", "text": "\"I will say in advance this is not a great answer, but I had a similar experience when I owned a CIT bond that defaulted. I ended up getting stock plus 5 newly issued bonds as a replacement for my defaulted bond. My broker had no clue on cost basis and didn't even try for the new securities, I called the \"\"hotline\"\" setup about CIT default and they knew nothing, and finally I read all the paperwork around the restructuring but it was less than transparent. So in the end I ended up claiming everything as a wash, no gain/no loss - which probably screwed me in the end as I believe I ended up down. It was a very small position for me and was not worth the headache :(\""}
{"id": "111451", "text": "Currency hedge means that you are somewhat protected from movements in currency as your investment is in gold not currency. So this then becomes less speculative and concentrates more on your intended investment.  EDIT The purpose of the GBSE ETF is aimed for investors living in Europe wanting to invest in USD Gold and not be effected by movements in the EUR/USD. The GBSE ETF aims to hedge against the effects of the currency movements in the EUR/USD and more closely track the USD Gold price. The 3 charts below demonstrate this over the past 5 years.    So as is demonstrated the performance of the GBSE ETF closely matches the performance of the USD Gold price rather than the EUR Gold price, meaning someone in Europe can invest in the fund and get the appropriate similar performance as investing directly into the USD Gold without being affected by currency exchange when changing back to EUR. This is by no way speculative as the OP suggests but is in fact serving the purpose as per the ETF details."}
{"id": "111454", "text": "You say that one property is 65% of the value of the two properties and the other is 35%.  But how much of that do the two of you actually own?  If you have co-signed mortgages on both properties, then your equity is going to be lower.  If you sold both properties, then your take away would be just half of that equity.  And while the 35% property may be less valuable, if you bought it first, it may actually have more equity.   It's the equity that matters here, not the value of the property.  With a mortgage, the bank is more of an owner than you are until you've paid down most of the loan.   You may find that the bank won't agree to a single-owner refinance.  A co-signed mortgage is a lot easier for them to collect, as they can hold either of you responsible for the entire loan.   If you sell the 65% property, then you can pay off any mortgage on that property and use the equity payout from that to buy out your relative on the 35% property.  If you currently have no mortgage, you'd even have cash back.  This is your fewest strings option.   Let's say that you have no mortgage now.  So this mortgage would be the only mortgage on the property.  It's not so much, as 15:65 is 3:13 or 18.75% of the value of the property.  That's more of a home equity loan than a mortgage.  You should be able to get a good rate.  It might reduce your short term profit, but it should be survivable if you have other income.   If you don't have other income, then seriously consider selling the 65% property and diversifying the payout into something else.  E.g. stocks and bonds.   Perhaps your relative would be willing to float you the loan.  That would save you bank fees and closing costs.  Write up a contract and agree to take assignment of the title at payoff.  You'll need to pay a lawyer to write up the contract (paying a modest amount now to cover the various future possibilities), but that should still be cheaper.   There's a certain amount of trust required on both sides, but this gives you some separation.  And of course it takes your relative out of the day-to-day management entirely.  Perhaps the steady flow of cash would provide what they need.   If your relative is willing to remain that involved, that can work.  Note that they may not want to do this, so don't get too attached to the idea.  Be prepared for a no.  This would be a great option for you, as you pretty much get everything you have now.  They get back the time meeting with you to make decisions, but they also give up control over those decisions.  Some people would not like that tradeoff.   The one time I was involved with a professional managing a property for me, the fee was around 7% of the rent.  If that fits your area, you might reasonably charge 5%.  That gives a discount for family and not being a professional.   There's a relatively easy way to find out what fits your area.  Look around and see what companies offer multiple listings.  Call until you find a couple that will do management for you.  Get quotes for managing your properties.  Now you'll know the amounts.   The big failing though is that this may not describe the issue that your relative has.  If the real problem is that the two of you have different approaches to property management, then making you the only decision maker may be the wrong direction.  This is certainly financially feasible, but it still may not be the right solution for your relationship.   If you get a no on this, I'd recommend moving on to other solutions immediately.  This may simply be too favorable to you."}
{"id": "111615", "text": "\"According to the following article the answer is \"\"first-in, first-out\"\": http://smallbusiness.chron.com/calculate-cost-basis-stock-multiple-purchases-21588.html According to the following article the last answer was just one option an investor can choose: https://www.usaa.com/inet/pages/advice-investing-costbasis?akredirect=true\""}
{"id": "111768", "text": "Option prices can predict the range of movement of the underlying, but not if the underlying is going up or down. An option price gives an implied volatility for an underlying . That IV number helps predict a range for the underlying price over the next few days,months, upto a year."}
{"id": "111815", "text": "Although I don't think you need to factor in risk tolerance to get the probabilities, I agree with JoeTaxpayer that you will need to factor in risk tolerance in order to make a practical decision about what to do.  In fact, I think that to make a practical decision you will need more than the specific probability you ask for you in the question; rather, you would like to see the complete probability distribution of possible outcomes. In other words, it's not enough to know that there is a 51% chance that investing will outperform paying down debt.  You actually need to know much it outperforms when it does outperform, and how much it underperforms when it underperforms.  As JoeTaxpayer's comment suggests, you might not choose to make an investment that had a 99% chance of outperforming debt payment by 1%, and a 1% chance of underperforming by 99%. I think it possible to address these questions by doing simulations.  This can be done even with a spreadsheet, but more flexibly with simple programming.  Essentially you can create some kind of probabilistic model of the various factors (e.g., chance that your investment will go up or down) and see what actually happens: how often you lose a lot of money, lose a little money, gain a little money, or gain a lot of money.  Then based on that you can consult your inner spirit animal to decide whether the probability distribution of possible gains outweighs that of possible losses."}
{"id": "112003", "text": "\"Their interest expense was $17M. Where you see $5.14/sh in Key Statistics, any daily interest received is more than canceled out by the expense paid at the same time. I understand your concern, but this company is not \"\"sitting on cash\"\" as are Apple, Google, etc. Short term rates are well below 1%, 1yr tbill looks like about .2%. So strictly speaking, each share might have 1 cent interest you need to concern yourself with. Disclaimer to other readers - This has nothing to do with taxes. OP is asking about a specific part of the company cash flow. His worst case is $1 per 100 shares.\""}
{"id": "112042", "text": "I vote on Plan C. Why pay taxes? In an emergency situation, you could always borrow from the 401k."}
{"id": "112136", "text": "Here is another explanation of an SMA.  SMA refers to the Special Memorandum Account which represents neither equity nor cash but rather a line of credit created when the market value of securities in a Reg. T margin account increase in value.  For example, assume the market value of securities purchased at a cost of $10,000 on margin (at 50%) increase in value to $12,000.  This $2,000 increase in market value would create SMA of $1,000, which provides the account holder the ability to either: 1) buy additional securities valued at $2,000 (assuming a 50% margin rate) without depositing up additional funds; or 2) withdraw $2,000 in cash, which may be financed by increasing the debit balance if the account holds no cash.   It should be noted that while an increase in market value over original cost creates SMA, a subsequent decline in market value has no effect on SMA.  SMA will only decline if used to purchase securities or withdraw cash and the only restriction with respect to its use is that the additional purchases or withdrawals do not bring the account below the maintenance margin requirement. SMA will also increase on a dollar for dollar basis in the event of cash deposits or dividends. More details at http://ibkb.interactivebrokers.com/article/66"}
{"id": "112179", "text": "You could theoretically use any time period unit, but 1 minute and 30 minute  seem to be the most common and useful.  Especially for active traders.  This also has the added advantage of giving you useful insight into the trade volumes throughout the day; assuming that is also included on the chart.  I think most include that as a bar chart across the bottom. Here is a great example for crude oil on dailyfx:  https://www.dailyfx.com/crude-oil Notice that the chart has time options at the top left which include 1 minute, 30 minutes, 1 hour, and 1 day."}
{"id": "112195", "text": "\"Repurchase agreements are a way of financing a security position. You have a collateralized loan where you give your security in exchange for cash. Let's say you have a 10 year Treasury note paying 3.5% while the 1-week repurchase rate is 0.5%. You loan the security to someone with a promise to repurchase it from them some time in the future. You  collect the 3.5% coupon and you pay the 0.5% interest. Clearly it makes no sense for someone to collect interest on money and also collect coupon payments. And for the counter-party it makes no sense to be not getting coupon payments and also to be paying interest. This how one website explains the process: During the transaction, any coupon payments that come due belong to   the legal owner, the \"\"borrower.\"\" However, when this happens, a cash   amount equal to the coupon is paid to the original owner, this is   called \"\"manufactured payment.\"\" In order to avoid the tax payment on   the coupon, some institutions will repo the security to a tax exempt   entity and receive the manufactured payment and avoid the tax (\"\"coupon   washing\"\") I find this unequivocal description to be the clearest During the life of the transaction the market risk and the credit risk   of the collateral remain with the seller. (Because he has agreed to   repurchase the asset for an agreed sum of money at maturity). Provided   the trade is correctly documented if the collateral has a coupon   payment during the life of the repo the buyer is obliged to pay this   to the seller.\""}
{"id": "112259", "text": "If someone recommends a particular investment rather than a class of investments, assume they are getting a commission and walk away. If someone recommends whole life insurance as an investment vehicle, walk away. Find someone whose fiduciary responsibility is explicitly to you as their client. That legally obligated them to consider your best interests first. It doesn't guarantee they are good, but it's done protection against their being actively evil."}
{"id": "112342", "text": "This is called the gordon growth model (or dividend discount model).  This is one way to value a stock, but in practice no one uses it because the assumptions are that companies will return value to investors solely via regular dividends, and that the growth rate and the required rate of return from investors are constants; among other issues."}
{"id": "112435", "text": "It's not typically possible for someone to jointly own the house, who is not also jointly liable for the mortgage. This doesn't matter however, because it is possible for two people to get a mortgage together, where only one person's income is assessed by the lender. If that person could get a mortgage of that amount on their own, then the couple should also be able to get the same mortgage. Source: My wife and I got a mortgage like this. She is self-employed, rather than meet the very high requirements for proving her self-employment income, we simply said that we only wanted my income to be taken into consideration."}
{"id": "112659", "text": "Yes, if you want income and are willing to commit to hold a bond to maturity, you can hold the bond, get the scheduled payments, and get your principal returned at the end. US Savings Bonds are non-marketable (you cannot trade them, but can redeem early) bonds designed for this purpose. The value of a marketable bond will vary over its lifetime as interest rates change and the bond matures. If you buy a 30 year US Treasury bond at par value (100) on September 1, 2011, it yielded 3.51%. If rates fall, the value of your bond will increase over 100. If rates rise, the value will decrease below 100.  How much the value changes depends on the type of bond and the demand for it. But if your goal is to buy and hold, you don't need to worry about it."}
{"id": "112678", "text": "I am no expert, but lots of things can cause drops.  Large unsecured revolving debt (credit cards) - even jf you payoff monthly, unpaid medical bill, acquiring multiple credit cards or other multiple credit searches, any form of lawsuit, and I am sure several other things"}
{"id": "112801", "text": "\"Wait, are you sure you've got that right? What you're describing is a tax credit that counts against your total owed.   In normal operations, companies get to \"\"write off\"\" all of their expenses and they only pay taxes on the net profit of the operation. So I guess you could say that if it cost me $100M to move a factory off shore, and my marginal tax rate was 35%, then I would \"\"save\"\" $35M in taxes ( it still cost me the $100M, but it only felt like it cost $65M).   This is true of any business expense. I (not Romney, apparently) don't know of any special treatment that offshoring activities get one way or the other.\""}
{"id": "112949", "text": "Spend less than you earn. If you have no job (source of income), then you can not possibly stay out of debt as you have to spend money to live and study."}
{"id": "113018", "text": "The market prices for futures and depository ETFs like GLD and IAU are pretty consistent.  Prices for physical gold at retail can vary dramatically. At a coin store that I was at a few weeks ago, there was a very wide buy/sell spread on commonly available gold coins."}
{"id": "113134", "text": "Our Business loans at Fullerton India take care of your wide range of financial needs, capital requirements &amp; other industrial expenses that are crucial for the growth of your small or medium level enterprise with instant eApproval &amp; at affordable interest rates."}
{"id": "113221", "text": "I'm responsible for all our hedging.  Since we sell the energy to end users we do mostly fixed buys, swaps and calls.  I'm a excel guru and dabble a little in SQL.  we have Crystal Ball as well but i have no idea how to use it.  I guess I'm trying to figure out if there is a tool that people use to help me analyze the spreads. or perhaps some reading material to help me through this. This is what i've been working towards for so long and i really don't want to fuck this up"}
{"id": "113451", "text": "If you're not a NY (tax) resident, then as long as you're not physically present in New York - you do not owe NY taxes on compensation for your services. But that is if you're a 1099 contractor/employee. If you're a partner/shareholder in a partnership/LLC/S-Corp registered or conducting business in New York, and that company pays you money - you do owe NY taxes. See this page of the NY revenue agency for more details."}
{"id": "113558", "text": "\"The reason \"\"on-line\"\" savings accounts (Ally, CapitalOne, American Express, and many others) provide much higher rates than brick-and-mortar banks is because they're not brick-and-mortar. They do not need to pay for a huge amount of real estate, utilities, public-facing employees, inter-office mail, security, etc etc. All that - allows them to pay more for your money. The back office of these banks is the same as that of Chase, BOA or Wells Fargo. Its just that they don't have the enormous expense of having a branch in every neighborhood, while still reaching all the same population of depositors. So no, its not a scam, these are reputable banks. Some have physical offices (for example, I know that CapitalOne has some branches in New York), some don't (IIRC neither Ally nor American Express Federal Saving Bank have physical branches). But they're banks nonetheless, insured as required by FDIC (or NCUA, in case of credit unions), and provide all the same services for less (or all the same savings for more, if you will). IMHO, giving 0.01% APR is a scam. Not the other way around. The old-style banks want your money for free, and you're worried why would someone else treat you better... Well, that's why the US has one of the most retarded financial systems in the Western world...\""}
{"id": "113566", "text": "Narratively from the POV of the landlord, the hip retailer ABC offered me a 10 year lease at $1000/month for an empty store front on an empty block.  I agreed.  ABC attracted a large youth market, so other stores filled in the rest of the block in the intervening decade, which I leased for 1200, 1500, 2000, and finally 4000 per month since the foot traffic and demographic is so strong. It's now year 9.  Next year, the lease will likely jump up to the comparable 4000 per square foot.  Their margin in this location probably looks great today.  But the purpose of the quote is to warn you to check the future."}
{"id": "113632", "text": "First, you need to see if you actually qualify as a dependent under IRS rules; in short: While there may be exceptions to the cohabitation rule, I am not sure what those could be.  The takeaway is that if your parent is wishing to claim you as a dependent, they must be responsible for supporting the majority of your living expenses (e.g. food and shelter). If this is the case, then the next question is to look at how the impact of the exemptions play out.  In your situation, I would guess that your mother is correct:  your taxable income is likely to be so low that if you do not take an exemption for yourself, you probably would still have zero or minimal tax liability; but if you mother claims you as a dependent, she will be able to take a deduction. In the case of your grants and loans, the loans should not be taxable income since these need to be repaid (presumably, with future earnings).  Federal grants may be taxable--basically, the portion of the grant that is used solely for paying educational expenses toward a specific degree (tuition and books) is non-taxable, but the remainder may be subject to tax. As for tax credits, you would need to see how much you would get and how they would apply to you.  The bottom line is, there are too many variables to say for certain what the best approach would be, so both your and your mother's returns must be prepared under each scenario (you as her dependent, versus you claiming a personal exemption)."}
{"id": "113651", "text": "You should pay things off every month.  You don't want to be paying 10%-25% interest if you don't have to.  If you regularly use you card, the credit agencies can't tell the difference.  The way it works is that every month, they send the credit agencies your current balance and if you paid the last bill on time.  There is nothing that indicates if this is a standing balance, or if you charged all of it since the last payment. Any business that you legitimately owe a debt to can report that to the credit agencies.  Not all of them do.  This includes utilities, cell phone companies, landlords, etc. If any of them report overdue items it will show up on your credit report, and your credit card company can use that to raise you interest rate. Some cards will automatically raise you credit limit.  They are basically looking to make money fro you.  If you often charge near the limit, and pay the minimum balance each month, they may raise your limit to get you to charge more, and pay more interest.  You can also call them and ask.  They have some internal rules to decide if, based on your history with them and your credit history, if you are a good risk."}
{"id": "113660", "text": "I love how this probably won't get many replies because your in the trenches doing it, keep up the hard work. I graduated high school with 1k in savings and dropped out of college to help support my depressed and unemployed mother with some help from my Father.   I am now a married new construction homeowner and we take home enough money to have new cars, save for retirement, and enjoy life with no college degrees. I went from 8 an hour to over 35 now in 4-5 years.  We both had to get off social media because of all our old high school friends who went to college for garbage degrees, never tried to get entry level jobs in their industry while in school or network, and now cry all day about how Bernie sanders didn't win the election and why school should be free so they don't have to pay off debt for a worthless degree as they wait tables. No sympathy"}
{"id": "113876", "text": "\"I think the \u00a335K band applies to the \"\"dividend income\"\" not the \"\"dividend paid to you\"\", and so you would only actually get \u00a331.5K (90% of \u00a335K) in your pocket before the next tax band kicked in. If your company will only supplying large VAT registered entities, then register for VAT yourself and elect the Flat Rate scheme - depending on your area of business, given that you have no expenses, your company will get an extra 7% - 14% on its income for free. Your clients won't care that you charge them VAT because they'll claim it back. Finally, depending on what your company is for, beware of the dreaded IR35\""}
{"id": "113881", "text": "Your max contribution to your Roth IRA and your traditional IRA share the same cap, so if you are maxing your Roth IRA you cannot have a traditional one as well. I would put the additional into your 401k or perhaps a 529 if you have any kids."}
{"id": "113948", "text": "Yes, an overall $500 loss on the stock can be claimed. Since the day trader sold both lots she acquired, the Wash Sale rule has no net impact on her taxes. The Wash Sale rule would come into play if within thirty days of second sale, she purchased the stock a third time. Then she would have to amend her taxes because claiming the $500 loss would no longer be a valid under the Wash Sale rule. It would have to be added to the cost basis of the most recent purchase."}
{"id": "114064", "text": "My first thought is get a Capital One Secured Card. Use it for small things and pay it all off when you get paid. It will build your credit and after six months of solid use your credit limit can go up and you can be eligible for a better non-secured card (not that you need to get one). It's great for starting or rebuilding credit."}
{"id": "114263", "text": "I think they give away their shit for free (right?)  but if not... 100% true.  definitely going to be everywhere in China immediately... not even a debate.  people here who doubt this don't work in a Chinese company"}
{"id": "114302", "text": "\"Massachusets does no such thing. The 5.25% tax is only on realized gains. \"\"Unearned\"\" means \"\"doesn't tie to your trade/business\"\", i.e.: is not gained through your personal performance.\""}
{"id": "114494", "text": "I would try to avoid mixing business expenditure with personal expenditure so a second credit card might be a good idea. That said, I did get a business credit card for my company in the UK as I didn't want to be personally liable for the money that was spent on the business card (even though I owned 100% of the business) in case things went horribly wrong. As I didn't fancy signing a personal guarantee, this meant that the limit was quite low but it was good enough in most cases."}
{"id": "114497", "text": "They just let you borrow a little more every months. When the owner dies/sells they get all their money + % back."}
{"id": "114643", "text": "I was once the personal assistant to two wealthy NYC sisters. They did not pay for anything. For example, if we were riding the subway, I would pay, and be reimbursed by the Company. They had multiple residences and investment properties. Each property was purchased through a separate Limited Liablity Corporation, and paid for by the Company. When they purchased, donated or sold art, it was through their family Foundation. Their income primarily came from a draw of funds from the family estate, although one of them worked as an architect, which provided further income."}
{"id": "114912", "text": "The simplest explanation is that a traditional IRA is a method of deferring taxes. That is, normally you pay taxes on money you earn at the ordinary rate then invest the rest and only pay the capital gains rate.  However, with a traditional IRA you don't pay taxes on the money when you earn it, you defer the payment of those taxes until you retire. So in the end it ends up being treated the same. That said, if you are strategic about it you can wind up paying less taxes with this type of account."}
{"id": "114981", "text": "\"Is there anyway to salvage my investment for short-term? No.  If by \"\"salvage\"\" you mean \"\"get back as much as you paid\"\", the only way to salvage it is to wait as long as you consider \"\"short-term\"\" and see if goes up again.  If by \"\"salvage\"\" you mean \"\"get some money back\"\", the only thing you can do to guarantee that is sell it now.  By doing so, you guarantee that you will get neither more nor less than it is worth right now.  Either way, there is nothing you can do other than sell the stock or hold it.  The stock price went down.  You can't make it go back up. Would it be better if I sell my stocks now and buy from other company? Or should I just wait for it's price to go up again? This depends on why you bought the stock, and what you think it will do in the future.  You said a family member persuaded you.  Does that family member still think the stock will go up again?  If so, do you still trust them? You didn't even say what stock it is in your question, so there's no way anyone here can tell you whether it's a good idea to sell it or not.  Even if you do say what stock it is, all anyone can do is guess.  If you want, you could look the stock up on Motley Fool or other sites to see if analysts believe it will rise.  There are lots of sources of information.  But all you can do with that information is decide to sell the stock or not. It may sound obvious, but you should sell if you think the stock will go lower, and hold it if you think it could still go back up.  No one can tell you which of those things is going to happen.\""}
{"id": "115066", "text": "Wrong way round. Transitional arrangements are non-binding guidelines that the lenders can observe if they choose to. The borrower - like your friend - doesn't  get to choose whether to use them or not. Your friend obviously can't afford the property, so if you do this, all I can say is congratulations on buying your new house, and I hope you got a deal on the mortgage."}
{"id": "115118", "text": "\"For what it's worth, the distribution I'm currently using is roughly ... with about 2/3 of the money sitting in my 401(k). I should note that this is actually considered a moderately aggressive position. I need to phone my advisor (NOT a broker, so they aren't biased toward things which are more profitable for them) and check whether I've gotten close enough to retirement that I should readjust those numbers. Could I do better? Maybe, at higher risk and higher fees that would be likely to eat most of the improved returns. Or by spending far more time micromanaging my money than I have any interest in. I've validated this distribution using the various stochastic models and it seems to work well enough that I'm generally content with it. (As I noted in a comment elsewhere, many of us will want to get up into this range before we retire -- I figure that if I hit $1.8M I can probably sustain my lifestyle solely on the income, despite expected inflation, and thus be safely covered for life -- so this isn't all that huge a chunk of cash by today's standards. Cue Daffy Duck: \"\"I'm rich! I'm wealthy! I'm comfortably well off!\"\" -- $2M, these days, is \"\"comfortably well off.\"\")\""}
{"id": "115175", "text": "One big advantage that the 529 plan has is that most operate like a target date fund. As the child approaches college age the investment becomes more conservative. While you can do this by changing the mix of investments, you can't do it without capital gains taxes. Many of the issues you are concerned about are addressed: they are usable by other family members, they don't hurt financial aid offers, they address scholarships, they can be used for books or room and board.  Many states also give you a tax break in the year of the contribution."}
{"id": "115416", "text": "&gt; Why is this always the top voted kind of comment whenever a blog post is submitted on Reddit?  It isn't. Decent blog articles get submitted every day.  &gt; A blog is not an article so adjust your expectations or volunteer to be her pro-bono editor.  I do expect it to be at least coherent and consise.  &gt;doesn't really contradict what the blogger was writing about: being sold a false dream.    Caveat Emptor. It precisely contradicts what the OP was about. If the contract isn't to your liking, don't buy into the dream.  Look - Freelancing is hard. You have to make decisions that regular employees don't have to. One of your tasks is vetting potential employees and negotiating contracts. If that sounds too hard or too difficult, go back to your fucking cubicle and fill out your TPS reports."}
{"id": "115499", "text": "Finding a way to pay down credit debt is important, because you're probably paying in the high teens in APR. 401k should be last resort. Have you researched other options? E.g loan consolidation  If you don't mind me asking, how did you get that far in debt?"}
{"id": "115553", "text": "No, the dividends can't be exploited like that. Dividends settlement are tied to an ex-dividend date. The ex-dividend, is the day that allows you to get a dividend if you own the stock. Since a buyer of the stock after this date won't get the dividend, the price usually drop by the amount of the dividend. In your case the price of a share would lose $2.65 and you will be credited by $2.65 in cash such that your portfolio won't change in value due to the dividend. Also, you can't exploit the drop in price by short-selling, as you would be owing the dividend to the person lending you the stock for the short sale. Finally, the price of the stock at the ex-dividend will also be affected by the supply and demand, such that you can't be precisely sure of the drop in price of the security."}
{"id": "115636", "text": ""}
{"id": "115717", "text": "Simply, you should put your money into whatever has the higher interest rate, savings or repayment of debt. Let's say at the beginning of month A you put $1000 into each account. In the case of the savings, at the end of month A you will have $1001.6 ($1000 + 1000 x 2% annual interest / 12) In the case of a loan, at the end of month A you will have $1005.7. ($17000 plus 6.8 interest for one month is 17096.3. On $16000, the new value is 16090.6.  The difference between these is $1005.7. 5.7 / 1.6 = 3.56 Therefore, using your money to repay your loan nets you a return about 3.5 times greater."}
{"id": "115947", "text": "\"Can an employer force a person to take a stock?   From what I understand an employer can only offer stock options, doesn't that mean that the employee has to exercise that option in order for the stock to be valid?  Would it be legal to fire me for refusing a bonus?  Furthermore would owning stock necessarily make you an \"\"owner\"\" for the purposes of said law?\""}
{"id": "115973", "text": "Yes. It seems to me you got it right.  On my site, Stock Options Cafe, my last post was an illustration of a bullish call spread. In this case, I bought a 50 call, and sold the 60 call. This is a debit order as I was paying money, not collecting a new premium."}
{"id": "116134", "text": "I didn't mean to imply that the perceived value of a company on the stock market somehow proved that the companies had not lost capital or value. But it sure is a clear datapoint to juxtapose against all of the other hard facts in play. Often, the stock market isn't wrong... even if it may lag. If these companies have all this loss, is that baked into the current price? But again I was just merely grasping for the details from the plethora of sources given. I surely missed the real meat of the data."}
{"id": "116181", "text": "\"If you are a permanent resident (and it wasn't taken away or abandoned), then you are a resident alien for U.S. tax purposes. (One of the two tests for being a resident alien is the \"\"green card test\"\".) Being a resident alien means all your worldwide income is subject to U.S. taxes, regardless of where you live or work. That doesn't necessarily mean you need to actually pay taxes on your income again if you've already paid it -- you may be able to use the Foreign Tax Credit to reduce your taxes by the amount already paid to a foreign government -- but you need to report it on U.S. tax forms just like income from the U.S., and you can then apply any tax credits that you may qualify for. As a resident alien, you file taxes using Form 1040. You are required to file taxes if your income for a particular year is above a certain threshold. This threshold is described in the first few pages of the 1040 instructions for each year. For 2013, for Single filing status under 65, it is $10000. The only way you can legally not file is if your income the whole year was below this amount. You should go back and file taxes if you were required to but failed to. Having filed taxes when required is very important if you want to naturalize later on. It is also one component of demonstrating you're maintaining residency in the U.S., which you're required to do as a permanent resident being outside the U.S. for a long time, or else you'll lose your permanent residency. (Even filing taxes might not be enough, as your description of your presence in the U.S. shows you only go there for brief periods each year, not really living there. You're lucky you haven't lost your green card already; any time you go there you run a great risk of them noticing and taking it away.)\""}
{"id": "116213", "text": "You can open Savings Bank Account with some Banks that offer better interest rate. Note there would be restriction on number of withdrawals in quarter. There are better interest rates if you lock in for 90+ days. The other option to explore is to open a Demat / Brokrage account and invest in liquid funds. Note depending on various factors it may or may not suite your requirements."}
{"id": "116545", "text": "There are, of course, many possible financial emergencies. They range from large medical expenses to losing your job to being sued to major home or car repairs to who-knows-what. I suppose some people are in a position where the chances that they will face any sort of financial emergency are remote. If you live in a country with national health insurance and there is near-zero chance that you will have any need to go outside this system, you are living with your parents and they are equipped to handle any home repairs, you ride the bus or subway and don't own a car so that's not an issue, etc etc, maybe there just isn't any likely scenario where you'd suddenly need cash. I can think of all sorts of scenarios that might affect me. I'm trying to put my kids through college, so if I lost my job, even if unemployment benefits were adequate to live on, they wouldn't pay for college. I have terrible health insurance so big medical bills could cost me a lot. I have an old car so it could break down any time and need expensive repairs, or even have to be replaced. I might suddenly be charged with a crime that I didn't commit and need a lawyer to defend me. Etc. So in a very real sense, everyone's situation is different. On the other hand, no matter how carefully you think it out, it's always possible that you will get bitten by something that you didn't think of. By definition, you can't make a list of unforeseen problems that might affect you! So no matter how safe you think you are, it's always good to have some emergency fund, just in case. How much is very hard to say."}
{"id": "116574", "text": "Not to be an asshole but the fact you are even asking the above tells me any form of financial service may not be for you.  How the fuck can you be licensed and not have a basic understanding of what it means? And even further, that rules for doing/not doing are much more determined by individual jobs and firm rules than by some industry exam.  You have confirmed my belief that our industry licensing is equivalent to a food handler's card, thank you."}
{"id": "116647", "text": "\"The game is not zero sum. When a friend and I chop down a tree, and build a house from it, the house has value, far greater than the value of a standing tree. Our labor has turned into something of value.  In theory, a company starts from an idea, and offers either a good or service to create value. There are scams that make it seem like a Vegas casino. There are times a stock will trade for well above what it should. When I buy the S&P index at a fair price for 1000 (through an etf or fund) and years later it's 1400, the gain isn't out of someone else's pocket, else the amount of wealth in the world would be fixed and that's not the case. Over time, investors lag the market return for multiple reasons, trading costs, bad timing, etc. Statements such as \"\"90% lose money\"\" are hyperbole meant to separate you from your money. A self fulfilling prophesy.   The question of lagging the market is another story - I have no data to support my observation, but I'd imagine that well over 90% lag the broad market. A detailed explanation is too long for this forum, but simply put, there are trading costs. If I invest in an S&P ETF that costs .1% per year, I'll see a return of say 9.9% over decades if the market return is 10%. Over 40 years, this is 4364% compounded, vs the index 4526% compounded, a difference of less than 4% in final wealth. There are load funds that charge more than this just to buy in (5% anyone?).  Lagging by a small fraction is a far cry from 'losing money.'  There is an annual report by a company named Dalbar that tracks investor performance. For the 20 year period ending 12/31/10 the S&P returned 9.14% and Dalbar calculates the average investor had an average return of 3.83%. Pretty bad, but not zero. Since you don't cite a particular article or source, there may be more to the story. Day traders are likely to lose. As are a series of other types of traders in other markets, Forex for one.  While your question may be interesting, its premise of \"\"many experts say....\"\" without naming even one leaves room for doubt.  Note - I've updated the link for the 2015 report. And 4 years later, I see that when searching on that 90% statistic, the articles are about day traders. That actually makes sense to me.\""}
{"id": "116804", "text": "It depends what you mean by financial knowledge.  Often you will work in a group focused on some aspect of the company's business.  As an example, I work for a company and my group works on econometric models.  Although I have a degree in finance, I don't encounter or talk about corporate or personal finance.  I do talk about investing with a friend, but in general, our group is focused on one aspect of finance and economics for the company.   From another direction, often financial companies will offer financial literacy training through HR and benefits programs where you can improve your knowledge of finance outside of your groups focus.   In the end, you will learn the most by persuing new knowledge through reading on current financial literature.  I hope this helps. Edit:  If you add some specifics to what you would like to learn about I may be able to point you in the right direction."}
{"id": "116846", "text": "\"When people talk about \"\"the price\"\" of a stock, they usually mean one of the following: Last price:  The price at which a trade most recently took place.  If someone sold (and someone else bought) shares of XYZ for $20 each, then until another trade occurs, the last price of the stock will be quoted at $20. Bid price: The highest price at which someone is currently offering to buy the stock. Ask price: The lowest price at which someone is currently offering to sell the stock. As you can see, all of these are completely determined by the people buying and selling the stock.\""}
{"id": "116934", "text": "Yes, you can deduct from your taxable profits (almost) any expenses incurred in the course of your business. See here for HMRC's detailed advice on the subject. The fact that you have salaried PAYE employment as well makes no difference."}
{"id": "116958", "text": "Good addition. When learning finance and business, /u/msattam, realize the world does not work cleanly like it does in a textbook. You have added complexity, both systemic and human caused. And that there is a very good reason that we must understand agency issues and how to mitigate those risks."}
{"id": "117049", "text": "\"It's easy for me to look at an IRA, no deposits or withdrawal in a year, and compare the return to some index. Once you start adding transactions, not so easy. Here's a method that answers your goal as closely as I can offer: SPY goes back to 1993. It's the most quoted EFT that replicates the S&P 500, and you specifically asked to compare how the investment would have gone if you were in such a fund. This is an important distinction, as I don't have to adjust for its .09% expense, as you would have been subject to it in this fund. Simply go to Yahoo, and start with the historical prices. Easy to do this on a spreadsheet. I'll assume you can find all your purchases inc dates & dollars invested. Look these up and treat those dollars as purchases of SPY. Once the list is done, go back and look up the dividends, issues quarterly, and on the dividend date, add the shares it would purchase based on that day's price. Of course, any withdrawals get accounted for the same way, take out the number of SPY shares it would have bought. Remember to include the commission on SPY, whatever your broker charges.  If I've missed something, I'm sure we'll see someone point that out, I'd be happy to edit that in, to make this wiki-worthy.  Edit - due to the nature of comments and the inability to edit, I'm adding this here. Perhaps I'm reading the question too pedantically, perhaps not. I'm reading it as \"\"if instead of doing whatever I did, I invested in an S&P index fund, how would I have performed?\"\" To measure one's return against a benchmark, the mechanics of the benchmarks calculation are not needed. In a comment I offer an example - if there were an ETF based on some type of black-box investing for which the investments were not disclosed at all, only day's end pricing, my answer above still applies exactly. The validity of such comparisons is a different question, but the fact that the formulation of the EFT doesn't come into play remains. In my comment below which I removed I hypothesized an ETF name, not intending it to come off as sarcastic. For the record, if one wishes to start JoesETF, I'm ok with it.\""}
{"id": "117077", "text": "\"Never forget that student lenders and their collection agencies are dangerous and clever predators, and you, the student borrower, are their legal prey. They look at you and think, \"\"food.\"\" My friend said she never pays her student loans and nothing has happened.  She's wrong. Something has happened. She just doesn't know about it yet. Each unpaid bill, with penalties, has been added to the balance of her loan.  Now she owes that money also. And she owes interest on it. That balance is probably building up very fast indeed. She's playing right into the hands of her student lender. They are smiling about this. When the balance gets large enough to make it worthwhile, her student lender will retain an aggressive collection agency to recover the entire balance. The agency will come after her in court, and they are likely to win.  If your friend lives in the US, she'll discover that she can't declare bankruptcy to escape this. She has the bankruptcy \"\"reform\"\" act of 2006, passed during the Bush 43 regime, to thank for this. A court judgement against her will make it harder for her to find a job and even a spouse. I'm not saying this is right or just. I believe it is wrong and unjust to make university graduates into debt slaves. But it is true. As for being paid under the table, I hope your friend intends on dying rather than retiring when she no longer can work due to age. If she's paid under the table she will not be eligible for social security payments.  You need sixteen calendar quarters of social security credit to be eligible for payments.  I know somebody like this. It's a hell of a way to live, especially on weekends when the local church feeding programs don't operate.  Paying people under the table ought to be a felony for the business owner.\""}
{"id": "117237", "text": "[I think this quote is utter bullshit](https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1400/0*ORZDlqkUmjUTH35z.png)- but that's just my opinion.   Since they referenced Dragons Den/Shark Tank- that's how you see so many entrepreneurs on those shows who are doing that and failing- divorced, remortaged house, no one left and a disaster."}
{"id": "117391", "text": "\"19500 - The balance isn't held all month. It's held on average for half a month (assuming the days money was spent was randomly distributed).  260/(1.5% - 4%/(24))  Edit: That answer only works if they pay off their balance at the end of the month - 260/(1.5% - 4%*(3/24)) gives 26000 if the average balance is held for a month and a half. But either way, leaving out the \"\"half a month\"\" results in a messy number.\""}
{"id": "117576", "text": "\"A stock split can force short sellers of penny stocks to cover their shorts and cauuse the price to appreciate.  Example:  Someone shorts a worthless pump and dump stock, 10,000 shares at .50.  They have to put up $25,000.00 in margin ($2.50 per share for stocks under $2.50).  The company announces a 3 to 1 split.  Now the short investor must come up with $50,000.00 additional margin or be be \"\"bought in\"\". The short squeeze is on.\""}
{"id": "117875", "text": "If you are in an economy which has a decent liquid debt market (corporate bonds, etc.), then you may look into investing in AA or AA+ rated bonds. They can provide higher returns than bank deposits and are virtually risk-free. (Though in severe economic downturns, you can see defaults in even very high-rated bonds, leading to partial or complete loss of value however, this is statistically quite rare). You can make this investment through a debt mutual fund but please make sure that you read through the offer document carefully to understand the investment style of the mutual fund and their expense ratio (which directly affect your returns). In any case, it is always recommended to reach out to an investment adviser who is good with local tax laws to minimize taxes and maximize returns."}
{"id": "117960", "text": "Be very careful to hold on tight to your money! I agree with paying for an investment advisor, but I would say use at least two to get different viewpoints, and get credentials and references! Don't let relatives convince you to invest in their business, or help them out, or any other such nonsense. Real estate still is one of the best investments out there in my opinion. You could buy a fixer upper and rent it out?"}
{"id": "118039", "text": "why can't I just use the same trick with my own shares to make money on the way    down? Because if you sell shares out of your own portfolio, by definition, you are not selling short at all. If you sell something you own (and deliver it) - then there is no short involved. A short is defined as a net negative position - i.e. you sell shares you do not have. Selling shares you own is selling shares you own - no short involved. You must borrow the shares for a short because in the stock market, you must DELIVER. You can not deliver shares you do not own. The stock market does not work on promises - the person who bought the shares expects ownership of them with all rights that gives them. So you borrow them to deliver them, then return them when you buy them back."}
{"id": "118065", "text": "You can expect about a 7% return when investing in the general market if your horizon is ten years or more. The market fluctuates, which means that you should be absolutely fine with losing 10% or more of your invested money during this period. You say yourself that: I have been setting aside money (...) into a savings account earmarked for that purpose (repairs/maintenance) so that I don't have to take out loans. It's obvious from your question that the purpose of this money is not savings, this is money that you are already investing, not in stocks or bonds but in your house. While this money sits around, of course you could put it into the market and hope that it grows. It all depends on your horizon, which in your case sounds like about 1 year. Is that long enough to be fairly sure you will make a profit? From what I've written so far, hopefully you can gather that the answer is no. If you choose to invest $6,000 but you need that money back in one year, you need to be aware of the risk that you'll instead end up with $5,400 or even less. Your options are then to: If you're asking for personal advice, my opinion would be this: you're already investing in your house. The housing market, like most markets, fluctuate. Whether you like it or not, you're already a victim (or benefactor) of this value fluctuation. The difference is that a house is something you'll live in for a long time (probably), that will give you daily joy in a way stocks and bonds won't. Of course, saving up money and investing them is always a good idea anyway. You should still save a small amount every month and put it into low/medium risk bonds, in my opinion."}
{"id": "118138", "text": "Right, so if a federal interest rate near 0 percent is not enough to stimulate the demand for those loans, then we have pretty much exhausted what we can do with monetary policy. So the only thing left is fiscal policy - raise spending or lower taxes"}
{"id": "118191", "text": "\"Hmm... Maybe I somewhat misunderstood your question then.  Yes, trade deficits/surpluses are really the core of the country-level \"\"investment\"\".  But yes, it maters what they *do* with it, which is **why** so many countries put any excesses into US treasuries.   Going back to \"\"personal\"\" finance, if they pay down higher interest debt with their trade surplus, *great*; if they have no debt and can issue local currency (in PF land, \"\"take out a loan\"\") for under 2%, *great*;  If not... **Not** so great.  \"\"Saving\"\" money that costs over 2% isn't an investment, it's nothing but a loan disguised as one.\""}
{"id": "118485", "text": "\"There are a couple of misconceptions I think are present here: Firstly, when people say \"\"interest\"\", usually that implies a lower-risk investment, like a government bond or a money market fund. Some interest-earning investments can be higher risk (like junk bonds offered by near-bankrupt companies), but for the most part, stocks are higher risk. With higher risk comes higher reward, but obviously also the chance for a bad year. A \"\"bad year\"\" can mean your fund actually goes down in value, because the companies you are invested in do poorly. So calling all value increases \"\"interest\"\" is not the correct way to think about things. Secondly, remember that \"\"Roth IRA fund\"\" doesn't really tell you what's \"\"inside\"\" it. You could set up your fund to include only low-risk interest earning investments, or higher risk foreign stocks. From what you've said, your fund is a \"\"target retirement date\"\"-type fund. This typically means that it is a mix of stocks and bonds, weighted higher to bonds if you are older (on the theory of minimizing risk near retirement), and higher to stocks if you are younger (on the theory of accepting risk for higher average returns when you have time to overcome losses). What this means is that assuming you're young and the fund you have is typical, you probably have ~50%+ of your money invested in stocks. Stocks don't pay interest, they give you value in two ways: they pay you dividends, and the companies that they are a share of increase in value (remember that a stock is literally a small % ownership of the company). So the value increase you see as the increase due to the increase in the mutual fund's share price, is part of the total \"\"interest\"\" amount you were expecting. Finally, if you are reading about \"\"standard growth\"\" of an account using a given amount of contributions, someone somewhere is making an assumption about how much \"\"growth\"\" actually happens. Either you entered a number in the calculator (\"\"How much do you expect growth to be per year?\"\") or it made an assumption by default (probably something like 7% growth per year - I haven't checked the math on your number to see what the growth rate they used was). These types of assumptions can be helpful for general retirement planning, but they are not \"\"rules\"\" that your investments are required by law to follow. If you invest in something with risk, your return may be less than expected.\""}
{"id": "118786", "text": "I wrote about this in another answer: You can sell the scrip dividend in the market; the capital gain from this sale may fall below the annual tax-free allowance for capital gains, in which case you don't pay any capital gains tax on that amount. For a cash dividend, however, there isn't a minimum taxable amount, so you would owe dividend tax on the entire dividend (and may therefore pay more taxes on a cash dividend). Since you haven't sold the shares in the market yet, you haven't earned any income on the shares. You don't owe taxes on the scrip until you sell the shares and earn capital gains on them. HMRC is very explicit about this, in CG33800: It is quite common for a company, particularly a quoted company, to offer its shareholders the option of receiving additional shares instead of a cash dividend. The expression `stock or scrip dividend' is used to describe shares issued in such circumstances. The basic position under tax law is that when a company makes a bonus issue of shares no distribution arises, and the bonus issue of shares is not income for tax purposes in the hands of the recipient. Obviously, if this is an issue for you, talk to a tax professional to make sure you get it right."}
{"id": "119165", "text": "I don't like your strategy.  Don't wait.  Open an investment account today with a low cost providers and put those funds into a low cost investment that represents as much of the market as you can find. I am going to start by assuming you are a really smart person.  With that assumption I am going to assume you can see details and trends and read into the lines.  As a computer programmer I am going to assume you are pretty task oriented, and that you look for optimal solutions. Now I am going to ask you to step back.  You are clearly very good at managing your money, but I believe you are over-thinking your opportunity. Reading your question, you need a starting place (and some managed expectations), so here is your plan: Now that you have a personal retirement account (IRA, Roth IRA, MyRA?) and perhaps a 401(k) (or equivalent) at work, you can start to select which investments go into that account.  I know that was your question, but things you said in your question made me wonder if you had all of that clear in your head. The key point here is don't wait.  You won't be able to time the market; certainly not consistently.  Get in NOW and stay in.  You adjust your investments based on your risk tolerance as you age, and you adjust your investments based on your wealth and needs.  But get in NOW.   Over the course of 40 years you are likely to be working, sometimes the market will be up, and sometimes the market will be down; but keep buying in.  Because every day you are in, you money can grow; and over 40 years the chances that you will grow substantially is pretty high.  No need to wait, start growing today. Things I didn't discuss but are important to you:"}
{"id": "119247", "text": "Our two rentals have yielded 8.5% over the past two years (averaged). That is net, after taxes, maintenance, management, vacancy, insurance, interest. I am only interested in cash flow - expenses / original investment. If you aren't achieving at least 4.5-5% net on your original investment you probably could invest elsewhere and earn a better return on a similar risk profile."}
{"id": "119298", "text": "The bank depends on the laws of large numbers.  They don't need to make money on every customer -- just on average. There are several ways that zero interest makes sense to them: You asked about banks, and I don't think you see this last scheme in use very much by a bank.  Here's why.   First, customers absolutely hate it - and when you drop the interest bomb, they will warn their friends away, blow you up on social media, call the TV news consumer protectors, and never, ever, ever do business with you again.  Which defeats your efforts in customer acquisition.  Second, it only works on that narrow range of people who default just a little bit, i.e. who have an auto-pay malfunction.  If someone really defaults, not only will they not pay the punishment interest, they won't pay the principal either!  This only makes sense for secured loans like furniture or cars, where you can repo that stuff - with unsecured loans, you don't really have any power to force them to pay, short of burning their credit.  You can sue them, but you can't get blood from a stone."}
{"id": "119308", "text": "I have had better experiences with accountants in smaller towns.  It seems they are used to working with small businesses and their reputation is very important to them."}
{"id": "119470", "text": "Not necessarily. You can set any rules that you like, and you can get capital from other sources. In our company's case, you have to work there for a year before you are eligible to join the co-op. The buy in is given as an interest free loan taken through payroll deduction. We don't get to share the profits generated by the labor of people who are not members of the company. Those stay as retained earnings. We can take on loans as well as outside investment as long as the outside investors aren't given voting rights (via restricted preferred stock)."}
{"id": "119628", "text": "Congrats on saving aggressively when you're young. I'm not a huge fan of tax-advantaged accounts because the rules can change on them, and there's already a penalty for you to take out that money for most purposes until you've almost tripled your age. Free money (a match) overcomes this reservation for me, but I'm not contributing anything beyond that.  I'm paying my taxes on the rest and am done with them. Watching your money grow tax-free for another 37 1/2 years only to see your (and everyone else's) marginal tax rate rise isn't much fun.  I'm not saying that will happen, but it certainly could."}
{"id": "119699", "text": "In addition to a fee-only advisor, brought up by dg99, you could consider asking your questions on message boards such as Bogleheads.org. I have found the advice amazing, obviously conflict-free, and free."}
{"id": "120080", "text": "As mhoran_psprep and others have already said, it sounds like the sale is concluded and your son has no obligation to return the car or pay a dime more. The only case in which your son should consider returning the car is if it works in his favor--for example, if he is able to secure a similar bargain on a different car and the current dealer buys the current car back from your son at a loss. If the dealer wants to buy the car back, your son should first get them to agree to cover any fees already incurred by your son. After that, he should negotiate that the dealer split the remaining difference with him. Suppose the dealership gave a $3000 discount, and your son paid $1000 in title transfer, registration, and any other fees such as a cashier's check or tax, if applicable. The remaining difference is $2000. Your son should get half that.  In this scenario, the dealer only loses half as much money, and your son gains $1000 for his trouble."}
{"id": "120394", "text": "\"Some 401k plans allow you to make \"\"supplemental post-tax contributions\"\". basically, once you hit the pre-tax contribution limit (17.5k$ in 2014), you are then allowed to contribute funds on a post-tax basis. Because of this timing, they are sometimes called \"\"spillover\"\" contributions. Usually, this option is advertised as a way of continuing to get company match even if you accidentally hit the pre-tax limit.  But if you actually pay attention to your finances, it is instead a handy way to put away additional tax-advantaged money.  That said, you would only want to use this option if you already maxed out your pre-tax and Roth options since you don't get the traditional tax break on contributions or the Roth tax break on the earnings. However, when you leave the company, you can transfer the post-tax money directly into a Roth IRA when you transfer the pre-tax money, match, and earnings into a traditional IRA.\""}
{"id": "120816", "text": "I suppose it depends on the circumstances, but I wouldn't advise it. If you default on a loan to the bank it might ruin your credit, if you default to a family member it has the potential for much more damage in the form of fostering bad feelings and hurt the relationship."}
{"id": "121017", "text": "There are two parts to this. Firstly, if you are also living in the property you have bought, then you should not consider it to be an investment. You need it to provide shelter, and the market value is irrelevant unless/until you decide to move. Of course, if your move is forced at a time not of your choosing then if the market value has dropped, you might lose out. No-one can accurately predict the housing market any more than they can predict interest rates on normal savings accounts, the movement of the stock market, etc.  Secondly, if you just have a lump sum and you want to invest it safely, the bank is one of the safest places to keep it. It is protected / underwritten by EU law (assuming you are in the EU) up to \u20ac100,000. See for example here which is about the UK and Brexit in particular but mentions the EU blanket protection. The other things you could do with it - buy property, gold, art works, stocks and shares, whatever thing you think will be least likely to lose value over time - would not be protected in the same way."}
{"id": "121145", "text": "Here's a good rule of thumb. In any situation where you are required to purchase insurance (Auto Liability, Property Mortgage Insurance, etc.) you can safely assume that you aren't the primary beneficiary. You are being required to buy that insurance to protect someone else's investment."}
{"id": "121230", "text": "\"Here are some things you want to look at for evaluating a bank or credit union for your regular spending accounts: Convenience.  Do they have a branch in a convenient location for you?  Do they have no-fee ATMs near you? Website.  If you are like me, you will spend more time on the bank's website than you do inside a branch.  Some bank's websites are great, some are terrible.  Unfortunately, this is generally difficult to evaluate until you actually get an account.  You want a website that is easy to use.  It should allow you to easily move money between your accounts, get instant lists of transactions, show you your monthly statements, and have a billpay feature that works well.  If you use budgeting software that interfaces online with your bank, you want to ensure that it works well with your bank. Fee structure.  Some banks will nickel-and-dime you to death.  Watch out for minimum balance fees and ATM fees.  Banks and credit unions usually have a fee schedule page on their website that lists every fee they charge, making it easy to compare different banks.   I would not be very concerned about interest rates for savings.  Currently, all savings accounts have a universally terrible interest rate.  Therefore, I wouldn't base my bank choice on the interest rate.  Sure, one might offer double the interest rate of another, but double \"\"next-to-nothing\"\" is still \"\"next-to-nothing.\"\"  When you accumulate enough savings that you want to start maximizing your earnings, you can look for a better rate at another bank to move your savings to, and you can keep your checking account at the bank with the best convenience and fee structure. In my limited experience, I have had better luck with credit unions than with banks when it comes to fees.\""}
{"id": "121480", "text": "A 15% discount is a 17.6% return. (100/85 = 1.176). For a holding period that's an average 15.5 days, a half month. It would be silly to compound this over a year as the numbers are limited.  The safest way to do this is to sell the day you are permitted. In effect, you are betting, 12 times a year, that the stock won't drop 15% in 3 days. You can pull data going back decades, or as long as your company has been public, and run a spreadsheet to see how many times, if at all, the stock has seen this kind of volatility over 3 day periods. Even for volatile stocks, a 15% move is pretty large, you're likely to find your stock doing this less than once per year. It's also safest to not accumulate too many shares of your company for multiple reasons, having to do with risk spreading, diversification, etc.  2 additional points -  the Brexit just caused the S&P to drop 4% over the last 3 days trading. This was a major world event, but, on average we are down 4%. One would have to be very unlucky to have their stock drop 15% over the specific 3 days we are discussing.  The dollars at risk are minimal. Say you make $120K/yr. $10K/month. 15% of this is $1500 and you are buying $1765 worth of stock. The gains, on average are expected to be $265/mo. Doesn't seem like too much, but it's $3180 over a years' time. $3180 in profit for a maximum $1500 at risk at any month's cycle."}
{"id": "121505", "text": "First, check with your lender to see if the terms of the loan allow early payoff.  If you are able to payoff early without penalty, with the numbers you are posting, I would hesitate to refinance. This is simply because if you actually do pay 5k/month on this loan you will have it paid off so quickly that refinancing will probably not save you much money. Back-of-the-napkin math at 5k/month has you paying 60k pounds a year, which will payoff in about 5 years.  Even if you can afford 5k/month, I would recommend not paying extra on this debt ahead of other high-interest debt or saving in a tax-advantaged retirement account. If these other things are being taken care of, and you have liquid assets (cash) for emergencies, I would recommend paying off the mortgage without refinancing."}
{"id": "121589", "text": "To answer your precise question, your plans are not at all misguided, and are in fact very reasonable. You are clearly financially very comfortable, and from the tone of your post it sounds like you value security and simplicity over maximizing your investment return over the coming years.  If money was the most important thing to you then you would stay shackled to your high paying jobs. @JoeTaxpayer's answer has some great information for a person who is interested in maximizing their investment return.  If you followed that advice, you might increase your return on investments by up to 1%/year (I'm just throwing a ball park number out there). So your choice is simple.  Peace of mind on one hand and perhaps 1% additional return on investments on the other hand."}
{"id": "121621", "text": "\"As a contractor, I have done this exact calculation many times so I can compare full time employment offers when they come. The answer varies greatly depending on your situation, but here's how to calculate it: So, subtracting the two and you get I've run many different scenarios with multiple plans and employers, and in my situation with a spouse and 1 child, the employer plans usually ended up saving me approximately $5k per year. So then, to answer your question: ...salary is \"\"100k\"\", \"\"with healthcare\"\", or then \"\"X\"\" \"\"with no healthcare\"\" - what do we reckon? I reckon I would want to be paid $5K more, or $105K. This is purely hypothetical though and assumes there are no other differences except for with or without health insurance. In reality, contractor vs employee will have quite a few other differences. But in general, the calculation varies by company and the more generous the employer's health benefits, the more you need to be compensated to make up for not having it. Note: the above numbers are very rough, and there are many other factors that come into play, some of which are: As a side note, many years ago, during salary talks with a company, I was able to negotiate $2K in additional yearly salary by agreeing not to take the health insurance since I had better insurance through my spouse. Health insurance in the US was much cheaper back then so I think closer to $5K today would be about right and is consistent with my above ballpark calculation. I always wondered what would have happened if I turned around and enrolled the following year. I suspect had I done that they could not have legally lowered my salary due to my breaking my promise, but I wouldn't be surprised if I didn't get a raise that year either.\""}
{"id": "121866", "text": "I'm going to be buying a house / car / home theater system in the next few months, and this loan would show up on my credit report and negatively impact my score, making me unable to get the financing that I'll need."}
{"id": "122014", "text": "\"&gt;Me: \"\"they pay it as regular income rather than LTCG\"\" &gt;You: \"\"There's no LTCG tax on Roth accounts.\"\"  Those two things aren't the same thing.  Among other problems, you were referring to tax-deferred accounts and I was referring to Roths.  &gt;Me: \"\"they pay it as regular income rather than LTCG\"\" &gt;You: \"\"You're only taxed once on the money\"\"  Again, those are not the same thing.  There is no account out there where you would only pay LTCG tax.  So paying the tax as regular income RATHER than LTCG tax is not a concern.   &gt;Me: \"\"they pay it as regular income rather than LTCG\"\" &gt;You: \"\"The main advantage of 401ks is that you don't ever pay capital gains tax.\"\"  Again, the word \"\"rather\"\" means there were two possible scenarios: paying regular income tax and paying LTCG tax.  This simply isn't true.   &gt;I never mentioned Roth or taxable funds   Well, those are the only alternatives to a tax-deferred account, so...  &gt;\"\"Though what I said does also apply to Roth\"\"  No it doesn't.    &gt;\"\"But please, keep digging...\"\"  Nothing to dig for.  This isn't a difficult concept but for whatever reason you clearly don't understand it.\""}
{"id": "122074", "text": "\"The property tax valuation and the fair market price are NOT one and the same.  They track each other, correlate to each other, but are almost NEVER the same number. In some parts of the USA, a municipality has to re-assess property tax values every ten years.  In these places, the tax value of a property is on something like a 10-year moving average, NOT on the volatile daily market price. EDIT:  It is easy to fall into the \"\"trap\"\" of thinking that property tax valuation is intended to represent fair market value.  It's INTENT is to provide an accurate (or, as accurate as possible) RELATIVE VALUATION of your property compared to the other properties in the municipality. The sum of all the property values is the tax base of the municipality.  When the town budget (which is paid in part via property taxes) is set, the town simply divides the tax base into the budget total to arrive at the ratio of tax-to-collect, to the tax base, also called the \"\"tax rate per thousand dollars of valuation.\"\"  i.e. if the town tax base is US$10,000,000, and the town budget is US$500,000, then the ratio is 0.05, or $50 per thousand dollars of valuation.  If your property is assessed at US$100,000, then you would pay 100 x $50, or $5000 in property taxes that year. Since this is the goal of the property tax valuation, NOT deciding what your house is worth on the open market, then we are left with the question of \"\"why use the market value of a house for property assessment?\"\" and the answer is that of all the various schemes and algorithms you can try, \"\"fair market value\"\" is the easiest and most accurate...IF TIME FLUCUTATIONS ARE TAKEN OUT.  For example, if I buy a house in a development for $250,000 today, and next summer the housing market crashes, and you buy the identical house next door to me for $150,000, it does NOT stand to reason that you should pay less taxes than me, because your house is \"\"worth\"\" $100,000 less.  In fact, BOTH our houses are worth $100,000 less. What matters most in property tax valuation isn't the actual number, but rather, is YOUR valuation the same as other essentially similar properties in your tax base?  Getting the RELATIVE ratio of value between you and your neighbors correct is the goal of property tax valuation.\""}
{"id": "122222", "text": "Apply as many deductions as you are legally entitled to. Those are taxes you may never ever pay.  Then turn around and put any more monies above the maximum retirement contributions into a taxable account. But this time invest in tax efficient investments. For example, VTI or SPY will incur very minimal taxes and when you withdraw, it will be at lower tax rate (based on current tax laws). Just as you diversify your investments, you also want to diversify your taxes."}
{"id": "122432", "text": "\"Defining parity as \"\"parity is the amount by which an option is in the money\"\", I'd say there may be an arbitrage opportunity. If there's a $50 strike on a stock valued at $60 that I can buy for less than $10, there's an opportunity.  Keep in mind, options often show high spreads, my example above might show a bid/ask of $9.75/$10.25, in which case the last trade of $9.50 should be ignored in favor of the actual ask price you'd pay.  Mispricing can exist, but in this day and age, is far less likely.\""}
{"id": "122493", "text": "Just use a credit card like AMEX Blue that categorizes your purchases, and reconcile at the end of the month. There is no good reason to use a debit card."}
{"id": "122679", "text": "For your purposes, I would recommend using direct investment in a no-load mutual fund.  I mostly use Vanguard and would recommend them.  They just about invented index funds, usually have the lowest (internal) expenses for index and many other funds, if you take electronic instead of paper statements there is no maintenance fee, have no transaction commission, can do periodic automatic investment from a bank account etc.  A typical index fund there would require an initial $3000 investment and would have a minimum of $100 for each additional investment.  If you can't come up with an initial sum of that size, you might be able to find a broker with a lower minimum and suitable free ETFs trades as others have suggested."}
{"id": "123256", "text": "Put it in the bank and earn the meager interest rate.  By far your most important investment is finishing your education and as such this money might be needed to do so. If you don't need the money during your education you will undoubtedly need it for a new apartment/furnishings/moving expenses."}
{"id": "123287", "text": "This is taxed as ordinary income. See the IRC Sec 988(a)(1). The exclusion you're talking about (the $200) is in the IRC Sec 988(e)(2), but you'll have to read the Treasury Regulations on this section to see if and how it can apply to you. Since you do this regularly and for profit (i.e.: not a personal transaction), I'd argue that it doesn't apply."}
{"id": "123320", "text": "\"The question is, how do I exit? I can't really sell the puts because there isn't   enough open interest in them now that they are so far out of the money. I have about $150K of funds outside of this position that I could use, but I'm   confused by the rules of exercising a put. Do I have to start shorting the stock? You certainly don't want to give your broker any instructions to short the stock! Shorting the stock at this point would actually be increasing your bet that the stock is going to go down more. Worse, a short position in the stock also puts you in a situation of unlimited risk on the stock's upside \u2013 a risk you avoided in the first place by using puts. The puts limited your potential loss to only your cost for the options. There is a scenario where a short position could come into play indirectly, if you aren't careful.  If your broker were to permit you to exercise your puts without you having first bought enough underlying shares, then yes, you would end up with a short position in the stock. I say \"\"permit you\"\" because most brokers don't allow clients to take on short positions unless they've applied and been approved for short positions in their account. In any case, since you are interested in closing out your position and taking your profit, exercising only and thus ending up with a resulting open short position in the underlying is not the right approach. It's not really a correct intermediate step, either. Rather, you have two typical ways out: Sell the puts.  @quantycuenta has pointed out in his answer that you should be able to sell for no less than the intrinsic value, although you may be leaving a small amount of time value on the table if you aren't careful.  My suggestion is to consider using limit orders and test various prices approaching the intrinsic value of the put.  Don't use market orders where you'll take any price offered, or you might be sorry. If you have multiple put contracts, you don't need to sell them all at once. With the kind of profit you're talking about, don't sweat paying a few extra transactions worth of commission. Exercise the puts.  Remember that at the other end of your long put position is one (or more) trader who wrote (created) the put contract in the first place. This trader is obligated to buy your stock from you at the contract price should you choose to exercise your option.  But, in order for you to fulfill your end of the contract when you choose to exercise, you're obligated to deliver the underlying shares in exchange for receiving the option strike price. So, you would first need to buy underlying shares sufficient to exercise at least one of the contracts.  Again, you don't need to do this all at once.  @PeterGum's answer has described an approach. (Note that you'll lose any remaining time value in the option if you choose to exercise.) Finally, I'll suggest that you ought to discuss the timing and apportioning of closing out your position with a qualified tax professional. There are tax implications and, being near the end of the year, there may be an opportunity* to shift some/all of the income into the following tax year to minimize and defer tax due. * Be careful if your options are near expiry!\u00a0 Options typically expire on the 3rd Friday of the month.\""}
{"id": "123468", "text": "Under Income Tax Act, tax liability depends on residency as defined under section 6 of the Income Tax Act, and not on citizenship. If you are resident in India, then your global income is taxable. As it appears from your question, you are not resident of India (182 days stay in India in a FY), as such you will have absolutely no tax liability for whatever income you earn outside India."}
{"id": "123557", "text": "\"Already a lot of great answers, but since I ask myself this same question I thought I'd share my 2 cents.  As @user541852587 pointed out, behavior is of the essence here. If you're like most recent grads, this is probably the first time in your life you are getting serious about building wealth. Can you pay your loans down quickly and then have the discipline to invest just as much -- if not more -- than you were putting towards your loans? Most people are good at paying bills in full and on time, yet many struggle to \"\"pay themselves\"\" in full and on time.  As @Brandon pointed out, you can do both. I find this makes a great deal of practical sense. It helps form good behaviors, boosts confidence, and \"\"diversifies\"\" those dollars. I have been paying double payments on my student loans while at the same time maxing out my IRA, HSA, & 401k. I also have a rental property (but that's another can of worms). I'm getting on top and feeling confident in my finances, habits, etc. and my loans are going down. With each increase in pay, I intend to pay the loans down faster than I invest until they're paid off.  Again -- I like the idea of doing both.\""}
{"id": "123570", "text": "When you want to pay a bill on line there are several ways to do it. You can give them your credit card details: Name on Card, zip code, credit card number, and 3 or 4 digit security code on the back. Most of the information is available on the card or via an easy Google search. If the crook has your card they can use it to buy something.  You can contact your bank's website and establish a one time or recurring transfer. You provide the information about the person/company. Your bank knows who you are because you used a secure system and your password. Their bank accepts the money because who would refuse money, they don't care who you are. You can provide the company with your bank info (bank number, your account number, and your name). If your bank limits their transactions via this method only to legitimate organizations, then your money will only be sent to legitimate organizations. But if the organization has no way of knowing who is on the other end of the phone or webpage, they may be withdrawing money from a bank account without the account owners permission.  In the example article a person found a charity that had lax security standards, they were recognized by the bank as a legitimate organization, so the bank transferred the money. The charity will point to the form and say they had permission from the owner, but in reality they didn't.  The subject of the article was correct, all the info required is on every check. It is just that most people are honest, and the few security hurdles that exist do stop most of the fraud."}
{"id": "123718", "text": "You're being too hard on yourself. You've managed to save quite a bit, which is more than most people ever do. You're in a wonderful position, actually -- you have savings and time! You don't mention how long you want/need to continue working, but I'll assume 20 years or so? You don't have to invest it all at once. Like Pete B says, index funds (just read what Mr. Buffett said in recent news: he'd tell his widow to invest in the S&P 500 Index and not Berkshire Hathaway!) should be a decent percentage. You can also pick a target fund from any of the major investment firms (fees are higher than an Index, but it will take care of any asset allocation decisions). Put some in each. Also look at retirement accounts to take advantage of tax-deferred or tax-free growth, but that's another question and country-specific. In any case, don't even blink when the market goes down. And it will go down. If you're still working, earning, and saving, it'll just be another opportunity to buy more at lower prices. As for the house, no reason you can't invest and save for a house. Invest some for the long term and set aside the rest for the house in 1-5 years. If you don't think you'll ever really buy the house, though, invest the majority of it for the long-term: I have a feeling from the tone of your question that you tend to put off the big financial decisions. So if you won't really buy the house, just admit it to yourself now!"}
{"id": "123789", "text": "I think you'd be adding the transaction fee each time, so let's say it's 3% or minimum $10, your balance would be almost $580 by November.  Unless for some reason you have a permanent no balance transfer fee card or the two cards let you pay bills without charging a cash fee of some sort."}
{"id": "123880", "text": "The two biggest issues that impact your question I would say are diversification and fees. If you have $10,000 to invest and only invest it in two securities, then a 20% drop in one security can have you lose 10% of your initial investment which I would consider a very high risk scenario. If you have $10,000 to invest and invest it in 20 securities, then a 20% drop in one security would only cause you to lose 1% of your initial investment. So far this is looking better from a diversification point of view. But then the issue of fees comes in. If you paid $10 per trade to buy those 20 securities you already spent 2% of your initial investment in fees! Not to mention you will pay at least another $200 to get out of all those positions. No right answer - but those are the two factors I always try to balance."}
{"id": "123991", "text": "\"Banks are currently a lot less open to 'creative financing' than they were a few years ago, but you may still be able to take advantage of the tactic of splitting the loan into two parts, a smaller 'second mortgage' sometimes called a 'purchase money second' at a slightly higher interest rate for around 15-20% of the value, and the remaining in a conventional mortgage.  Since this tactic has been around for a long time, it's not quite in the category of the shenanegans they were pulling a few years back, so has a lot more potential to still be an option.  I did this in for my first house in '93 and again in '99 when I moved to a larger home after getting married.  It allowed me to get into both houses with less than 20% down and not pay PMI. This way neither loan is above 80% so you don't have to pay PMI.  The interest on the second loan will be higher, but usually only a few percent, and is thus usually a fraction of what you were paying for the PMI. (and it's deductible from your taxes) If you've been making your payments on time and have a good credit rating, then you might be able to find someone who would offer you such a deal.  You might even be able to get a rate for your primary that is down in the low 4's depending on where rates are today and what your credit rating is like.   If you can get the main loan low enough, even if the other is like say 7%, your blended rate may still be right around 5% If you can find a deal like this, it's also great material to use to negotiate with your current lender \"\"either help me get the PMI off this loan or I'm going to refinance.\"\"  Then you can compare what they will offer you with what you can get in a refinance and decide what makes the most sense for you.  On word of warning, when refinancing, do NOT get sucked into an adjustable rate mortgage.  If you are finding life 'tight' right now with house payments and all, the an ARM could be highly seductive since they often offer a very low initial rate.. however then invariably adjust upwards, and you could suddenly find yourself with a monster payment far larger than what you have now.  With low rates where they are, getting a conventional fixed rate loan (or loans in the case of the tactic being discussed here) is the way to go.\""}
{"id": "124230", "text": "A general rule of thumb is to avoid having more than 5% of your investments in any single stock, to avoid excessive risk; it's usually even more risky if you're talking company stock because an adverse event could result in an inferior stock price and you getting laid off. Under other circumstances, the ideal amount of company stock is probably 0%. But there are tax benefits to waiting, as you've noted, and if you're reasonably confident that the stock isn't likely to jerk around too much, and you have a high risk tolerance (i.e. lots of extra savings besides this), and you're comfortable shouldering the risk of losing some money, it might make sense to hold onto the stock for a year - but never any longer. The real risk to holding a lot of company stock doesn't depend on how often you buy it and sell it per se, but having period purchases every month should make it easier for you to ladder the funds, and regularly sell your old shares as you purchase new shares. You might also consider a stop-loss order on the stock at or near the price you purchased it at. If the stock is at $100, then you buy at $85, and then the stock drops to $85, there are no more outstanding tax benefits and it makes no sense to have it as part of your portfolio instead of any other speculative instrument - you probably get better diversification benefits with any other speculative instrument, so your risk-adjusted returns would be higher."}
{"id": "124458", "text": "this article talks about tips you can use to improve your chances of qualifying for a credit card, even if you have poor credit standing. please help us promote it by telling your friends to drop by our site and share the articles posted there to their friends."}
{"id": "124505", "text": "Being a tax professional, my understanding is that the threshold limit is a single limit for all your source(s) of income. Now many people who already draw salary which is liable to tax, develop application for mobile and generate some income. Such income is liable to tax, if along with other income they exceed the threshold limit.  Income will have surely related expenses. And the expenses which are related to earning of the income are allowed to be deducted."}
{"id": "124856", "text": "Why not just leave it as is and register as foreign entity in New Mexico? You won't avoid the gross receipts tax, but other than that - everything stays as is. Unless Illinois has some taxes that you would otherwise not pay - just leave it there."}
{"id": "125111", "text": "\"Actually, calculating taxes isn't that difficult.  You will pay a percentage of your gross sales to state and local sales tax, and as a single-owner LLC your profits (after sales taxes) should pass through to your individual tax tax return (according to this IRS article. They are not cumulative since they have different bases (gross sales versus net profit). That said, when determining if your future business is profitable, you need to ask \"\"what aspects of the business can I control\"\"? Can you control how much each item sells for? Increasing your prices will increase your gross margins, which should be higher than your fixed and variable costs.  If your margins do not exceed your costs, then you will note be profitable. Note that as a vendor you are at a slight disadvantage to a retailer, since tax has to be baked in to your prices.  A retailer can advertise the pre-tax price, and pass-through sales tax at the point of sale.  However, people expect to pay more at a vending machine, so the disadvantage is very small (you aren't directly competing with retailers anyways).\""}
{"id": "125298", "text": "\"It depends on how the program is run. If the company runs the program out of treasury stock (shares that are authorized, but not issued), then there aren't any shares being purchased on the open market.   Because of that, the share price wouldn't be affected.    If you look in your employer's annual report, you will probably find how the program is run and how many shares are issued annually under that program. By comparing that to the daily trading volume of the company's stock you can gauge whether there's any likelihood of the share price being affected by the employee purchases. That is, of course, if shares are being purchased on the open market.  For example, here is Books-A-Million's program, as described in their 2011 annual report: Employee Stock Purchase Plan   The Company maintains an employee stock purchase plan under which shares of the Company\u2019s common stock are reserved   for purchase by employees at 85% of the fair market value of the common stock at the lower of the market value for the   Company\u2019s stock as of the beginning of the fiscal year or the end of the fiscal year. On May 20, 2010, the stockholders of the   Company approved an additional 200,000 shares available for issuance under the plan, bringing the aggregate number of   shares that may be awarded to 600,000. Of the total reserved shares, 391,987, 373,432 and 289,031 shares have been   purchased as of January 29, 2011, January 30, 2010 and January 31, 2009, respectively. This describes an instance of the employee purchase program being run from unissued stock, not open market purchases. From it, we can tell 18,555 shares were issued during the past fiscal year.  As their average daily volume is ~40,000 shares, if the program were run from a single open market purchase, it would have potential to \"\"move the market\"\".  One would think, though, that a company running it from open market purchases would spread the purchases over a period of time to avoid running up the price on themselves.\""}
{"id": "125477", "text": "\"The $1K in funds are by default your emergency fund. If absolutely necessary, emergency funds may need to come from debt, a credit capacity, focus on building credit to leverage lower rates for living expenses eventually needed. Profitable organizations & proprietors, borrow at a lower cost of capital than their return. Join your local credit union, you're welcome to join mine online, the current rates for the first $500 in both your checking and savings is 4.07%, it's currently the fourth largest in the U.S. by assets. You may join as a \"\"family member\"\" to me (Karl Erdmann), not sure what their definition of \"\"family\"\" is, I'd be happy to trace our ancestry if need be or consider other options. Their current incentive program, like many institutions have often, will give you $100 for going through the hassle to join and establish a checking and savings. Some institutions, such as this credit union, have a lower threshold to risk, applicants may be turned down for an account if there is any negative history or a low credit score, shooting for a score of 600 before applying seems safest.  The web services, as you mentioned, have significantly improved the layman's ability to cost effectively invest funds and provide liquidity. Robinhood currently seems to be providing the most affordable access to the market. It goes without saying, stay objective with your trust of any platform, as you may have noticed, there is a detailed explanation of how Robinhood makes their money on this stack exchange community, they are largely backed by venture funding, hopefully the organization is able to maintain a low enough overhead to keep the organization sustainable in the long run. The services that power this service such as Plaid, seem promising and underrated, but i digress. The platform gives access for users to learn how investing works, it seems safest to plan a diversified portfolio utilizing a mix of securities,such as low Beta stocks or \"\"blue chip\"\" companies with clear dividend policies. One intriguing feature, if you invest in equities is casting votes on decisions in shareholder meetings.  Another popular investment asset class that is less liquid and perhaps something to work toward is real estate. Google the economist \"\"Matthew Rognlie\"\" for his work on income equality on this type of investment. There are many incentives for first time homeowners, saving up for a down payment is the first step. Consider adding to your portfolio a Real Estate Investment Trust (REITs) to gain a market position. Another noteworthy approach to this idea is an investment commercial property cooperative organization, currently the first and only one is called NorthEast Investment Cooperative, one stock of class A is $1K.  If you are interested and plan to focus on equities, consider dropping into your college's Accounting Capstone course to learn more about the the details of fundamental and technical analysis of an organization. The complexities of investing involve cyclical risk, macro and micro economic factors,  understanding financial statements and their notes, cash flow forecasting - discounting, market timing, and a host of other details Wikipedia is much more helpful at detailing. It's safe to assume initial investment decisions by unsophisticated investors are mostly whimsical, and likely will only add up to learning opportunities, however risk is inherit in all things, including sitting on cash that pays a price of inflation. A promising mindset in long term investments are in organizations that focus on conscious business practices. Another way to think of investing is that you are already somewhat of a \"\"sophisticated investor\"\" and could beat the market by what you know given your background, catching wind of certain information first, or acting on a new trends or technology quickly. Move carefully with any perhaps biased \"\"bullish\"\" or \"\"bearish\"\" mindset. Thinking independently is helpful, constantly becoming familiar with different ideas from professions in a diverse set of backgrounds, and simulating decisions in portfolio's. Here is an extremely limited set of authors and outlets that may have ideas worth digging more into, MIT Tech Reviews (Informative), Bloomberg TV (it's free, informative), John Mackey (businessman), Paul Mason (provocative journalist). Google finance is a simple and free go-to application, use the \"\"cost basis\"\" feature for \"\"paper\"\" or real trades, it's easy to import transactions from a .csv.   This seems sufficient to start off with. Enjoy the journey, aim for real value with your resources.\""}
{"id": "125497", "text": "\"I too am a full-monthly-statement-balance payer and I received a balance transfer offer from my credit-card company. This one was quite different from many others that I have read about on this forum. I could do a balance transfer for any amount up to $X from another credit card, or use the enclosed \"\"checks\"\" to pay  some other (non-credit-card) bills, and I would not have to pay any interest for 12 months on the amount thus borrowed.  But, There would be a 2% service charge on the amount I was borrowing. This amount would be billed on the next monthly statement, and it would have to be paid in full by the due date of that month's payment, that is, within the 25-day grace period allowed for payment of monthly statements. Else, interest would start being charged on the unpaid part of the service charge at the usual humongous rate of H% per month. If I had not paid the previous month's balance in full, I would be charged interest at H% per month on the service charge starting from Day One; no free ride till the due date of the next month's statement. Of course, the balance carried over from last month would also be charged interest at H%. If I had paid last month's bill in full, but there were any other charges (purchases) during the current month, then  unless the entire amount due, this month's purchases plus service charge and that \"\"interest-free-for-twelve-months loan\"\"  balance was paid off within the 25-day grace period, my purchases would be deemed unpaid and would start being charged interest. In short, the only way to avoid paying interest on the amount borrowed was to start with a card showing a $0 balance due on the previous month's statement, not make any charges on that card for a whole year, and pay off that 2% service charge within the grace period. It might also have required that one-twelfth of that interest-free loan be repaid each month, but  I had stopped reading the offer at this point and filed it in the round circular file. In short, while @JoeTaxpayer's tale of how \"\"As a pay-in-full user, I've used the zero rate to throw $20K at the 5.25% mortgage\"\" is undoubtedly how things worked once, it is not at all clear that they still work that way. At least, they don't work that way for me.  Heck, once upon a time, for a period of about 3 months, you could earn 1.5% interest per month from the credit card company by overpaying your credit card bill considerably. Their computers then just \"\"added on\"\" 1.5% interest by multiplying your credit balance -$X by 1.015 and so you got 1.5% per month interest from the credit card company. The credit card agreements (and the software!) got changed in a hurry, and nowdays all credit-card agreements state in the fine print that if you overpay your bill, you don't earn any interest on the overpayment.\""}
{"id": "125601", "text": "If you put it in a normal account it is (1) taxed as ordinary income now and then (2) any growth is taxed again at the capital gains rate.  Additionally, (3) any dividends will be taxed each year.  If you put it in a 401(k), you will only be taxed once, at the ordinary income rate.   Mathematically, if you start with X and have a regular tax rate of t and capital gains rate of g and your investments return r and there are n years to retirement, then your total wealth if you put it in a mutual fund (ignoring annual taxes on dividends) will be While if you used a 401(k) it would simply be The whole g term (along with any annual taxes on dividends) is gone in the second case and that's potentially a lot of taxes.  The 401(k) is much better in terms of total wealth unless tax rates dramatically rise between now and when you retire so that the t in the second case is much higher than in the first. This is virtually never the case for people retiring now.  Of course, what tax rates the future holds, we do not know."}
{"id": "125613", "text": "\"How can I use a house I own free and clear to purchase another home? Answer: walk in to any bank, that's any bank, or any lending institution. State that you own a house free and clear. This will happen: In all jurisdictions, it's incredibly easy to borrow large amounts of money at the lowest possible rate, once you own a house outright. On top of that, you want to spend the money on another house (as opposed to s sports car or the like), so you have even more equity.  Winner! Your main question will be this.  Say your current house (owned outright!) is worth $500,000.  Go to a bank or lender, and say to them, \"\"How much money will you give me to buy house B putting both the houses on the mortgage.\"\"  One bank will say \"\"fantastic!  buy any house you want up to $400,000!\"\"  Another will say \"\"$450,000!\"\" another will say \"\"$300,000!\"\"  In a hot market another will say \"\"$650,000!\"\".  So shop around and see who will give you the most.\""}
{"id": "125659", "text": "\"Lending of shares happens in the background. Those who have lent them out are not aware that they have been lent out, nor when they are returned. The borrowers have to pay any dividends to the lenders and in the end the borrowers get their stock back. If you read the fine print on the account agreement for a margin account, you will see that you have given the brokerage the permission to silently loan your stocks out.  Since the lending has no financial impact on your portfolio, there's no particular reason to know and no particular protection required.  Actually, brokers typically don't bother going through the work of finding an actual stock to borrow.  As long as lots of their customers have stocks to lend and not that many people have sold short, they just assume there is no problem and keep track of how many are long and short without designating which stocks are borrowed from whom. When a stock becomes hard to borrow because of liquidity issues or because many people are shorting it, the brokerage will actually start locating individual shares to borrow, which is a more time-consuming and costly procedure.  Usually this involves the short seller actually talking to the broker on the phone rather than just clicking \"\"sell.\"\"\""}
{"id": "125811", "text": "What you are describing is called a Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC). While the strategy you are describing is not impossible it would raise the amount of debt in your name and reduce your borrowing potential. A recent HELOC used to finance the down payment on a second property risks sending a signal of bad financial position to credit analysts and may further reduce your chances to obtain the credit approval."}
{"id": "126151", "text": "While historical performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance, I like to look at the historical performance of the markets for context. Vanguard's portfolio allocation models is one source for this data. Twenty years is a long term timeline. If you're well diversified in passively managed index funds, you should be positioned well for the future.  You've lost nothing until it's realized or you sell. Meanwhile, you still own an asset that has value. As Warren Buffet says, buy low and sell high."}
{"id": "126479", "text": "\"Preferred dividends and common dividends are completely separate transactions.  There's not a single \"\"dividend\"\" payment that is split between preferred and common shares. Dividends on preferred shares are generally MUCH higher than common dividends, and are generally required by the terms of the preferred shares, again unlike common dividends, which are discretionary.\""}
{"id": "126502", "text": ""}
{"id": "126521", "text": "&gt;Then we will have to agree to disagree.  The important thing is that we didn't give any solid advice to the original question :)  &gt;The social discount rate isn't about borrowing it is about funding projects that would return a higher rate. To simply say the discount rate is the same as the borrowing rate (which is dirt cheap right now) isn't wise because different projects offer better social value. Think of it as your opportunity cost.  I agree with you that there may be better projects. But I am implying that as long as those other projects' IRR are above the borrowing rate, they also should be undertook. Basically keep on borrowing and going down the pecking order until the borrowing rate meets the IRR of projects not started. What every that equilibrium is should be the discount rate.  And while someone may say that borrowing takes away from private investment (and they are right), it is in the best interest of the country to ignore that. The market for government securities is global; the state could be taking more from foreign private investment than domestic.  However, this does ignore the manipulation on the rate that goes on from forced lending from citizens. Social Security by law has no choice but to invest in government securities. I don't know, I think I'm just rambling now."}
{"id": "126675", "text": "\"The argument you are making here is similar to the problem I have with the stronger forms of the efficient market hypothesis.  That is if the market already has incorporated all of the information about the correct prices, then there's no reason to question any prices and then the prices never change.  However, the mechanism through which the market incorporates this information is via the actors buying an selling based on what they see as the market being incorrect. The most basic concept of this problem (I think) starts with the idea that every investor is passive and they simply buy the market as one basket.  So every paycheck, the index fund buys some more stock in the market in a completely static way.  This means the demand for each stock is the same.  No one is paying attention to the actual companies' performance so a poor performer's stock price never moves.  The same for the high performer.  The only thing moving prices is demand but that's always up at a more or less constant rate. This is a topic that has a lot of discussion lately in financial circles.  Here are two articles about this topic but I'm not convinced the author is completely serious hence the \"\"worst-case scenario\"\" title. These are interesting reads but again, take this with a grain of salt.  You should follow the links in the articles because they give a more nuanced understanding of each potential issue.  One thing that's important is that the reality is nothing like what I outline above. One of the links in these articles that is interesting is the one that talks about how we now have more indexes than stocks on the US markets.  The writer points to this as a problem in the first article, but think for a moment why that is.  There are many different types of strategies that active managers follow in how they determine what goes in a fund based on different stock metrics.  If a stocks P/E ratio drops below a critical level, for example, a number of indexes are going to sell it.  Some might buy it.  It's up to the investors (you and me) to pick which of these strategies we believe in. Another thing to consider is that active managers are losing their clients to the passive funds.  They have a vested interest in attacking passive management.\""}
{"id": "126751", "text": "\"I can pretty much guarantee you that the vast majority of new small companies will NOT grow to have 50 workers (they probably won't even have 49 workers, or 48, or even 47).  Once they approach 40, other \"\"solutions\"\" -- even beyond the \"\"part time employees\"\" suggested by the author (a thing I would expect will be \"\"addressed\"\" by a change in the detailed regulations -- the Federal government will attempt to stop this obvious loophole by redefining what constitutes a \"\"full time employee\"\") -- MANY other solutions will be executed (dividing the company into two or three distinct entities with slightly different ownership {for example wife owns one location, husband another, etc}, plus the obvious expanded use of temp agencies, contract and/or subcontract workers, subbing work {especially generic administrative work} out to other firms, etc).  Any and all of those will probably cost far LESS than $40k a year (which is probably a woefully underestimated number).\""}
{"id": "126756", "text": "The main reasons are that investment are deducted from your gross income and earnings are not taxed until withdrawal. This applies to both traditional IRAs and 401Ks. Roth accounts have different rules but valuable benefits. My effective income tax rate is around 35%. This means that for every $1000 I earn in wage I only get to keep $650. Since my 401K contributions are deferred reductions from my income I can invest 35% more money into my 401K than I would be able to invest in a non-tax-advantaged account. Where I can invest $1000 into my 401K I would only be able to invest $650 into a non-advantaged account with the same wages. If I put $650 into an account yielding 10% then my one-year return on my income is $65 The 10% return on my $1000 is $100. Compared to what I would have been able to take home in the first place this makes my ROI $100/$650 = 15.3% Interest earned in non-advantaged accounts incurs taxes every year. Interest earned in advantaged accounts does not incur taxes until withdrawn. Compounding 10% annually for 20 years is significantly more than 6.5% compounded annually for 20 years. Imagine 10% on a 1000 investment with no additional cash flows over 20 year. The result is $6727, or 672%. Imagine your income tax rate does not reduce below 35%, your after-tax return is 4372, or %437 return. Now imagine you pay taxes every year on 10% take, so your take annually is only 6.5%... Now over 20 years you have $3523 (but you've already paid all taxes on this) and your return is %352 You have earned 24% more money because taxes were deferred until withdrawal! EDIT: Some tabular info for the commenters Your take home from the investment is $3752 because you have diligently paid your taxes every year on the earnings. Now, with the tax deferred until withdrawal! You then owe 35% tax on the withdrawal so you keep 7400 * .65 = $4810 $4810 versus $3750 means you have made an additional $1060, or 28%, from the compounding against tax-advantaged earnings. But Matthew! you say... Annual proceeds from your investments are not taxed at your income tax rate. This is true for now but the political winds are pushing this direction. However, even if you use a reduced rate in the first situation (let's say 30% instead of 35%, if you're a California resident) then the effect is $4140 rather than $3750. Less of a gain, but still a gain. In fact your capital-gains rate would have to be as low as 22% to even this difference out (versus a 35% income tax rate).... And remember that this assumes you're in the same bracket at retirement (which more people are not) You may also note that I used $1000 as the principle in both calculations. This was intentional to show the effects of compounding the taxable earnings alone. If you replace the taxable principle with $650 instead of $1000 then the effect is even more pronounced and only balanced out if your capital gains rate is actually zero!"}
{"id": "126770", "text": "You're welcome to disagree. Lol, and actually it'd be fairly easy to do an artificial markup on labor expense on a P&amp;L, then show you price increase necessary to maintain margin, assuming a constant volume increase year over year. I've done many similar exercises.   My family has a small business too, yay. They probably wouldn't hire outside help at $15 an hour. I've worked for minimum wage before for multiple years, it's not like I got some small loan for a million on birth.   Also, I'm referring to a blanket national minimum wage increase. It would wreck small companies in cheap areas if too high."}
{"id": "127009", "text": "Fuck managerial accounting to death. Anywho, I'm not sure what they mean by the variance being higher or lower in the budget. Variance in principle is the discrepancy from a budget and actual.   I'll try to answer this from what I can see.    The budget variance in this problem is unfavorable for Busy Community Support, mostly caused by a significant underestimating of your salaries expense in the budget."}
{"id": "127015", "text": "There are several reasons why this may happen and I will update as I get more information from you. Volumes on that stock look low (supposing that they are either in a factor between 1s and 1000s) so it could well be that there was no volume on that day. If no trades occur then open, high and low are meaningless as they are statistics based on trades that occur that day and no trades occur. Remember that there has to be volume to get a price. The stock may have been frozen by either the exchange or the company for the day. This could be for various reasons including to prevent some illegal activity. In that case no trades were made because the market for that stock was closed. Another possibility is that all trades that day were cancelled by the exchange. The exchange may cancel all trades if there is unusual, potentially fraudulent or other illegal activity on the stock. In this case the last price for that day existed but was rolled back by the exchange and never occurred. This is a rare situation. Although I can't find any holidays on that date it is possible that this is how your data provider marks market holidays. It would be valid to ignore the data in that case as being from a non-market day. I cannot tell if this is possible without knowing exchange information. There is a possibility that some data providers don't receive data for a day or that it gets corrupted. It may be worth checking another source to ensure the integrity of the data that you are receiving. Whichever reason is true, the data provider has made the close equal to the previous day's close as no price movements occurred. Strictly the closing price is the price of the last trade made for that day and so should be null (and open, high and low should be null too and not 0 otherwise the price change on day is very large!). Therefore, to keep integrity, you have a few choices:"}
{"id": "127165", "text": "If I was bank, I certainly wouldn't give a **30 year** mortgage to a **57 year old** with a property which is worth less than the mortgage!  And I don't see why a bank should.  I get that it sucks for him to have a 6.35% interest mortgage, but that situation sucks for the bank as well.  I wouldn't offer a lower interest to someone in that sort of situation."}
{"id": "127188", "text": "Yes!  This has bothered me for years because it's really obvious on the level of small businesses.  Any material/service cost goes up- ugh fine I guess we have to pay to stay in business.....          Can't find anyone to break their backs for $9/hr?  They'll do literally anything rather than pay more.  They will fuck up their business for years trying to find a way to pay the same labor costs."}
{"id": "127227", "text": "&gt; And for a brand new company, you can sure as shit guarantee that as an owner, you'll be held personally liable.  You are personally liable for any debt you personally sign off on yes. But you are not personally responsible for more than that debt. So if you take a 30 thousand dollar loan to start your business, your company hasn't been profitable and lost 20 thousand and your employees sue the company for 25 thousand. The company has 10 thousand to pay that with. The owner is still liable to pay the lender the 30 thousand, but has no obligation to the employees of the 25 thousand they are suing for."}
{"id": "127263", "text": "The article links to William Bernstein\u2019s plan that he outlined for Business Insider, which says: Modelling this investment strategy Picking three funds from Google and running some numbers. The international stock index only goes back to April 29th 1996, so a run of 21 years was modelled.  Based on 15% of a salary of $550 per month with various annual raises: Broadly speaking, this investment doubles the value of the contributions over two decades. Note:  Rebalancing fees are not included in the simulation. Below is the code used to run the simulation.  If you have Mathematica you can try with different funds.    Notice above how the bond index (VBMFX) preserves value during the 2008 crash.  This illustrates the rationale for diversifying across different fund types."}
{"id": "127316", "text": "The issue for you seems to be the sequence of events. Presumably, there will be a gain in the fund. In one year, you have a fund worth $100,000 and the $8500 your netted from the $10,000 dividend. (Dividends are taxed at 15% for most of us. If your taxable income is under $38K single, it's $0) An $8500 net return for the year. Now, if there were no initial dividend, and at the end of a full year, your $100K grew to $110K, and then gave you the $10K dividend, you might not be so unhappy. Even on day 2, you now have a fund worth $90K with a basis of $100K, and the promise of future dividends or cap gains. When you sell, the first $10K of gain from this point will effectively be tax free due to this quick drop.  To directly answer the last few sentences, dividends and cap gains are different. And different still, for the way a fund processes them."}
{"id": "127434", "text": "You\u2019ve really got three or four questions going here\u2026 and it\u2019s clear that a gap in understanding one component of how bonds work (pricing) is having a ripple effect across the other facets of your question. The reality is that everybody\u2019s answers so far touch on various pieces of your general question, but maybe I can help by integrating. So, let\u2019s start by nailing down what your actual questions are:  1. Why do mortgage rates (tend to) increase when the published treasury bond rate increases? I\u2019m going to come back to this, because it requires a lot of building blocks. 2. What\u2019s the math behind a bond yield increasing (price falling?)  This gets complicated, fast. Especially when you start talking about selling the bond in the middle of its time period. Many people that trade in bonds use financial calculators, Excel, or pre-calculated tables to simplify or even just approximate the value of a bond. But here\u2019s a simple example that shows the math.  Let\u2019s say we\u2019ve got a bond that is issued by\u2026 Dell for $10,000. The company will pay it back in 5 years, and it is offering an 8% rate. Interest payments will only be paid annually. Remember that the amount Dell has promised to pay in interest is fixed for the life of the bond, and is called the \u2018coupon\u2019 rate. We can think about the way the payouts will be paid in the following table:   As I\u2019m sure you know, the value of a bond (its yield) comes from two sources: the interest payments, and the return of the principal. But, if you as an investor paid $14,000 for this bond, you would usually be wrong. You need to \u2018discount\u2019 those amounts to take into account the \u2018time value of money\u2019. This is why when you are dealing in bonds it is important to know the \u2018coupon rate\u2019 (what is Dell paying each period?). But it is also important to know your sellers\u2019/buyers\u2019 own personal discount rates. This will vary from person to person and institution to institution, but it is what actually sets the PRICE you would buy this bond for.  There are three general cases for the discount rate (or the MARKET rate). First, where the market rate == the coupon rate. This is known as \u201cpar\u201d in bond parlance. Second, where the market rate < the coupon rate. This is known as \u201cpremium\u201d in bond parlance. Third, where the market rate > coupon rate. This is known as a \u2018discount\u2019 bond.  But before we get into those in too much depth, how does discounting work? The idea behind discounting is that you need to account for the idea that a dollar today is not worth the same as a dollar tomorrow. (It\u2019s usually worth \u2018more\u2019 tomorrow.) You discount a lump sum, like the return of the principal, differently than you do a series of equal cash flows, like the stream of $800 interest payments. The formula for discounting a lump sum is:  Present Value=Future Value* (1/(1+interest rate))^((# of periods)) The formula for discounting a stream of equal payments is:  Present Value=(Single Payment)* (\u30161-(1+i)\u3017^((-n))/i) (i = interest rate and n = number of periods) **cite investopedia So let\u2019s look at how this would look in pricing the pretend Dell bond as a par bond. First, we discount the return of the $10,000 principal as (10,000 * (1 / 1.08)^5). That equals $6,807.82.  Next we discount the 5 equal payments of $800 as (800* (3.9902)). I just plugged and chugged but you can do that yourself. That equals $3,192.18. You may get slightly different numbers with rounding.  So you add the two together, and it says that you would be willing to pay ($6,807.82 + $3,192.18) = $10,000. Surprise! When the bond is a par bond you\u2019re basically being compensated for the time value of money with the interest payments. You purchase the bond at the \u2018face value\u2019, which is the principal that will be returned at the end.  If you worked through the math for a 6% discount rate on an 8% coupon bond, you would see that it\u2019s \u201cpremium\u201d, because you would pay more than the principal that is returned to obtain the bond [10,842.87 vs 10,000]. Similarly, if you work through the math for a 10% discount rate on an 8% coupon bond, it\u2019s a \u2018discount\u2019 bond because you will pay less than the principal that is returned for the bond [9,241.84 vs 10,000].  It\u2019s easy to see how an investor could hold our imaginary Dell bond for one year, collect the first interest payment, and then sell the bond on to another investor. The mechanics of the calculations are the same, except that one less interest payment is available, and the principal will be returned one year sooner\u2026 so N=4 in both formulae.  Still with me? Now that we\u2019re on the same page about how a bond is priced, we can talk about \u201cYield To Maturity\u201d, which is at the heart of your main question.  Bond \u201cyields\u201d like the ones you can access on CNBC or Yahoo!Finance or wherever you may be looking are actually taking the reverse approach to this. In these cases the prices are \u2018fixed\u2019 in that the sellers have listed the bonds for sale, and specified the price. Since the coupon values are fixed already by whatever organization issued the bond, the rate of return can be imputed from those values.  To do that, you just do a bit of algebra and swap \u201cpresent value\u201d and \u201cfuture value\u201d in our two equations.  Let\u2019s say that Dell has gone private, had an awesome year, and figured out how to make robot unicorns that do wonderful things for all mankind. You decide that now would be a great time to sell your bond after holding it for one year\u2026 and collecting that $800 interest payment. You think you\u2019d like to sell it for $10,500. (Since the principal return is fixed (+10,000); the number of periods is fixed (4); and the interest payments are fixed ($800); but you\u2019ve changed the price... something else has to adjust and that is the discount rate.) It\u2019s kind of tricky to actually use those equations to solve for this by hand\u2026 you end up with two equations\u2026 one unknown, and set them equal. So, the easiest way to solve for this rate is actually in Excel, using the function =RATE(NPER, PMT, PV, FV). NPER = 4, PMT = 800, PV=-10500, and FV=10000. Hint to make sure that you catch the minus sign in front of the present value\u2026 buyer pays now for the positive return of 10,000 in the future.  That shows 6.54% as the effective discount rate (or rate of return) for the investor. That is the same thing as the yield to maturity. It specifies the return that a bond investor would see if he or she purchased the bond today and held it to maturity.  3. What factors (in terms of supply and demand) drive changes in the bond market? I hope it\u2019s clear now how the tradeoff works between yields going UP when prices go DOWN, and vice versa. It happens because the COUPON rate, the number of periods, and the return of principal for a bond are fixed. So when someone sells a bond in the middle of its term, the only things that can change are the price and corresponding yield/discount rate.  Other commenters\u2026 including you\u2026 have touched on some of the reasons why the prices go up and down. Generally speaking, it\u2019s because of the basics of supply and demand\u2026 higher level of bonds for sale to be purchased by same level of demand will mean prices go down. But it\u2019s not \u2018just because interest rates are going up and down\u2019. It has a lot more to do with the expectations for 1) risk, 2) return and 3) future inflation. Sometimes it is action by the Fed, as Joe Taxpayer has pointed out. If they sell a lot of bonds, then the basics of higher supply for a set level of demand imply that the prices should go down. Prices going down on a bond imply that yields will go up. (I really hope that\u2019s clear by now). This is a common monetary lever that the government uses to \u2018remove money\u2019 from the system, in that they receive payments from an investor up front when the investor buys the bond from the Fed, and then the Fed gradually return that cash back into the system over time.  Sometimes it is due to uncertainty about the future. If investors at large believe that inflation is coming, then bonds become a less attractive investment, as the dollars received for future payments will be less valuable. This could lead to a sell-off in the bond markets, because investors want to cash out their bonds and transfer that capital to something that will preserve their value under inflation. Here again an increase in supply of bonds for sale will lead to decreased prices and higher yields.  At the end of the day it is really hard to predict exactly which direction bond markets will be moving, and more importantly WHY. If you figure it out, move to New York or Chicago or London and work as a trader in the bond markets. You\u2019ll make a killing, and if you\u2019d like I will be glad to drive your cars for you.  4. How does the availability of money supply for banks drive changes in other lending rates?  When any investment organization forms, it builds its portfolio to try to deliver a set return at the lowest risk possible. As a corollary to that, it tries to deliver the maximum return possible for a given level of risk.  When we\u2019re talking about a bank, DumbCoder\u2019s answer is dead on. Banks have various options to choose from, and a 10-year T-bond is broadly seen as one of the least risky investments. Thus, it is a benchmark for other investments.  5. So\u2026 now, why do mortgage rates tend to increase when the published treasury bond yield rate increases? The traditional, residential 30-year mortgage is VERY similar to a bond investment. There is a long-term investment horizon, with fixed cash payments over the term of the note. But the principal is returned incrementally during the life of the loan.  So, since mortgages are \u2018more risky\u2019 than the 10-year treasury bond, they will carry a certain premium that is tied to how much more risky an individual is as a borrower than the US government.  And here it is\u2026 no one actually directly changes the interest rate on 10-year treasuries. Not even the Fed. The Fed sets a price constraint that it will sell bonds at during its periodic auctions. Buyers bid for those, and the resulting prices imply the yield rate. If the yield rate for current 10-year bonds increases, then banks take it as a sign that everyone in the investment community sees some sign of increased risk in the future. This might be from inflation. This might be from uncertain economic performance. But whatever it is, they operate with some rule of thumb that their 30-year mortgage rate for excellent credit borrowers will be the 10-year plus 1.5% or something. And they publish their rates."}
{"id": "127584", "text": "Yes you can. You should talk to your tax advisor re the specific expenditures that can be accounted as startup-costs (legal fees are a good candidate, for example). If they add up to significant amounts (>$5K), you'll have to capitalize them over a certain period of time, and deduct from your business' income. This is not a tax advice.:-)"}
{"id": "127697", "text": "SMSFs are generally prohibited from acquiring assets from related parties (whether it is purchased by the SMSF or contributed into the fund). There are some exceptions to the above rule for acquiring related party assets, including: \u2022 Listed securities (ie shares, units or bonds listed on an approved stock exchange, such as the ASX) acquired at market value. \u2022 Business real property (ie freehold or leasehold interests in real property used exclusively in one or more businesses) acquired at market value. \u2022 An in-house asset where the acquisition would not result in the level of the fund\u2019s in-house assets exceeding 5%. \u2022 Units in a widely held unit trust, such as a retail ,managed fund. In-house asset rules An \u2018in-house asset\u2019 is generally defined as: \u2022 An investment by an SMSF in a related company or trust (ie a fund owns shares in a related company or units in a related trust). \u2022 An asset of an SMSF that is leased to a related party. \u2022 A loan made by an SMSF to a related company or trust. An investment, lease or loan that is an in-house asset is not prohibited, but is limited to 5% of the market value of the fund\u2019s assets. The Answer: If your pre-owned Western Australian Rock Lobster fishery quota units are not included in the exceptions then you cannot transfer them into your SMSF."}
{"id": "127974", "text": "There is a shortcut you can use when calculating federal estimated taxes.  Some states may allow the same type of estimation, but I know at least one (my own--Illinois) that does not. The shortcut: you can completely base your estimated taxes for this year on last year's tax return and avoid any underpayment penalty.  A quick summary can be found here (emphasis mine): If your prior year Adjusted Gross Income was $150,000 or less, then   you can avoid a penalty if you pay either 90 percent of this year's   income tax liability or 100 percent of your income tax liability from   last year (dividing what you paid last year into four quarterly   payments). This rule helps if you have a big spike in income one year,   say, because you sell an investment for a huge gain or win the   lottery. If wage withholding for the year equals the amount of tax you   owed in the previous year, then you wouldn't need to pay estimated   taxes, no matter how much extra tax you owe on your windfall. Note that this does not mean you will not owe money when you file your return next April; this shortcut ensures that you pay at least the minimum allowed to avoid penalty. You can see this for yourself by filling out the worksheet on form 1040ES.  Line 14a is what your expected tax this year will be, based on your estimated income.  Line 14b is your total tax from last year, possibly with some other modifications.  Line 14c then asks you to take the lesser of the two numbers.  So even if your expected tax this year is one million dollars, you can still base your estimated payments on last year's tax."}
{"id": "128408", "text": "\"Hi, \"\"guy\"\" here! This was me. I think we have a PNC shill on our hands. Anyway, slrrp you're missing the point, I was called and asked specifically about why I'm buying bitcoin and was then told that PNC wants nothing to do with bitcoin. That is news. Me refusing to answer the question is not news, it is not about the response from me or them, it's about the initial impetus to call me.\""}
{"id": "128469", "text": "\"Since doodle77 handled arbitrage, I'll take goodwill.  Goodwill is an accounting term that acts much like a \"\"plug\"\" account: you add/subtract to it the amount that makes everything balance.  In the case of goodwill, it generally only applies to mergers &amp; acquisitions.  The theory (and justification) is this: firms buy other firms at prices other than the market price (usually higher), and it is assumed that this is because the acquirer values its acquisition more than other people do.  But whether you use historical prices or market prices when you add (subtract) assets and liabilities to to (from) your balance sheet, this will never add up, because you paid more (less) than the assets are worth in the market, so more (less) cash flowed out than assets flowed in.  The difference goes into the goodwill account, so firms with a large goodwill account are ones that have made lots of acquisitions.\""}
{"id": "129177", "text": "between two people purchasing a house together, one with good and one with bad credit, will having both persons on the loan raise the interest rates. If the house deed is on both names, generally the Bank would insist the loan should also be on both of your names. This to ensure that Bank has enough leverage to recover the house in case of default. If one of you has bad credit, bank would raise the interest rate, assumption that bad credit would drag the good credit and force him to some activities / actions that could stretch the finance of one with good credit. If timely payments are not made, it would make your good credit to bad. If the house deed is on only on your name and you can get the loan on your own, this would be a better position. If the house deed is on only on your name and you would like to loan to be on both names, then the positive side is credit score of the person with bad credit would start showing improvement over period, provided both of you make timely payments. As pointed out by keshlam, there are enough question where people have entered into agreement without deciding what would happen if they separate. There is no right / wrong answer. It would be best you decide how it would be with respect to the ownership in the house and with respect to payments and if in worst case you part ways, how the settlement should look like."}
{"id": "129255", "text": "Investing is really about learning your own comfort level.  You will make money and lose money. You will make mistakes but you will also learn a great deal. First off, invest in your own financial knowledge, this doesn't require capital at all but a commitment. No one will watch or care for your own money better than yourself. Read books, and follow some companies in a Google Finance virtual portfolio. Track how they're doing over time - you can do this as a virtual portfolio without actually spending or losing money.  Have you ever invested before? What is your knowledge level? Investing long term is about trying to balance risk while reducing losses and trying not to get screwed along the way (by people).  My personal advice: Go to an independent financial planner, go to one that charges you per hour only. Financial planners that don't charge you hourly get paid in commissions. They will be biased to sell you what puts the most money in their pockets. Do not go to the banks investment people, they are employed by the banks who have sales and quota requirements to have you invest and push their own investment vehicles like mutual funds. Take $15k to the financial planner and see what they suggest. Keep the other $5K in something slow and boring and $1k under your mattress in actual cash as an emergency. While you're young, compound interest is the magic that will make that $25k increase hand over fist in time. But you need to have it consistently make money. I'm young too and more risk tolerant because I have time. While I get older I can start to scale back my risk because I'm nearing retirement and preserve instead of try to make returns."}
{"id": "129466", "text": "I wouldn't only consider the entry/exit cost per trade. That's a good comparison page by the way. I would also consider the following. This depends if you are planning on using your online broker to provide all the information for you to trade. I have lower expectations of my online broker, not meant to be harsh on the online brokers, but I expect brokers to assist me in buying/selling, not in selecting. Edit: to add to the answer following a comment. Here are three pieces of software to assist in stock selection"}
{"id": "129606", "text": "You should probably get a professional tax advice, as it is very specific to the Philipines tax laws and the US-Philippine tax treaty. What I know, however, is that if it was the other way around - you paying a foreigner coming to the US to consult you - you would be withholding 30% of their pay for the IRS which they would be claiming for refund on their own later. So if the US does it to others - I'm not surprised to hear that others do it to the US.  Get a professional advice on what and how you should be doing. In any case, foreign taxes paid can be used to offset your US taxes using form 1116 up to some extent."}
{"id": "129852", "text": "\"If you haven't been a US resident (not citizen, different rules apply) at the time you sold the stock in Europe but it was inside the same tax year that you moved to the US, you might want to have a look at the \"\"Dual Status\"\" part in IRS publication 519.\""}
{"id": "129855", "text": "\"It's viable for you,  but the \"\"investor\"\" is either stupid or willing and able to write off the investment as a gift for a friend in need, knowing it will probably end the friendship.  The banks make their money off of indebtedness, with the highest returns being on the highest risk loans . If the bank isn't willing to give you that debt on your own,  it's because they already know it's a bad debt. In this case,  trust the banks. If you can't come up with the downpayment on your own, you won't be able to meet your other commitments on this contract.\""}
{"id": "130188", "text": "ETFs trade on specific exchanges. If your broker deals with those exchanges, you should have access to the ETF. If your broker does not deal with that exchange, then you will not have access through that broker. This is different than, say, mutual funds, which don't trade on the exchanges are proprietary to certain brokerages or financial institutions."}
{"id": "130201", "text": "The only reason I can think of is that the bonds are bought automatically by some investment pools, groups or institutions. That will stop very quickly once the management finds some other place to put the money."}
{"id": "130424", "text": "Is there evidence of Russian money laundering through bitcoin or is this your assumption? As I understand it laundering through btc would require you to explain why your wallet has millions in it, doesn't seem useful  Edit: unless you maybe distributed the bitcoin to fake users and had them spend it on your own digital services? Would people be able to track the coins through the ledger and see that you're indirectly circulating coins from your personal wallet to your business one? I don't know I'm in too deep now"}
{"id": "130631", "text": "\"In the US you are not required to have a corporation to use business expenses to offset your income. The technical term you need is \"\"deducting business expenses\"\", and in matters of taxes it's usually best to go straight to the horse's mouth: the IRS's explanations Deducting Business Expenses  Business expenses are the cost of carrying   on a trade or business. These expenses are usually deductible if the   business operates to make a profit.  What Can I Deduct? Cost of Goods   Sold, Capital Expenses, Personal versus Business Expenses, Business Use   of Your Home, Business Use of Your Car, Other Types of Business Expenses None of this requires any special incorporation or tax arrangements, and are a normal part of operating a business.  However, there is a bit of a problem with your scenario. You said you \"\"invested\"\" into a business, but you mentioned buying specific things for the business which is not generally how one accounts for investment. If you are not an owner/operator of the business, then the scenario is not so straight-forward, as you can't simply claim someone else's business expenses as your own because you invested in it. Investments are taxed differently than expenses, and based upon your word choices I'm concerned that you could be getting yourself into a bit of a pickle. I would strongly advise you to speak with a professional, such as a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), to go over your current arrangement and advise you on how you should be structuring your ongoing investment into this shared business. If you are investing you should be receiving equity to reflect your ownership (or stock in the company, etc), and investments of this sort generally cannot be deducted as an expense on your taxes - it's just an investment, the same as buying stock or CDs. If you are just buying things for someone else's benefit, it's possible that this could be looked upon as a personal gift, and you may be in a precarious legal position as well (where the money is, indeed, just a gift). And gifts of this sort aren't deductible, either.  Depending on how this is all structured, it's possible that you should both consider a different form of legal organization, such as a formal corporation or at least an official business partnership. A CPA and an appropriate business attorney should be able to advise you for a nominal (few hundred dollars, at most) fee. If a new legal structure is advisable, you can potentially do the work yourself for a few hundred dollars, or pay to have it done (especially if the situation is more complex) for a few hundred to a few thousand. That's a lot less than you'd be on the hook for if this business is being accounted for improperly, or if either of your tax returns are being reported improperly!\""}
{"id": "130850", "text": "Very good answers as to how 0% loans are typically done.  In addition, many are either tied to a specific large item purchase, or credit cards with a no interest period.  On credit card transactions the bank is getting a fee from the retailer, who in turn is giving you a hidden charge to cover that fee.  In the case of a large purchase item like a car, the retailer is again quite likely paying a fee to cover what would be that interest, something they are willing to do to make the sale.  They will typically be less prone to deal as low a price in negotiation if you were not making that deal, or at times they may offer either a rebate or special low to zero finance rates, but you don't get both."}
{"id": "130934", "text": "Do I pay tax to the US and then also pay it in India for my income, or   does my American partner, who holds 15% of the monthly income, pay tax   in the US for his income? Of course you do, what kind of question is this? You have income earned in the US by a US entity, and the entity is taxed. Since LLC is a disregarded entity - the tax shifts to you personally. You should file form 1040NR. You should also talk to a tax professional who's proficient in the Indo-US tax treaty, since it may affect your situation."}
{"id": "130941", "text": "\"It is absolutely normal for your investments to go down at times. If you pull money out whenever your investments decrease in value, you lock in the losses.  It is better to do a bit of research and come up with some sort of strategy about how you will manage your investments.  One such strategy is to choose a target asset allocation (or let the \"\"target date\"\" fund choose it for you) and never sell until you need the money for retirement.  Some would advocate various other strategies that involve timing the market.  The important thing is that you find a strategy that you can live with and that provides you with enough confidence that you won't buy and sell at random.  Acting on gut feelings and selling whenever you feel queasy will likely lead to worse outcomes in the long run.\""}
{"id": "131131", "text": "A rather good IRS paper on the topic states that a donation of a business' in-kind inventory would be  Under IRC 170(e)(1), however, the fair market value must be   reduced by the amount of gain that would not be long-term capital gain if the   property had been sold by the donor at the property's fair market value (determined   at the time of the contribution). Under this rule, deductions for donated inventory   are limited to the property's basis (generally its cost), where the fair market value   exceeds the basis.  There are references to IRC regulations in a narrative context you may find helpful: This paper goes on for 16 pages describing detailed exceptions and the political reasons for the exceptions (most of which are concerned with encouraging the donation of prepared food from restaurants/caterers to hunger charities by guaranteeing a value for something that would otherwise be trashed valueless); and a worked out example of fur coats that had a cost of goods of $200 and a market value of $1000."}
{"id": "131382", "text": "If you move money - you don't need to pay any taxes. If the money was not there before and magically appeared at some point and now you want to move it - you'll have to explain a thing or two to the IRS and FinCEN. Generally, if you're a green card holder - you pay taxes on your worldwide income. So if you have a foreign account that earns interest - that interest is taxable to you in the US. In the year you earned it, not in the year you moved the money to the US. There are also reporting requirements (FBAR notably, and others). If you haven't filed FBAR with regards to the accounts which you now want to move, and especially if that also includes unreported income (interest and other) - you may find yourself in a very deep s#!t. Sorry, very deep troubles. Talk to a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State). A proper consultation is warranted, if you haven't had one already. You might need a tax attorney."}
{"id": "131595", "text": "In THEORY, you don't have to pay income tax in such a situation. In actual fact, the transaction looks suspicious because the money went into your account.  Presumably, the money should have gone OUT of your account in equal amount.  Having allowed all this to happen, what you need to do is to DOCUMENT this activity ASAP. The first thing to do is to retain the paperwork showing the sending of the funds to the third party. The second thing to do is to ask your friend for a letter dated TODAY (don't use an earlier date) as to why the money was delivered into your account, and corroborating the fact that it was sent to the third party. Then if the IRS comes calling, you will have documentation to prove your point and protect yourself."}
{"id": "131804", "text": "Much like any human interaction, a successful phone conversation rests on making a good first impression. Consequently, your customers would rather talk to a professional who is polite, patient, and knows his stuff rather than to a novice who stumbles over every word."}
{"id": "131959", "text": "\"Alternative Minimum Tax is based not just on your income, but moreso on the deductions you use. In short, if you have above the minimum AMT threshold of income (54k per your link), and pay a tiny amount of tax, you will pay AMT. AMT is used as an overall protection for the government to say \"\"okay, you can use these deductions from your taxable income, but if you're making a lot of money, you should pay something, no matter what your deductions are\"\". This extra AMT can be used to reduce your tax payment in a future year, if you pay regular tax again. For example - if you have 60k in income, but have 60k in specific deductions from your income, you will pay zero regular tax [because your taxable income will be zero]. AMT would require you to pay some tax on your income above the minimum 54k threshold, which might work out to a few thousand bucks. Next year, if you have 60k in income, but only 15k in deductions, then you would pay some regular tax, and would be able to offset that regular tax by claiming a credit from your AMT already paid.  AMT is really a pre-payment of tax paid in years when you have a lot of deductions. Unless you have a lot of deductions every single year, in which case you might not be able to get all of your AMT refunded in the end. Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of AMT in the US, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_minimum_tax.  If you think AMT is unfair (and maybe in some cases you might pay it when you think it's \"\"unfair\"\"), look at the root causes of paying AMT listed in that Wikipedia article: I am not trying to convince you that AMT is fair, just that it applies only when someone already has a very low tax rate due to deductions. If you have straight salary income, it would only apply in rare scenarios.\""}
{"id": "132111", "text": "\"Yes- you do not realize gains or losses until you actually sell the stock.  After you sell the initial stocks/bonds you have realized the gain.  When you buy the new, different stocks you haven't realized anything until you then sell those. There is one exception to this, called the \"\"Wash-Sale Rule\"\".  From Investopedia.com: With the wash-sale rule, the IRS disallows a loss deduction from the   sale of a security if a \u2018substantially identical security' was purchased within 30 days before or after the sale.  The   wash-sale period is actually 61 days, consisting of the 30 days before   and the 30 days after the date of the sale. For example, if you bought   100 shares of IBM on December 1 and then sold 100 shares of IBM on   December 15 at a loss, the loss deduction would not be allowed.   Similarly, selling IBM on December 15 and then buying it back on   January 10 of the following year does not permit a deduction. The   wash-sale rule is designed to prevent investors from making trades for   the sole purpose of avoiding taxes.\""}
{"id": "132288", "text": "I do this often and have never had a problem.  My broker is TD Ameritrade and they sent several emails (and even called and left a message) the week of expiry to remind me I had in the money options that would be expiring soon. Their policy is to automatically exercise all options that are at least $.01 in the money.  One email was vaguely worded, but it implied that they could liquidate other positions to raise money to exercise the options.  I would have called to clarify but I had no intention of exercising and knew I would sell them before expiry. In general though, much like with margin calls, you should avoid being in the position where the broker needs to (or can do) anything with your account. As a quick aside:  I can't think of a scenario where you wouldn't be able to sell your options, but you probably are aware of the huge spreads that exist for many illiquid options.  You'll be able to sell them, but if you're desperate, you may have to sell at the bid price, which can be significantly (25%?) lower than the ask.  I've found this to be common for options of even very liquid underlyings.  So personally, I find myself adjusting my limit price quite often near expiry.  If the quote is, say, 3.00-3.60, I'll try to sell with a limit of 3.40, and hope someone takes my offer.  If the price is not moving up and nobody is biting, move down to 3.30, 3.20, etc. In general you should definitely talk to your broker, like others have suggested.  You may be able to request that they sell the options and not attempt to exercise them at the expense of other positions you have."}
{"id": "132371", "text": "Are you planning to not pay taxes? Any time someone has income in the U.S., it is subject to U.S. taxes. You must file tax returns (and pay taxes if necessary) if you have income above a certain threshold, regardless of whether you're not authorized to work or not. If you plan to intentionally not pay taxes, then that's a whole other matter from working without authorization. Working without authorization is an immigration issue. It probably violates the conditions of your status, which will make you to automatically lose your status. That may or may not affect when you want to want to visit, immigrate to, or get other immigration benefits in the U.S. in the future; and at worst you may be deported. It's a complicated topic, but not really relevant for this site."}
{"id": "132375", "text": "\"The problem is that if you sold off in 2010 you missed on out the market practically doubling itself. I would definitely be kicking myself.  No, it's not sustainable but no one knows what the market is going to do compared to other assets. Is the economy going to grow into the market, is it going to double dip? \"\"When\"\" is a key factor here.\""}
{"id": "132430", "text": "What if there is only one trading day and the volume is smaller than   the open interest on that one trading day. This is assuming there is   no open interest before that day? I pulled this from a comment. This can't happen. We have zero open interest on day one. On day 2, I buy 10 contracts. Volume is 10 and now open interest is also 10. Tomorrow, if I don't sell, open interest starts at 10 and will rise by whatever new contracts are traded.   This is an example. I removed the stock name. This happens to be the Jan'17 expiration. The 10 contract traded on the $3 strike happen to be mine. You can see how open interest is cumulative, representing all outstanding contracts. It's obvious to me the shares traded as high as $5 at some point which created the interest (i.e. the desire) to trade this strike. Most activity tends to occur near the current price."}
{"id": "132657", "text": "What would you do if you had the check?  Probably destroy it.  The goal is to render it uncashable.  One way to do such is to have it shredded.   If you are uncomfortable leaving them to destroy it, then swing by and pick it up.  Alternatively offer to send them a self addressed and stamped envelope.  I am sure they will accommodate if you ask nicely."}
{"id": "132743", "text": "\"The major bureaus use the Fair Isaac scoring model, for the most part.  Here's an excerpt from a web site (Versions of the FICO scoring model) to explain: One of the first things a newcomer to this board learns is the difference between FICO and FAKO scores. FAKO refers to the non-FICO scores offered by various companies. FAKO scores have little value since few of them are used by lenders and they do not match closely to FICO scores.    But even when you stick with FICO scores, confusion can ensue because FICO scores have many different editions, versions, and variations. On a single day, a consumer could theoretically have dozens of different FICO scores, depending on which version and credit agency is used to produce the score.   This post provides a summary of the various FICO versions. Please offer any corrections or updates, and they will be edited in.   The FICO scoring model with its familiar range of 300 to 850 was first introduced in 1989. Since then, FICO has released five major revisions:   1995, 1998, 2004, 2008, and 2014.  Each \"\"edition\"\" uses a different formula and produces a different score.   When a new FICO edition is released, many lenders continue using an older version for years before \"\"upgrading.\"\" The 1995 revision is no longer in common use, but later editions are still used by lenders.   Most FICO editions are commonly known by the year of introduction:  FICO 98, FICO 04, and FICO 08 (although FICO now calls it FICO Score 8, without the zero).   The most recent edition is FICO Score 9 introduced in 2014.   As of 2014, FICO Score 8 is the most commonly used. However, most mortgage lenders use FICO 04 for Equifax and Transunion, and FICO 98 for Experian.   In addition to the \"\"classic\"\" version, FICO offers \"\"Industry Option\"\" versions customized for auto loans, credit cards, installment loans, personal finance loans, and insurance. These have a score range of 250 to 900, so the scores are not fully comparable with \"\"classic\"\" versions. As of 2015, Auto and Bankcard scores are available from myFICO as described here.  Citibank provides the Equifax FICO 8 Bankcard score free each month to credit cards holders.   Each credit agency (Transunion, Equifax, and Experian) uses a customized version of each FICO edition. As a result, a consumer's FICO scores from each agency may differ even when all credit information is identical among the agencies.   Because there are many FICO versions, when a score is received, it's helpful to know which version it is. If a lender provides a credit score, ask for details such as which credit agency was used, which FICO edition was used, and whether the score is an Industry Option version. The lender may not always be willing or able to provide the answers, but it doesn't hurt to ask.  Transunion   Official name:   FICO Risk Score Classic 98    Common name:  TU-98   Available directly to consumers:   No    Real-world score range:  336 to 843     (as shown on page 16 of this Transunion document)   Equifax   Official name:   Equifax FICO Score 4  (also known as Equifax Beacon 96)   Common name:   EQ-98   This version appears to be seldom used, but a poster reported it used on a mortgage application in 2014.   Available directly to consumers:   No   Experian   Official name:   Experian FICO Score 2  (also known as Experian FICO Risk Model v2)   Common name:   EX-98   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO when buying a product that includes all 19 available scores (as described here).  Some credit unions such as PSECU provide it free each month to members.   Real-world score range:   320 to 844     (as shown on this Experian document) Most mortgage lenders use FICO 04 for Equifax and Transunion, and FICO 98 for Experian.   All three scores will normally be pulled and the middle score (not the average) will be used by the lender. Transunion   Official name:   Transunion FICO Score 4  (also known as Transunion FICO Risk Score Classic 04)   Common name:  TU-04   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO as described here.   Real-world score range:   309 to 839     (as shown on page 16 of this Transunion document)   Equifax   Official name:   Equifax FICO Score 5  (also known as Equifax Beacon 5.0)   Common name:   EQ-04   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO as described here.  Also available from Equifax when buying FICO score (as a one-time purchase with the \"\"Score Power\"\" product available here, or as part of credit monitoring available here).  Some credit unions such as DCU provide it free each month to members.    Real-world score range:   334 to 818   Experian   Official name:   Experian FICO Score 3 (also known as Experian FICO Risk Model v3)   Common name:   EX-04   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO when buying a product that includes all 19 available scores (as described here).   Real-world score range:   325 to 850     (as shown on this Experian document) Transunion   Official name:   Transunion FICO Score 8  (also known as Transunion FICO 8 Risk Score or FICO Risk Score Classic 08)   Common name:   TU-08   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO as described here. Some credit card issuers such as Discover, Barclays, and Walmart provides it free each month.   Real-world score range:   341 to 850     (as shown on page 15 of this Transunion document)   Equifax   Official name:   Equifax FICO Score 8  (also known as Equifax Beacon 09)   Common name:   EQ-08   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO as described here.    Real-world score range:   300  to 850   Experian   Official name:   Experian FICO Score 8  (also known as Experian FICO Risk Model v8)   Common name:   EX-08   Available directly to consumers:   from myFICO as described here.   Real-world score range:   316  to 850     (as shown on this Experian document) How FICO Score 8 differs from previous versions is explained here.    In May 2014, a poster named android01 received 850 scores from all three credit agencies, as described in this post.    In June 2014, a poster named fused received 850 scores from all three credit agencies, as described in this post.   This 2011 press release describes a study of FICO Score 8 scores.   From a sample of 250,000 credit reports, it found 0.02% had a score of 850, or about 1 out of every 5000 persons. In 2014, FICO announced a new version called FICO Score 9.  More info here. As of February 2016, the score is now available directly to consumers, as described here. This New York Times article  says FICO 9 includes two important changes:    unpaid debts that result in collection actions will no longer have a negative effect on a score if the debt has been paid.    unpaid medical debts will have less negative effect on scores. In 2001, FICO released a new scoring model called NextGen.   It is claimed to be an improvement over \"\"classic\"\" FICO models because it tracks more factors.  But it has failed to catch on with lenders because its score range of 150 to 950 is incompatible with the familiar 300 to 850 range, requiring lenders to recalculate cutoff scores and revise many rules and policies.  Only a small percentage of lenders reportedly use NextGen. Transunion   Official name:   Precision   Available directly to consumers:    No   Equifax   Official name:   Pinnacle   Available directly to consumers:   In 2014, Pentagon Federal Credit Union (PenFed) began to provide this score free to its credit card holders, as discussed in this post.   Experian   Official name:   FICO Advanced Risk Score   Available directly to consumers:    No I included all of this to make the point that there are many variations of the scoring models, and all of them are customized to one degree or another by each of the major bureaus as a means of giving their models more credibility, as far as they're concerned. To your question about coming up with a \"\"fair\"\" scoring model, can you propose what makes current scoring models unfair?  I think it's a safe assumption to make that the financial community has already had a substantial amount of input into how the current scoring models work.  To think otherwise implies that the credit bureaus are just kinda \"\"winging it\"\" with whatever they think is best.  Their models are designed to give their client creditors the best scoring model possible based on what those creditors have stated is important to them. There isn't a unified single scoring model out there, and the bureaus definitely won't share the details of their modifications.  You can always come up with your own custom model, but how it compares to what's widely used, that's anyone's guess. I hope this helps. Good luck!\""}
{"id": "132754", "text": "This analysis misses the opportunities the Roth IRA presents to those with special access. It assumes that all money grows at the same rate, with investments at regular intervals. These assumptions hold for normal workers, but not for the privileged.  Suppose, for example, that in a single year you have limited access to a security that is an acorn you know will grow into a mighty oak; for this example, this security will grow 1000x over some short period of time. For simplicity, assume both the value of acorns you can buy and the the maximum IRA contribution in this year is $5K.  After the short acorn growth period, the after tax values are: There is a minor difference in the amount of money you need to buy the acorns (pre v. post tax), but this is negligible relative to the amount of cash you can assume you have on hand to have special access.  The Atlantic provides an acorn example from private equity (not used with a Roth) and this Washington Post article describes someone with non-publicly traded startup stocks and a Roth."}
{"id": "132839", "text": "\"First check: Do you have all the insurances you need? The two insurances everyone should have are: Another insurance you might want to get is a contents insurance (\"\"Hausratsversicherung\"\"). But if you don't own any super-expensive furniture or artworks, you might also opt to self-insure and cover it with: Priority 2: Emergency fund. Due to the excellent healthcare and welfare system in Germany, this is not as important as in many other countries. But knowing that you have a few thousand \u20ac laying around in liquid assets in case something expensive breaks down can really help you sleep at night. If you decide not to pay for contents insurance, calculate what it would cost you if there is a fire in your apartment and you would have to replace everything. That's how large your emergency fund needs to be. You also need a larger emergency fund if you are a homeowner, because as a homeowner there might always be an emergency repair you have to pay for. Priority 3: Retirement. Unless there will be some serious retirement reforms in the next 40 years (and I would not bet on that!), the government-provided pension will not be enough to cover your lifestyle cost. If you don't want to suffer from poverty as a senior citizen you will have to build up a retirement plan now. Check which options your company provides (\"\"Betriebliche Altersvorsorge\"\") and what retirement options you have which give you free money from the government (\"\"Riester-Rente\"\"). Getting professional advise to compare all the options with each other can be really beneficial. Priority 4: Save for a home. In the long-run, owning a home is much cheaper than renting one. Paying of a mortgage is just like paying rent - but with the difference that the money you pay every month isn't spent. Most of it (minus interest and building maintenance costs) stays your capital! At one point you will have paid it off and then you never have to pay rent in your life. It even secures the financial future of your children and grandchildren, who will inherit your home. But few banks will give you a good interest rate if you have no own capital at all. So you should start saving money now. Invest a few hundred \u20ac every month in a long-term portfolio. You might also get some additional free money for this purpose from your employer (\"\"Verm\u00f6genswirksame Leistungen\"\").\""}
{"id": "132966", "text": "From the IRS Section 1091. Loss from Wash Sales of Stock or Securities  Section 1091(a) provides that in the case of any loss claimed to have been sustained from any sale or other disposition of shares of stock or securities where it appears that, within a period beginning 30 days before the date of such sale or disposition and ending 30 days after such date, the taxpayer has acquired (by purchase or by an exchange on which the entire amount of gain or loss was recognized by law),or has entered into a contract or option so to acquire, substantially identical stock or 3 securities, then no deduction shall be allowed under \u00a7 165 The document is not long, 4 pages, and should be read to see the intent. It's tough to choose the one snippet, but the conclusion is this is the definitive response to that question.  A purchase within an IRA or other retirement account can create a wash sale if such a purchase would be a wash sale otherwise, i.e. the fact that it's a retirement account doesn't avoid wash rules."}
{"id": "133000", "text": "You should consider dollar cost averaging your investments. Retirement account is perfect for that - it's long term with periodic deposits. Overall, by investing in stocks now for a long term, you'll benefit more because the stocks are at their low(er) point."}
{"id": "133046", "text": "I understand your point now. When I first read your comment, I gathered that you were making a prediction of a 50% drop (thus my comment about the fool's errand of making predictions).  I now see that you were commenting on the high price volatility of gold and silver."}
{"id": "133093", "text": "How is it possible that long term treasury bonds, which the government has never defaulted on, can hold more risk as an ETF then the stock market index? The risk from long-term bonds isn't that the government defaults, but that interest rates go up before you get paid, so investors want bonds issued more recently at higher interest rates, rather than your older bonds that pay at a lower rate (so the price for your bonds goes down). This is usually caused by higher inflation rates which reduce the value of the interest that you will be paid. Do you assume more risk investing in bond ETFs than you would investing in individual bonds? If you are choosing the right ETFs, there should be a lower amount of risk because the ETFs are taking care of the difficult work of buying a variety of bonds.  Are bond ETFs an appropriate investment vehicle for risk diversification? Yes, if you are investing in bonds, exchange traded funds are an appropriate way to buy them. The markets for ETFs are usually very liquid."}
{"id": "133196", "text": "Dividends are not paid immediately upon reception from the companies owned by an ETF. In the case of SPY, they have been paid inconsistently but now presumably quarterly."}
{"id": "133235", "text": "\"Do I understand correctly, that we still can file as \"\"Married filing   jointly\"\", just add Schedule C and Schedule SE for her? Yes. Business registration information letter she got once registered   mentions that her due date for filing tax return is January 31, 2016.   Does this prevent us from filing jointly (as far as I understand, I   can't file my income before that date)? IRS sends no such letters. IRS also doesn't require any registration. Be careful, you might be a victim to a phishing attack here. In any case, sole proprietor files a regular individual tax return with the regular April 15th deadline. Do I understand correctly that we do not qualify as \"\"Family   partnership\"\" (I do not participate in her business in any way other   than giving her money for initial tools/materials purchase)? Yes. Do I understand correctly that she did not have to do regular   estimated tax payments as business was not expected to generate income   this year? You're asking or saying? How would we know what she expected? In any case, you can use your withholding (adjust the W4) to compensate.\""}
{"id": "133413", "text": "\"&gt; Wall St ripped off retail investors pretty good  \"\"Ripped off\"\" ?  How about \"\"retail investors did not sufficiently research and think about the company, invested poorly\"\"  Seriously, a 20 minute thought experiment pre-IPO of \"\"is Facebook worth $100bn, and does it have growth prospects?\"\" ought to immediately discount the stock. The smart money was always on \"\"short it as soon as you can\"\"  If you're making investment decisions like \"\"Hey, I know what that company is. I use facebook!\"\" you deserve to lose money.\""}
{"id": "133760", "text": "\"Buying pressure is when there are more buy orders than sell orders outstanding.  Just because someone wants to buy a stock doesn't mean there's a seller ready to fill that order.  When there's buying pressure, stock prices rise.  When there's selling pressure, stock prices fall. There can be high volume where buying and selling are roughly equal, in which case share prices wouldn't move much. The market makers who actually fill buy and sell orders for stock will raise share prices in the face of buying pressure and lower them in the face of selling pressure.  That's because they get to keep the margin between what they bought shares from a seller for and what they can sell them to a new buyer for.  Here's an explanation from InvestorPlace.com about \"\"buying pressure\"\": Buying pressure can basically be defined as increasingly higher demand for a particular stock's shares. This demand for shares exceeds the supply and causes the price to rise. ... The strength or weakness of a stock determines how much buying or selling interest will be required to break support and resistance areas. I hope this helps!\""}
{"id": "133795", "text": "Three things prevent you from doing this: Credit cards generally don't accept other credit cards as payment.  You could do this with a cash advance or balance transfer, but Cash advances and balance transfers usually have fees associated with them, negating any reward you might earn. Your card might have a no-fee balance transfer promotion going, but Cash advances and balance transfers generally aren't eligible for rewards."}
{"id": "133938", "text": "\"A lot of credit card companies these days uses what they call \"\"daily interest\"\" where they charge the interest rate for the number of days till you pay off what you spent. This allows them to make more money than the \"\"period billing\"\".  The idea of credit, theoretically, is that there isn't really a day when you can borrow without paying interest - in theory\""}
{"id": "133943", "text": "\"You're missing a very important thing: YEAR END values in (U.S.) $ millions unless otherwise noted So 7098 is not $7,098.  That would be a rather silly amount for Coca Cola to earn in a year don't you think?  I mean, some companies might happen upon random small income amounts, but it seems pretty reasonable to assume they'll earn (or lose) millions or billions, not thousands. This is a normal thing to do on reports like this; it's wasteful to calculate to so many significant digits, so they divide everything by 1000 or 1000000 and report at that level.  You need to look on the report (usually up top left, but it can vary) to see what factor they're dividing by. Coca Cola's earnings per share are $1.60 for FY 2014, which is 7,098/4450 (use the whole year numbers, not the quarter 4 numbers; and here they're both in millions, so they divide out evenly).   You also need to understand that \"\"Dividend on preferred stock\"\" is not the regular dividend; I don't see it explicitly called out on the page you reference.  They may not have preferred stock and/or may not pay dividends on it in excess of common stock (or at all).\""}
{"id": "133997", "text": "The Khan Academy has a huge series on finance (Sal Khan used to work at a hedge fund before he started his magnum opus): http://www.khanacademy.org/#core-finance  Some are pretty basic stuff, but he does have some interesting commentary and snippets of more interesting topics. They're all very low-commitment and bite-sized."}
{"id": "134026", "text": "Looking at the numbers quickly,  if he makes this amount for the entire year, single, no kids, no investment income, standard deduction only, his taxable income will be about $110,000.*  That puts him in the 28% tax bracket.  His federal tax would be:  $18,481.25 plus 28% of the amount over $90,750 Which comes out to about $23,800 in tax liability.  His federal withholding is $26,047 for the year, so with absolutely no deductions whatsoever, he will be getting a tax refund of about $2200. I'm not very familiar with the California tax return, but it is entirely possible that he would get a decent sized refund from the state as well.  This means that his tax refund could be about the size of an extra paycheck.  He may want to consider increasing his allowances, which would make his paychecks bigger and his tax refund smaller. That having been said, taxes are high, no doubt about it.  Remember that when you are in the voting booth.  :) * Here is how I got the taxable income number for the year:"}
{"id": "134494", "text": "\"Yep. You're single, you're possibly still a dependent on your parent's taxes (in lieu of rent), and you're finally bringing home bacon instead of bacon bits. Welcome to the working world. Let's say your gross salary is the U.S. median of $50,000. With bi-weekly checks (26 a year; common practice) you're getting $1923.08 per paycheck. In the 2013 \"\"Percentage Method\"\" tax tables, here's how your federal withholding is calculated as a single person paid biweekly: Federal taxes are computed piecewise; the amount up to A is taxed at X%, then the amount between A and B is taxed at Y%, so if you make $C, between A and B, the tax is (A*X) + (C-A)*Y. The amount A*X is included in the \"\"base amount\"\" for ease of calculation. Back to our example; let's say you're getting $1923.08 gross wages per check. That puts you in the 25% marginal bracket. You pay the sum of all lesser brackets (which is the \"\"base amount\"\" of the 25% bracket), plus the 25% marginal rate on every dollar that falls within the bracket. That's 191.95 + (1923.08 - 1479) * .25 = 191.95 + (444.08 * .25) = 191.95 + 111.02 = $302.97 per paycheck. The \"\"effective\"\" tax rate on the total amount, as if you were being charged a flat tax, is 15.75%, and this is just for the federal income tax. Add to this MA state income taxes (5.25% flat tax), FICA (aka Medicare; 1.45% flat) and SECA (aka Social Security; 6.2% up to a \"\"wage base\"\" that $50k doesn't even approach), and your effective tax rate on each dollar you earn is 15.75% + 5.25% + 1.45% + 6.2% = 28.65%. This doesn't include any state unemployment taxes that may be withheld separately, but as the rate I come up with is pretty darn close to what you've figured (meaning I slightly overestimated your gross income and thus your effective tax rate), my bet is that SUTA's either employer-paid in MA, or it's just part of MA state income tax. It gets better, at least at the federal level: The amount of your state income taxes is tax-deductible at the federal level if you itemize your deductions. That may not be a factor for you as you'd have to come up with more than $6,100 of other tax-deductible expenses to make itemizing the better option than taking the standard deduction (big-ticket items are mortgage expenses other than principal payments, hospital stays such as for childbirth or major accident, and state and local taxes such as sales, property and income). If you can claim yourself as a dependent (meaning your parents can't), then $150 of each check ($3,900 of your annual salary) is no longer taxed for federal withholding, lowering the amount of money taxed at the 25% marginal rate. You effectively save $37.50 biweekly ($975 annually) in taxes. Get married and file jointly, and your spouse, her personal exemption, and an extra standard deduction amount (if you don't itemize) go on your taxes. The tax rates for married couples filing jointly are also lower; they're currently calculated (or were in 2012) to be the same as if two equal earners were to file separately, so if your spouse doesn't work, your taxes on the single income are calculated at the rates you'd get if you earned half as much. It doesn't work out to half the taxes, but it is a significant \"\"marriage advantage\"\". Have kids, and each one is another little $3,900 tax write-off. It's nowhere near the cost of having or raising the child, but it helps, and having kids isn't about the money. Owning a home, making charitable deductions, having medical expenses, etc are a toss-up. The magic number in 2013 is $12,200 for a married couple, $6,100 for a single person. If your mortgage interest, insurance premiums, property taxes, medical expenditures, charitable donations, any contributions from your take-home pay to a tax-deferred savings account (typically these accounts are paid into by your employer as a \"\"pre-tax deduction\"\" and never show up as taxable income, but you could just as easily move money from your take-home pay into tax-deferred savings) and any other tax-deductible payments add up to more than 12 large, then itemize. If not, take your standard deduction. As a single taxpayer just starting out in life, you probably don't have any of these types of expenditures, certainly not enough to give up the SD. I did the math on my own taxes in 2012, and was surprised at how little the government actually gets of my paycheck when all's said and done. Remember back in the summer of 2012 when everyone was mad at Romney for making millions and only paying an effective income tax rate of 14%, which was compared to the middle class's marginal rate of 25-28%? Well, my family of 3, living on a little more than the median income from one earner (me), taking the married standard deduction, three personal exemptions, and a little extra for student loan interest, paid an effective federal income tax rate of something like 3.5%. Of course, the FICA and SS taxes don't allow any deductions (not even for retirement savings), so add in the 4.2% SS (in 2012) and 1.45% FICA and the full federal gimme was more like 9-10%.\""}
{"id": "134497", "text": "\"Both models understand that the value of a company is the sum total of all cashflows in the future, discounted back to the present. They vary in their definition of \"\"cash\"\". The Gordon Growth model uses dividends as a proxy for cashflow, under the assumption that this is the only true cash received by shareholders. (In theory, counting cash is meaningless if there's no eventual end-game where the accumulated cash is divvied up amongst the owners.) The Gordon model is best used to value companies that have an established, reliable dividend. The company should be stable, and the payout ratio high. GG will underestimate the value of firms that consistently maintain a low payout ratio, and instead accumulate cash. There are multiple DCF models. A firm valuation measures all cash available to both equity and debt holders. A traditional equity valuation measures all cash that can be claimed by shareholders. While the latter seems most intuitive and pertinent to a shareholder, the former is very good at showing what a company can do regardless of their choice of capital structure. A small add-on to a firm valuation is the concept of EVA, or economic value add, where the return on capital (all capital -- both debt and equity) is compared to the blended cost of capital. The DCF model is more flexible (optimistic?) than the Gordon in its approach to cash. The approach can be applied to many types of companies, at every stage in their maturity, even if they don't pay a dividend. A simplistic, or single-stage DCF is similar to the Gordon. The assumption is that the company is fully mature, growing at a rate perhaps just slightly above inflation, forever. For younger companies a multi-stage DCF can be employed, where you forecast fairly confident numbers for the next 3-5 years, then 3-5 years beyond that the forecast is less certain, but assumed to be slowing growth, and a generally maturing, stabilizing company. And then the steady-state stage is tacked on to the end. You'll want to check out Professor Aswath Damodaran's website: http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/ . He addresses all this and so much more, and has a big pile of spreadsheets freely downloadable to get you started. I also highly recommend his book \"\"Investment Valuation\"\". It's the bible on the topic.\""}
{"id": "134761", "text": "As someone who works for a company that deploys POS systems in Canada, I can tell you that your best bet would be to have a configuration option that lets the client decide what to do. If they have a business practice that would allow for a sale total to be $0.01 or $0.02, they should first evaluate their business practice.  If you're building a POS system to deploy in Canada, I'm sure you have access to resources (potential clients) who would already know how they would want to handle this. Ask them."}
{"id": "134764", "text": "\"Given the current low interest rates - let's assume 4% - this might be a viable option for a lot of people.  Let's also assume that your actual interest rate after figuring in tax considerations ends up at around 3%.  I think I am being pretty fair with the numbers. Now every dollar that you save each month based on the savings and invest with a higher net return of greater than 3% will in fact be \"\"free money\"\".  You are basically betting on your ability to invest over the 3%.  Even if using a conservative historical rate of return on the market you should net far better than 3%.  This money would be significant after 10 years.   Let's say you earn an average of 8% on your money over the 10 years.  Well you would have an extra $77K by doing interest only if you were paying on average of $500 a month towards interest on a conventional loan.  That is a pretty average house in the US.  Who doesn't want $77K (more than you would have compared to just principal).  So after 10 years you have the same amount in principal plus $77k given that you take all of the saved money and invest it at the constraints above. I would suggest that people take interest only if they are willing to diligently put away the money as they had a conventional loan.  Another scenario would be a wealthier home owner (that may be able to pay off house at any time) to reap the tax breaks and cheap money to invest. Pros: Cons: Sidenote:  If people ask how viable is this.  Well I have done this for 8 years.  I have earned an extra 110K.  I have smaller than $500 I put away each month since my house is about 30% owned but have earned almost 14% on average over the last 8 years.  My money gets put into an e-trade account automatically each month from there I funnel it into different funds (diversified by sector and region).  I literally spend a few minutes a month on this and I truly act like the money isn't there.  What is also nice is that the bank will account for about half of this as being a liquid asset when I have to renegotiate another loan.\""}
{"id": "134864", "text": "Such an offer has negative value, so it's hard to see how it would make sense to accept it. The offer has two components, one part that you gain and one part that you lose. The gain is that half your losses are covered. The cost is that half your profits are lost. For that to be a net benefit to you, you would have to expect that you will gain more from this than you will lose from it. That is, you must expect that the investment has negative value. But if you expect that the investment has negative value, why are you investing? This also doesn't really align incentives between the two parties. The person choosing the investment is not incurring opportunity cost (because they have no funds locked up) while you are. So they have an incentive to be conservative that you do not. For example, say I could make 1% in an ultra low risk CD. The person choosing the investments has an incentive to put me in something that he only expects to make around 0.5% (because he gets to keep half the profits and it costs him nothing). Whereas I'd rather just put the money in a CD (because I get to keep 1% instead just half of 0.5%)."}
{"id": "134972", "text": "The company may not permit a transfer of these options. If they do permit it, you simply give him the money and he has them issue the options in your name.  As a non-public company, they may have a condition where an exiting employee has to buy the shares or let them expire.  If non-employees are allowed to own shares, you give him the money to exercise the options and he takes possession of the stock and transfers it to you.  Either way, it seems you really need a lawyer to handle this. Whenever this kind of money is in motion, get a lawyer.  By the way, the options are his. You mean he must purchase the shares, correct?"}
{"id": "135022", "text": "If you are trading CFDs, which are usually traded on margin, you will usually be charged an overnight financing fee for long positions held overnight and you will receive an overnight financing credit for short positions held overnight. Most CFD brokers will have their overnight financing rates set at + or - 2.5% or 3% from the country's official interest rates. So if your country's official interest rate is 5% and your broker uses + or - 2.5%, you will get a 2.5% credit for any short positions held overnight and pay 7.5% fee for any long positions held overnight. In Australia the official interest rate is 2.5%, so I get 0% for short positions and pay 5% for long positions held overnight. If you are looking to hold positions open long term (especially long positions) you might think twice before using CFDs to trade as you may end up paying quite a bit in interest over a long period of time. These financing fees are charged because you are borrowing the funds to open your positions, If you buy shares directly you would not be charged such overnight financing fees."}
{"id": "135112", "text": "As long as you can get a cash advance on the credit card if you need it, then you're not putting the money beyond use if you use it to pay down card debt, you're just putting it where it gets the best rate of return."}
{"id": "135130", "text": "&gt; Are you saying that OP was just unlucky because he didn't realize that forex wasn't covered under SIPC?  Pretty much.  Opening an investing account has tons of T&amp;C.  You're not going to read every single bit of it."}
{"id": "135219", "text": "\"In your case, I believe the answer is that you don't owe any taxes, if your deductions exceed your income. There is something called the Alternate Minimum Tax to catch \"\"rich\"\" people, who claim \"\"too many\"\" deductions. Basically, it taxes their \"\"gross\"\" income at a lower rate, but allows them no deductions if they make $175,000 or more. You are not in that tax \"\"bracket.\"\"\""}
{"id": "135483", "text": "If his credit union participates in the national Co-Op, then he will be able to withdraw money at any participating credit union. He could just bring cash a check out in his name, just like he would at home."}
{"id": "135509", "text": "Tax accountant here.  The money is yours and you can do what ever you want with it. Just make sure to put it on the books as Loan Receivable and have an Interest Income account."}
{"id": "135571", "text": "Capital One's normal master card is known to approve people with limited or bad credit history. If not that look into a secured credit card.  You put down a deposit of $200 or more and you get that much in credit, sometimes more."}
{"id": "135646", "text": "Yeah, that's what I do, just buy the indices and forget it. My portfolio is so boring it's elegant, and makes money too.  4.5% YTD and 5.9% in 2016, not bad for a 30/70 stock bond split for this 70-year-old. Oh, did I tell you my costs are .06%! I am enjoying the freedom of my retirement."}
{"id": "135705", "text": "The calculation is to figure out how many dollars you get in return for the amount of dollars you spend. In your case, you know you get 1000 points for $1000 dollars, and can redeem one movie ticket for 1000 points. Therefore, Granted that you could also redeem a $8-9 ticket, making your return 0.8-0.9%.  In addition, this can get more complicated for some points cards that may give out free points, and is especially so if there's an intermediary such as AIR MILES, for which points can be earned in numerous ways. To get really nitty gritty, you could to keep a spreadsheet where you list number of dollars spent, number of points gained, number of points redeemed, and value of reward received. Thus, you can figure out exactly what your cost is for each point (second factor from above), as well as the ultimate value of each point with respect to rewards redeemed (first factor). I'm considering doing that myself since I'm prone to spreadsheet addiction, but this method is likely overkill for most points cards."}
{"id": "135724", "text": "Yes. Not doing so would be like turning down a raise. The best advice in almost every situation is to at least contribute up to the amount that the company will match so you get the full benefit. One thing to clarify that you might not be understanding. The vesting period is only for the money the company matches, not your own investment. Even if you leave the company before the account is vested or fully vested, you can transfer to a 401k at your new employer, or roll over into an IRA, or take as taxable income (and pay a penalty if it is an early withdrawal), all your contributions together with any investment gains or losses that have occurred. Ditto whatever part of your employer match that has vested by the time you leave. Often, the employer matching contributions are invested in the  same funds in the same proportions that you have chosen for your own contributions and thus will have incurred the same gains or losses as your own contributions, but  what you are entitled to take with you is the part that has vested. Also, you mention that it is unlikely that you will stay the entire 5 years. However, if you plan to at least stay a couple of years it makes sense to get the 20%, 40%, etc. of the match that you vest during your stay. Again, it's free money."}
{"id": "135823", "text": "\"Those advantages you've described (tax treatment and employee match) are what you receive in exchange for \"\"locking up\"\" the money. Ultimately it's a personal choice of whether that tradeoff makes sense for you situation (I'll echo the response that the real answer to your question is planning). Roth options (either 401K or IRA) may be good compromises for you, since you can withdraw those contributions (but not the earnings) without any penalty, since you've already paid taxes on them. Another avenue to explore may be a self-directed IRA or a Solo 401(k), depending on your circumstances and eligibility. In both cases, there are plan providers that structure the plan to allow you to use the money to invest in things besides traditional stocks, bonds, and mutual funds (often referred to as \"\"checkbook control\"\" accounts). They are very commonly used among Real Estate investors (this thread from BiggerPockets has quite a bit of info). You'd want to consult with an accountant or financial adviser before going down that path.\""}
{"id": "135845", "text": "It depends on the market that you participate in. Stock markets are not zero sum as JoeTaxpayer explained. On the other hand, any kind of derivative markets (such as options or futures) are indeed zero sum, due to the nature of the financial instruments that are exchanged. Those markets tend to be more unforgiving. I don't have evidence for this, but I believe one of the reasons that investors so often lose their money is psychology. The majority of us as humans are not wired to naturally make the kinds of rigorous and quick decisions that markets require, especially if day trading. Some people can invest time and energy to improve themselves and get over that. Those are the ones who succeed."}
{"id": "136047", "text": "\"If you make $10 in salary, $5 in interest on savings, and $10 in dividends, your income is $25, not $10. If you have a billion dollars in well-invested assets, you can take a loan against those assets and the interest payment on the loan will be smaller than the interest you earn on the assets. That means your investment will grow faster than your debt and you have a net positive gain. It makes no sense to do this if the value of your asset is static. In that case, you would be better off just to withdraw from the asset and spend it directly, since a loan against that static asset will result in you spending your asset plus interest charges. If you have a good enough rate of return on your investment, you may actually be able to do this in perpetuity, taking out loan after loan, making the loan payments from the loan proceeds, while the value of your original asset pool continues to grow. At any given time, though, a severe downturn in the market could potentially leave you with large debts and insufficient value in your assets to back the debt. If that happens, you won't be getting another loan and the merry-go-round will stop spinning. It's a bit of a Ponzi scheme, in a way. The U.S. government has done exactly this for a long time and has gotten away with it because the dollar has been the world's reserve currency. You could always get a loan against the value of the U.S. currency in the past. Those days may be dwindling, with more countries choosing alternative currencies to conduct business with and the dollar becoming comparatively weaker into the foreseeable future. If you have savings, you can spend more than you make, which will put you into debt, then you can draw down your savings to pay that debt, and at the end of the month you will be out of debt, but have less in savings. You cannot do this forever. Eventually, you run out of savings. If you have no savings, you immediately go into debt and stay there when you spend more than you make. This is simple arithmetic. If you have no savings, but you own assets (real estate, securities, a collection of never-opened Beatles vinyl records, a bicycle), then you could spend more than you make, and be in debt, but have the potential to liquidate assets to pay off all or part of the debt. This depends on finding a buyer and negotiating a price that helps you enough to make a real difference. If you have a car, and you owe $10 on it, but you can only find a buyer willing to pay $8 for the car, that doesn't help you unless you can refinance the $2 and your new payment amount is lower than the old payment amount. But then you're still $2 in debt on the car even though you no longer possess it, and you've still increased your debt by spending more than you made. If you stay on this path, sooner or later you will not have any assets left and you will be in debt, plain and simple. As a wrinkle in the concrete example, let's say you have stock options with your employer. This is a form of a \"\"call.\"\" You could also purchase a call through a broker in the stock market, or for a commodity in the futures market. That means you pay up front for the right to buy a specific amount of an asset at a fixed price (usually with an expiration date). You don't own the stock, you just have the right to buy it at the call price, regardless of the current market value when you buy it. In the case of employee stock options, your upfront cost is in the form of a vesting schedule. You have to remain employed for a set time before a specific number of stocks become eligible for you to purchase at your option price (the stocks \"\"vest\"\" on a certain date). Remain employed longer, and more stocks may vest, depending on your contract. If you quit or are terminated before that date, you forfeit your options. If you stick around through your vesting schedule, you pay real money to buy the stock at your option price. It only makes sense to do this if the market value of the stock is higher than your option price. If the current market value is lower than your option price, you're better off just buying the asset at the current market value, or waiting and  hoping that the value increases before your contract expires. You could drive yourself into debt by spending more than you make, but still have a chance to eliminate your debt by exercising your call/option and then re-selling the asset if it is worth more than what you pay for it. But you may have to wait for a vesting period to elapse before you can exercise your option (depending on the nature of your contract). During this waiting period, you are in debt, and if you can't service your debt (i.e. make payments acceptable to your creditors) your things could get repossessed. Oh, don't forget that you'll also pay a brokerage fee to sell the asset after you exercise your option. Further, if you have exhausted your savings and nobody will give you a loan to exercise your stock (or futures) options, then in the end you would be even further in debt because you already paid for the call, but you are unable to capitalize it and you'll lose what you already paid. If you can get a loan to exercise your option, but you're a bad credit risk, chances are good that the lender will draft a contract requiring you to immediately pay back the loan proceeds plus a fee out of the proceeds of re-selling the stock or other asset. In fact the lender might even draft a contract assigning ownership of your options to them, and stipulating that they'll pay you what's left after they subtract their fee. Even if you can get a traditional loan, you will pay interest over time. The end result is that your debt has still cost you very real money beyond the face value of the debt. Finally, if the asset for which you have a call has decreased in value lower than the current market value, you would be better off buying it directly in the market instead of exercising your option. But you'll pay transaction fees to do that, and the entire action would be pure speculation (or \"\"investment\"\"), but not an immediate means to pay off your debt. Unless you have reliable insider trading information. But then you risk running afoul of the law. Frankly it might be better to get a loan to pay off your debt than to buy an \"\"investment\"\" hoping the value will increase, unless you could guarantee that the return on your investment would be bigger than the cumulative interest and late fees on your debt (or the risk of repossession of your belongings). Remember that nothing you owe a debt on is actually yours, not your house, not your car, not your bicycle, not your smartphone. Most of the time, your best course of action is to make minimum payments on your lowest-interest debts and make extra payments on your highest interest debt, up to the highest total payment you can tolerate (set something aside in a rainy day fund just in case). As you pay off the highest-interest debt, shift the amount you were paying on that debt to make extra payments on your next highest-interest debt until that one is paid off, and repeat on down the line until you're out of debt, then live within your means so that you don't find yourself working at McDonald's because you don't have a choice when you're in your 80's.\""}
{"id": "136280", "text": "A 401(k) is an investment just like any other investment. You generally get two types of return lumped into that number, but there can be more and you should read your funds prospectus carefully. If you aren't investing in direct companies, you're using mutual funds for instance, then you should read the funds prospectus to see how they handle these situations for the underlying securities they hold for you. Although I think this is the basic answer to the question as you asked."}
{"id": "136631", "text": "I don\u2019t see this area turning around anytime soon. It\u2019s extremely poverty ridden . Plus I believe a lot of the stipulations in buying one of these $100 homes is that you rehab it and live in it.   I\u2019m not positive on the details though.   Last time this area was wealthy was during the al Capone era. He had a lot of money in it. But even that was ilegal money."}
{"id": "136804", "text": "Technically you owe 'self-employment' taxes not FICA taxes because they are imposed under a different law, SECA. However, since SE taxes are by design exactly the same rates as combining the two halves of FICA (employer and employee) it is quite reasonable to treat them as equivalent. SE taxes (and income tax also) are based on your net self-employment income, after deducting business expenses (but not non-business items like your home mortgage, dependent exemptions, etc which factor only into income tax). You owe SE Medicare tax 2.9% on all your SE net income (unless it is under $400) adjusted down by 7.65% to compensate for the fact that the employer half of FICA is excluded from gross income before the employee half is computed. You owe SE Social Security tax 12.4% on your adjusted SE net income unless and until the total income subject to FICA+SECA, i.e. your W-2 wages plus your adjusted SE net income, exceeds a cap that varies with inflation and is $127,200 for 2017. OTOH if FICA+SECA income exceeds $200k single or $250k joint you owe Additional Medicare tax 0.9% on the excess; if your W-2 income (alone) exceeds this limit your employer should withhold for it. However the Additional Medicare tax is part of 'Obamacare' (PPACA) which the new President and Republican majorities have said they will 'repeal and replace'; whether any such replacement will affect this for TY 2017 is at best uncertain at this point. Yes SE taxes are added to income tax on your 1040 with schedule SE attached (and schedule C/CEZ, E, F as applicable to your business) (virtually so if you file electronically) and paid together. You are supposed to pay at least 90% during the year by having withholding increased on your W-2 job, or by making 'quarterly' estimated payments (IRS quarters are not exactly quarters, but close), or any combination. But if this is your first year (which you don't say, but someone who had gone through this before probably wouldn't ask) you may get away with not paying during the year as normally required; specifically, if your W-2 withholding is not enough to cover your increased taxes for this year (because of the additional income and SE taxes) but it is enough to cover your tax for the previous year and your AGI that year wasn't over $150k, then there is a 'safe harbor' and you won't owe any form-2210 penalty -- although you must keep enough money on hand to pay the tax by April 15. But for your second year and onwards, your previous year now includes SE amounts and this doesn't help. Similar/related:"}
{"id": "136850", "text": "\"Yes, this is a miscellaneous itemized deduction. https://www.irs.gov/publications/p529/ar02.html For this to impact your taxes, you have to be itemizing deductions (have total deductions greater than standard deduction), and the total of all miscellaneous deductions needs to exceed the \"\"2% floor\"\" described in the IRS link above.\""}
{"id": "136862", "text": "\"One common rule of thumb: you can probably get 4% or better returns on your investments ('\"\"typical market rate of return is 8%, derate to allow for inflation and off years). Figure out what kind of income you will want in retirement and divide by 0.04 to get the savings you need to accumulate to support that.   This doesn't allow for the fact that your needs are also going to increase with inflation; you can make a guess at that and use an inflated needs estimate.  Not sophisticated,  not precise, but it's a quick and dirty ballpark estimate. And sometimes it's surprisingly close to what a proper model would say.\""}
{"id": "136932", "text": "No, if you are a nonresident alien, you cannot deduct sales tax. You can only deduct state income tax. 1040NR Schedule A (which is page 3 of 1040NR) does not contain an option for sales tax, like 1040 Schedule A does. If you are a resident alien, then you can deduct sales tax."}
{"id": "137044", "text": "For the present if you can't figure out anything big with a small budget,  then start something small e.g Make brownies,  bake cakes etc experiment and put up your name tag on the product and see if your friends buy some stock from you,  then link them all on facebook.  If you are good with your product,  people wouldn't care a lot about the packaging add-ons or frills and if orders start coming consistently well, then implement your book build systems, jack up prices,  etc. But don't blow all your cash on day one if don't have a queue waiting for your goodies."}
{"id": "137251", "text": "You are correct. She cannot claim the initial loss of $1,000 on her taxes, she can only report the $500 profit. However, the IRS does allow her to add the $1,000 loss to the basis cost of her replacement shares. e.g."}
{"id": "137267", "text": "Paying off the high-interest debt is a good first start. Paying interest, or compound interest on debt is like paying somebody to make you poor. As for your 401k, you want to contribute enough to get the full match from your employer. You might also consider checking out the fees associated with your 401k with an online fee analyzer. If it turns out you're getting reamed with fees, you can reduce them by fiddling with your investments. Checking your investment options is always a good idea since jobs frequently change them. Opening an IRA is a good call. If you're eligible for both Roth and Traditional IRAs, consider the following: Most financial institutions (brokers or banks) can help you open an IRA in a matter of minutes. If you shop around, you will find very cheap or even no fee options. Many brokers might try to get your business by giving away something for \u2018free.' Just make sure you read the fine print so you understand the conditions of their promotional offer.  Whichever IRA you choose, you want to make sure that it's managed properly. Some people might say, \u2018go for it, do it yourself\u2019 but I strongly disagree with that approach. Stock picking is a waste of time and market timing rarely works.  I'd look into flat fee financial advisors. You have lots of options. Just make sure they hear you out, and can design/execute an investment plan specific to your needs At a minimum, they should: Hope this is helpful."}
{"id": "137393", "text": "\"As you clarified in the comments, it is not a contract work but rather an additional temporary assignment with the same employer. You were paid for it in form of a \"\"bonus\"\" - one time irregular payment, instead of regular periodic payments. Irregular wage payments fall under the flat rate withholding rule (the 25% for Federal, some States have similar rules for State withholding). This is not taxes, this is withholding. Withholding is money the employer takes from your salary and forwards to the IRS on the account of your tax liability, but it is not in itself your tax liability. When you do your annual tax return, you'll calculate the actual tax you were supposed to pay, and the difference between what was withheld and your actual tax will be refunded to you (or owed by you, if not enough was withheld). You can control the regular pay withholding using W4 form.\""}
{"id": "137852", "text": "I think the advice Bob is being given is good. Bob shouldn't sell his investments just because their price has gone down. Selling cheap is almost never a good idea. In fact, he should do the opposite: When his investments become cheaper, he should buy more of them, or at least hold on to them. Always remember this rule: Buy low, sell high. This might sound illogical at first, why would someone keep an investment that is losing value? Well, the truth is that Bob doesn't lose or gain any money until he sells. If he holds on to his investments, eventually their value will raise again and offset any temporary losses. But if he sells as soon as his investments go down, he makes the temporary losses permanent. If Bob expects his investments to keep going down in the future, naturally he feels tempted to sell them. But a true investor doesn't try to anticipate what the market will do. Trying to anticipate market fluctuations is speculating, not investing. Quoting Benjamin Graham: The most realistic distinction between the investor and the speculator is found in their attitude toward stock-market movements. The speculator's primary interest lies in anticipating and profiting from market fluctuations. The investor's primary interest lies in acquiring and holding suitable securities at suitable prices. Market movements are important to him in a practical sense, because they alternately create low price levels at which he would be wise to buy and high price levels at which he certainly should refrain from buying and probably would be wise to sell. Assuming that the fund in question is well-managed, I would refrain from selling it until it goes up again."}
{"id": "137856", "text": "I suspect you will need to consult with a tax professional on this one.  In New York you would need to continue to file returns even if you did no business there until the partnership is dissolved.  But I have no idea if Cali has anything rules like that.  I would suspect since the partnership is on going the answer is no.  Even though you plan no further business in Cali the potential exists that you could return there(even if only in theory)."}
{"id": "137901", "text": "If you're in the USA and looking to retire in 10 years, pay your Social Security taxes? :P Just kidding. Do a search for Fixed Rate Annuities."}
{"id": "138065", "text": "It really depends on the type of business  you are running.  If there is any chance of liability, you should protect yourself with an LLC.  Then it is much more difficult for them to sue and take personal assets.  For example, if you are a wedding photographer, you would want to be an LLC in case you lose someones pictures."}
{"id": "138112", "text": "if rent, health care, college, doctor fees, drug prescription fees, lawyer fees, car repair mechanic fees weren't so expensive, then Americans would be living the good life, enjoying cheap deflationary books on Amazon and the no-change-in-price-for-the-last-decade prices of electronics, cars, and consumer goods from Wal-mart and newegg."}
{"id": "138283", "text": "\"If one takes a slightly more expansive view of the word \"\"saving\"\" to include most forms of durable asset accumulation, I think the reason some do and most don't is a matter of a few factors, I will include the three that seem obvious to me: Education Most schools in the US where I live do not offer personal finance courses, and even when they do, there is no opportunity for a student to practice good financial habits in that classroom setting. I think a simple assignment that required students to track every penny that they spend over the period of a few months would help them open their eyes to how much money is spent on trivial things that they don't need. Perhaps this would be more effective in a university setting where the students are usually away from home and therefore more responsible for the spending that occurs on their own behalf. Beyond simple education about personal finances, most people have no clue how the various financial markets work. If they understood, they would not allow inflation to eat away at their savings, but that's a separate topic from why people do not save. Culture Since much of the education above isn't happening, children get their primary financial education from their parents. This means that those who are wealthy teach their children how to be wealthy, and those who are poor pass on their habits to children who often also end up poor. Erroneous ideas about consumption vs. investment and its economic effects also causes some bad policy encouraging people to live beyond their means and use credit unwisely, but if you live in a country where the average person expects to eat out regularly and trade in their automobiles as soon as they experienced their highest rate of depreciation, it can be hard to recognize bad financial behavior for what it is. Collective savings rates reflect a lot of individuals who are emulating each other's bad behavior. Discipline Even when someone is educated about finances, they may not establish good habits of budgeting regularly, tracking spending, and setting financial goals. For me, it helps to be married to someone who has similar financial goals, because we budget monthly and any major purchases (over $100 or so) must be agreed upon at the beginning of the month (with obvious exceptions for emergencies). This eliminates any impulsive spending, which is probably 90% of the battle for me. Some people do not need to account to someone else in order to spend wisely, but everyone should find a system that works for them and helps them to maintain some financial discipline.\""}
{"id": "138383", "text": "Bond ETFs are just another way to buy a bond mutual fund.  An ETF lets you trade mutual fund shares the way you trade stocks, in small share-size increments.  The content of this answer applies equally to both stock and bond funds. If you are intending to buy and hold these securities, your main concerns should be purchase fees and expense ratios.  Different brokerages will charge you different amounts to purchase these securities.  Some brokerages have their own mutual funds for which they charge no trading fees, but they charge trading fees for ETFs.  Brokerage A will let you buy Brokerage A's mutual funds for no trading fee but will charge a fee if you purchase Brokerage B's mutual fund in your Brokerage A account. Some brokerages have multiple classes of the same mutual fund.  For example, Vanguard for many of its mutual funds has an Investor class (minimum $3,000 initial investment), Admiral class (minimum $10,000 initial investment), and an ETF (share price as initial investment).  Investor class has the highest expense ratio (ER).  Admiral class and the ETF generally have much lower ER, usually the same number.  For example, Vanguard's Total Bond Market Index mutual fund has Investor class (symbol VBMFX) with 0.16% ER, Admiral (symbol VBTLX) with 0.06% ER, and ETF (symbol BND) with 0.06% ER (same as Admiral).  See Vanguard ETF/mutual fund comparison page.  Note that you can initially buy Investor class shares with Vanguard and Vanguard will automatically convert them to the lower-ER Admiral class shares when your investment has grown to the Admiral threshold. Choosing your broker and your funds may end up being more important than choosing the form of mutual fund versus ETF.  Some brokers charge very high purchase/redemption fees for mutual funds.  Many brokers have no ETFs that they will trade for free.  Between funds, index funds are passively managed and are just designed to track a certain index; they have lower ERs.  Actively managed funds are run by managers who try to beat the market; they have higher ERs and tend to actually fall below the performance of index funds, a double whammy. See also Vanguard's explanation of mutual funds vs. ETFs at Vanguard. See also Investopedia's explanation of mutual funds vs. ETFs in general."}
{"id": "138418", "text": ""}
{"id": "138698", "text": "\"I suspect this is a function of deregulated banks' desire to write and flip as many mortgages as possible. The best targets for this sales push were naturally those with the most education, who tended to have the best credit ratings and most secure jobs.   The last time I bought a house, the mortgage salesman practically lit up when looking at my income and credit score, pushing me hard to borrow more. \"\"You could buy a lot more house than this!\"\" he said. \"\"You could buy apartments as an investment or for resale!\"\"  I resisted temptation, thank heaven, but it's all too easy to see how millions of others didn't.\""}
{"id": "138790", "text": "Google Finance portfolios take into account splits and cash deposits/withdrawals."}
{"id": "138845", "text": "\"People act like lawsuits are the end of the world, her suing shouldn't be considered a threat, it should be considered the accurate course of action to resolve contractual obligations. Of course, it would be convenient if she did nothing at all!  If you believe her real goal is to \"\"get it off her credit\"\", then have her come refinance with you. This will give you the opportunity to not have her on it and you to get different terms. Of course, if your credit still is poor then this option also exacerbates the inconvenience. None of the options sounds like they will ruin your credit (unless you are scrounging for cash through credit facilities to pay her off). You have several completely benign options available.\""}
{"id": "138855", "text": "There is a funny story about that.  If you were visiting Apple and Jobs was taking you to lunch in the cafe - he would insist on paying.  Employees, get to checkout and have their badge scanned and the cost of the food is deducted from their paycheck.  So why did Steve always insist on treating for lunch?  He was enjoying all he (and guests) could eat for $1 a year."}
{"id": "139059", "text": "\"Summary: It's because you are effectively contributing more money in the second case, so you have more money at the end.  The effect of being covered by an employer retirement plan (in the case of a 401(k), that means either you or your employer contributed to it during the year) is that it prevents you from deducting Traditional IRA contributions unless your income is below a very low level (for Single filing status, it phases out at an MAGI of between $62k and $72k). Since you are unable to deduct the Traditional IRA contribution, but you entered that you are still making the full $5500 contribution every year, that means you are making a non-deductible contribution of $5500 every year instead of a deductible contribution. Nondeductible contributions are \"\"after-tax\"\", whereas deductible contributions are \"\"pre-tax\"\" (because your taxable income is reduced by the amount of the contribution, so you effectively don't pay income tax on the income you used to contribute). $1 of pre-tax money is not the same as $1 of after-tax money. If your marginal tax rate is 25%, then $1 of pre-tax money is equivalent to $0.75 of after-tax money. However, since in both cases you are putting in the same nominal amount of contribution ($5500), but one is pre-tax and one is after-tax, in the after-tax case you are effectively contributing more money, i.e. more money is taken out from your bank account that year. The $5500 pre-tax contribution is equivalent to only $5500 * 0.75 = $4125 after-tax, i.e. you are only short $4125 from your bank account at the end of the year after making a $5500 deductible contribution, whereas you are short $5500 after making a $5500 non-deductible contribution, so it's not a fair comparison. The non-deductible Traditional IRA contributions are not taxed when withdrawn (though the earnings earned from those contributions are still taxed), so that's why you are left with a greater amount. This is a similar situation to what happens when you try to compare a $5500 deductible Traditional IRA contribution to a $5500 Roth IRA contribution -- it will look like the Roth IRA case leaves you with much more money, but that's again because you are effectively contributing more money, because the Roth IRA contribution is after-tax, so it's not a fair comparison. (The Roth IRA case will produce a much greater \"\"advantage\"\" than the non-deductible Traditional IRA contribution case, because for a Roth IRA, both the contributions and earnings will not be taxed at withdrawal.)\""}
{"id": "139366", "text": "There's a ton of great advice here.  It's very challenging to come up with something that hasn't already been suggested.  I'm curious to know how many years you have left to pay down the mortgage at the regular rate of payment.  If it's more than 15 years, it might be worthwhile to consider refinancing your mortgage to a shorter term (15 years or even 10 years if your income supports it).  Rates on fixed-interest mortgages at those terms are down in the 3% range and lower (at least according to bankrate.com).  Refinancing to a shorter term would be another way of paying off your home faster (with fewer of those dollars going toward interest payments). If you've got fewer than 15 years left to pay off your mortgage, following any of the other advice you've received here should keep you in great financial shape."}
{"id": "139654", "text": "The value of a company is, simplified, the sum of the value of the equity and the value of the debt. There are some other things to add/subtract to that, but just think about those for now.  You could also say the value of a company is the value of its assets, or more precisely the value of the net cash flows those assets will generate in the future.  So let's say you want to start a company, so you want to buy some assets. Maybe you want to buy a $200 asset. Well, you only have $100, so you take out a loan (debt) for $100 for the remainder. You buy the asset and start generating income.  Let's say after a month you get bored and decide to sell the company. Let's assume the value of the assets hasn't changed. Your equity is worth $100, and you find a buyer who is willing to pay $100 for your company. Great! Right?  Well there's still the $100 loan you owe, so you have to pay that back. And suddenly you now have $0.   So in fact, you should have negotiated $200 with the buyer, because that's what the assets are actually worth. Then you can pay back the loan and still have the $100 in equity you deserve. (Alternatively, you could have negotiated the buyer to assume responsibility for the loan; same outcome for you.)  Did that help?"}
{"id": "139978", "text": "First, many banks do not keep the loan. Even if they send you a payment notice and process the monthly payment, there's still a good chance the loan itself was packed up and sold to investors. Collateralizing mortgages, in and of itself, is not inherently dangerous. But the loan definitely needs a house behind it. If you found a bank that keeps its loans, it would be a tough sell. You'd be asking them to trust that you've chosen the right number to match up with the house you intend to buy. And then they'd need to have another round of processing to turn this into a loan with normal collateral (i.e. put a lien on the house and tie them together.)"}
{"id": "139998", "text": "\"This is an unfortunate situation for you.  You have zero chance at your question number 1, if someone was going to bend this rule for you it would have happened already.  The answer to question number 2 is pursue solution number 3. The overriding issue is that the IRS makes these rules, not the employer/plan sponsor or the administrator.  You can't talk the plan administrator in to reimbursing you, their system likely doesn't even have a function to do so. FSA timing issues can be complex and I think that's the root of your issue because when an expense can be incurred (date of service versus date of payment) and when a claim must be filed are different things. It's really common to bend the rules on when a claim is submitted, but not when it was incurred.   It's really common for an exiting employee to have 30 days to submit expenses for reimbursement.  FSA expenses must always be incurred within the specified plan year, or within your dates of employment if you weren't employed for the entire plan year, this is specified by the IRS.  It seems like some wires were crossed when you asked this question.  You were asking \"\"can I still incur claims\"\" and they were hearing \"\"how long do I have to submit an expense that has already been incurred.\"\" Some plans allow COBRA continuation on FSA which generally does not make sense.  Your contributions to the plan would use after tax dollars but for folks who know they have an eligible expense coming it can make sense to continue via COBRA in retain your eligibility under the plan so you can incur a claim after your employment termination. Regarding number 3.  This sort of reimbursement would be outside the plan, no precedent is necessary.  You've gotten them to claim it was their mistake, they're going to reimburse you for their mistake, it has nothing to do with the FSA. Good luck.\""}
{"id": "140038", "text": "Yes, if their record keeping is faulty or failed. It is best to keep all records of repayment.  Incomplete records such as signing for a loan yet no repayment receipt can be at least a headache and at most expensive. The most important document is a record of 0 balance then there is nothing that the courts will allow creditors to collect if their records are faulty."}
{"id": "140049", "text": "A Credit Default Swap is a derivative, a financial contract with a value dependent upon another asset. A CDS, in essence, is exactly what it sounds like a swap upon default. The typical arrangement is that a holder of non-risk free credit enters into an arrangement with a counterparty to pay the counterparty a portion of the income received from the non-risk free credit in exchange for being able to force the counterparty to deliver risk free credit if the non-risk free credit defaults. Banks use this mechanism to reduce the risk of the loans they produce while packaging them to be resold to investors.  Banks will typically buy CDSes on mortgages and corporate bonds, paying part of the income from interest payments received, to have the right to force counterparties, typically hedge funds and insurance companies, to swap national Treasuries upon the event that the mortgages or corporates default.  The banks receive less income yet are able to take on more inventory to sell to investors so that more loans can be made to borrowers, households and corporations. Hedge funds typically take on more complex arrangements while insurance companies sell CDSes because they are usually overflowing with risk-free assets yet are starved for income."}
{"id": "140135", "text": "\"&gt;&gt;Have enough funds to run the business and pay yourself the first year, plus 30%  &gt;This is going to vary wildly depending on the particular business. So much so that a rule of thumb would be impossible to define.  Absolutely.  One of the things that varies \"\"widely\"\" is what amount constitutes the **\"\"pay yourself the first year\"\"** -- which will fall anywhere on a wide spectrum from the low end that is essentially below poverty level (someone young, used to living as we used\\* to say \"\"like a college student\"\" -- needing only enough to cover a minimal \"\"survival\"\") to someone who has ridiculously extravagant needs (married with a family, McMansion mortgage and multiple \"\"new\"\" status vehicles, etc) that they expect to maintain -- and then the additional 30% grows in proportion *on top* of that subjective base figure.  \\* I wrote \"\"used to say\"\" because we are talking about *back in the day* when \"\"living like a college student\"\" meant minimalist \"\"bare-bones\"\" needs, akin to a monastic/ascetic life: a shared small dorm/boarding house room with minimal furniture, NO partying, ZERO \"\"amenities\"\" (certainly no water parks with \"\"lazy rivers\"\", no \"\"food courts\"\", etc -- nothing like most US colleges and universities have today).\""}
{"id": "140428", "text": "You might need to check yes... but I would check out New York's nonresident income tax requirements... My guess is yes if you meet the requirements, but I am not an expert nor do I work in the accounting or legal field. Check out New York's nonresident tax page explaination"}
{"id": "140568", "text": "I'd not do business under these terms. A bill of sale needs a signature, right? Your signature is your word, and your word is your bond. I wouldn't participate in such a fraud, nor would I accept this sum of cash, who knows its origins?"}
{"id": "140629", "text": "I think you're missing the fact that the trader bought the $40 call but wrote the $45 call -- i.e. someone else bought the $45 call from him.  That's why you have to subtract 600-100.  At expiration, the following happens: So $600 + -$100 = $500 total profit. Note: In reality he would probably use the shares he gets from the first call to satisfy the shares he owes on the second call, so the math is even simpler:"}
{"id": "140917", "text": "Does your employer offer a 401(k) match? If so, contribute enough to maximize that--it's free money. After that, contribute to an IRA where you can invest in funds with low expenses. After you max that out, if you still have money left over, max out your 401(k) despite the high expenses for the tax advantages. Remember when you leave the company you can roll over the balance into an IRA and switch to lower-cost investments. Of course this is general advice without knowing your situation. If you're looking to buy a home soon, for example, you might want to keep extra money in a taxable account for a downpayment rather than maxing out your 401(k)."}
{"id": "140966", "text": "You can only deduct (with the 2% AGI threshold) expenses that: You've actually incurred. I.e.: you actually paid for equipment or services provided and can show receipts for the payment. At the request of the employer. I.e.: you didn't just decide on your own to buy a new book or take a class, your employer told you to. With business necessity. I.e.: it was in order for you to do your job. And you were not reimbursed by your employer. I.e.: you went somewhere and spent your after tax money on something employer explicitly told you to pay for, and you didn't get reimbursed for that. From your story - these conditions don't hold for you. As I said in the comments - I strongly suggest you talk to a lawyer. Your story just doesn't make any sense, and I suspect your employer is doing something very fishy here."}
{"id": "141032", "text": "\"Fool's 13 steps to invest is a good starting point. Specifically, IFF all your credit cards are paid, and you made sure you've got no outstanding liabilities (that also accrues interest), stock indexes might be a good place for 5-10 years timeframes. For grad school, I'd probably look into cash ISA (or local equivalent thereof) -the rate of return is going to be lower, but having it in a separate account at least makes it mentally \"\"out of sight - out of mind\"\", so you can make sure the money's there WHEN you need it.\""}
{"id": "141164", "text": "That would be lead to eveeel and wasteful litigation.  Youre basically making a pro contingency fee structure argument.  Those incentives exists in private rights of actions which have been whittled away.  Look at the result."}
{"id": "141257", "text": "Pay to play in business is normal and completely ethical.  You want to be in the Yellow pages, you have to pay.   You want to be associated with an elite group of like businesses and share leads, you have to pay.   You want to be in the Chamber of Commerce, you have to pay.  There's tons of businesses that are in invite only groups that cost $10,000+ a year and $300 a month just for sharing leads and those leads are worth the cost."}
{"id": "141425", "text": "Banks should be risk averse by default. They make loans to people and businesses after measuring their ability to repay.  After they approve a big project loan like an apartment building, they don't give all the money to the builders upfront. They give money as progress is made and they make sure the funds are not being used inappropriately. There's no reason they couldn't do all this while owning the project, but that would also open them to lawsuits later on if anything wasn't built to code. By keeping the project at arm's length, they avoid future liability."}
{"id": "141551", "text": "In addition to all the other answers, here is a New Zealand Herald article from earlier this year about second mortgages, confirming that it is both legal and common in New Zealand.  Whether or not it is a good idea in your situation is another question."}
{"id": "142201", "text": "IRS Pub 561 says you have to use fair market value.  You cannot simply use a depreciated value. You should attempt to determine what people normally pay for comparable items, and be prepared to defend your determination with evidence in the event of an audit."}
{"id": "142242", "text": "\"I haven't dealt with this kind of thing in any way, but I found some quotes from IRS publications which I think are relevant and hopefully help. Your scenario sounds to me like a Qualified Tuition Reduction as described in Publication 970 Tax Benefits for Education. It appears the rules are different for graduate study as opposed to pre-graduate work, though I don't see anything about any dollar amount limit. There are various requirements and exceptions, so hopefully reading through that section of the publication can help you understand whether the benefit is supposed to be taxable. If taxable, it should show up on your W-2 like any other income: Any tuition reduction that is taxable should be included as wages on your Form W-2, box 1. Report the amount from Form W-2, box 1, on line 7 (Form 1040 or Form 1040A) or line 1 (Form 1040EZ).  It doesn't appear that there is any special designation or box for the tuition reduction as opposed to \"\"normal\"\" work, it just is income that's been earned like any other. If you need guidance on how much of the income is for \"\"normal\"\" work and how much is for the tuition reduction, you probably need to see if you can figure it out from her pay stubs, or contact the university's HR department. Well, looking through the credits I see in Publication 970, there appear to be two possible credits: The \"\"American opportunity credit\"\" section, under \"\"No double benefit allowed\"\", says things like (my emphasis added): You can't do any of the following.  \u22ee My understanding from reading through the section is that expenses are only excluded if they were tax-free, so that there can't be a double-dipping of benefits. If they're included as taxable income, I think they would count under your second interpretation, that the employer paid them like any other income, and your wife spent them as educational expenses just like other students, and they would qualify for educational credits. In fact, it explicitly states: Don't reduce qualified education expenses by amounts paid with funds the student receives as: Which sure sounds to me that anything that counts as W-2 Box 1 \"\"Wages\"\" would be payments received that then the expenses were logically paid separately from. The other credit, the \"\"Lifetime Learning Credit\"\", appears to use identical language (No double benefits; and don't reduce by wages). Obviously this is just from my looking through Publication 970; there may be more nuances here and for \"\"real\"\" advice you may want to speak more to the university HR department (who perhaps have dealt with this before) and/or a real tax advisor. You might also see if you can get any sort of a \"\"receipt\"\" or even a Form 1098-T from the university of what amount was paid on your wife's behalf, to help document it is truly that she was just paid more wages and spent them on classes as far as tax law is concerned.\""}
{"id": "142265", "text": "\"JoeTaxpayer nailed it.  Here's another way to look at it: Generally, we invest in something, then might leave it there for a few years, then take it out, but don't touch it in between.  In that case, to get the final amount X(N), we need to take the initial amount, then multiply by growth in the first year, then multiply by growth in the second year, etc. So, for three years, we have: X(3) = X(0) * G(1) * G(2) * G(3) = X(0) * \"\"average annual growth\"\" ^ 3 So, here, we see that we want the average annual growth to the power three equal to the product of the annual growth rates, thus, geometric mean: geometric mean = (G(1) * G(2) * G(3)) ^ (1/3) On the other hand, consider a situation where I have three investments X,Y,Z over one year. Now I have, after one year: X(1)+Y(1)+Z(1) = X(0)*G(1,X) + Y(0)*G(1,Y) + Z(0)*G(1,Z) = ( X(0)+Y(0)+Z(0) ) * \"\"average annual growth\"\" Now, in this case, if we assume X(0) = Y(0) = Z(0) = 1, i.e. I put equal amounts in each, we see that the average annual growth rate we want in this case is the arithmetic mean: arithmetic mean = (G(1,X) + G(1,Y) + G(1,Z)) / 3 (if we had unequal amounts at the beginning, it would be a weighted average). TL;DR:\""}
{"id": "142314", "text": "Banks want to be paid back, and if you don't, then want to be able to sell your property for enough money to cover what you didn't pay back. Your credit rating will determine the interest rate you pay, and this affects how much you can borrow because a higher interest rate means that you can borrow less on the same terms than you could with a lower interest rate. Paying 50% down will bring your payment way down, of course, and will improve everything about your loan (debt to income ratio, debt to equity) but you'll likely still be charged the higher interest rate based on your credit rating. This, of course, is contingent on the property's value appraising properly."}
{"id": "142623", "text": "\"You need to hire a tax professional and have them sort it out for you properly and advise you on how to proceed next. Don't do it yourself, you're way past the stage when you could. You're out of compliance, and you're right - there are penalties that a professional might know how to mitigate, and maybe even negotiate a waiver with the IRS, depending on the circumstances of the case. Be careful of answers like \"\"you don't need to pay anything\"\" that are based on nothing of facts. Based on what you said in the question and in the comments, it actually sounds like you do have to pay something, and you're in trouble with the IRS already. It might be that you misunderstood something in the past (e.g.: you said the business had filed taxes before, but in fact that might never happened and you're confusing \"\"business filed taxes\"\" with \"\"I filed schedule C\"\") or it might be the actual factual representation of things (you did in fact filed a tax return for your business with the IRS, either form 1120 of some kind or 1065). In any case a good licensed (CPA or EA) professional will help you sort it out and educate you on what you need to do in the future.\""}
{"id": "142658", "text": "It's still tax-deferred savings, unless the fees are terrible it's going to be better than investments that aren't tax deferred."}
{"id": "142962", "text": "this piece offers a step-by-step guide you can use to get rid of errors in your annual credit report. it also tackles pointers you should always remember when writing a credit dispute letter. please tell your friends about it so that they might read it too!"}
{"id": "143020", "text": "I want to mention I've found 2 options for more powerful tools that can be used to manage asset allocation:  Advantages/Disadvantages: Vanguard Morningstar X-ray I hope this helps others struggling with asset allocation."}
{"id": "143057", "text": "Is there any instance in which a large company whose corporate bonds are investment grade, find it more attractive to take out a bank loan to raise finance rather than underwrite bonds?   To my knowledge (I\u2019m a first year at university so I\u2019m not 100% sure) bonds are comparatively cheaper (lower effective interest rate), does not have the same caveats and regulations involved with usage of the loan (I.e. no need to buy insurance) and allow them to raise far more than most banks would be willing to risk (I know loan syndication exists but it\u2019s still rare to my knowledge).   Why would a such a company have ANY bank loan debt whatsoever if issuing bonds are objectively better? The only one I can fathom is if the loan is so incredibly small that It\u2019s more time consuming to underwrite bonds but 1.) I don\u2019t know if that\u2019s the case, 2.) Why would a large company do this if they could simply pay out less dividends and reinvest a slightly larger portion of profits?"}
{"id": "143060", "text": "Hang on... $963,100,000 revenue in US book sales, divided by 313,000,000 population gives... $3.07 spent per American per year on books, audiobooks and ebooks.   Somethings not right, these figures are clearly incorrect - and this IS meant to be entire consumption, not a sample."}
{"id": "143066", "text": "\"I don't think it really matters, my understanding is that as a sole trader there is no distinction between your personal and business tax affairs. The distinction between your personal and business account is mainly for your own personal benefit to make it easier to differentiate between \"\"wages\"\" and retained earnings. If you want to maintain this distinction with regard to tax then you need to somehow differentiate between tax paid on your \"\"wage\"\" and tax paid on retained earnings. You could then either make two payments, or pay from either and transfer the difference from the other. Either way, it's just a matter of perspective rather than something with a physical difference.\""}
{"id": "143238", "text": "\"There are a few reasons why an index mutual fund may be preferable to an ETF: I looked at the iShare S&P 500 ETF and it has an expense ratio of 0.07%.  The Vanguard Admiral S&P 500 index has an expense ratio of 0.05% and the Investor Shares have an expense ratio of 0.17%, do I don't necessarily agree with your statement \"\"admiral class Vanguard shares don't beat the iShares ETF\"\".\""}
{"id": "143622", "text": "I have a CPA. They said that it isn't possible. However, I've seen on message boards that it indeed IS possible, multiple times. I'll likely reach out to another CPA. However, I am interested to hear from somebody who has done this before, so that I at least have a name or defined process for what I'm attempting to do."}
{"id": "143655", "text": "\"An option is a financial instrument instrument that gives you the right, but not the obligation, to do some transaction in the future at a given price. An employee stock option is a kind of \"\"call option\"\" -- it gives you the right, but not the obligation, to buy the stock at a certain price (the \"\"exercise price\"\", usually set as the price of the stock when the option was granted). The idea is that you would \"\"exercise\"\" the option (buy the stock at the given price as provided by the option), if the value of the stock is higher than the exercise price, and not if it is lower. The option is gifted to you. But that does not mean you get any stock. If and when you choose to exercise the option, you would buy the stock with your own money. At what time you can exercise the option (and how many shares you can exercise at a given time) will be specified in the agreement. Usually, you can only exercise a particular share after it has \"\"vested\"\" (according to some vesting schedule), and you lose the ability to exercise after you no longer work for the company (plus perhaps a grace period), or after the option expires.\""}
{"id": "143862", "text": "You're on the right track, and yes, that small difference is subject to income taxes. Do you use a payroll service? I do the same thing and use my payroll software to tweak the salary until the paycheck is just a few dollars every month (we run payroll once a month), with the rest going to the 401(k) and payroll taxes. So we're rounding up just a bit just so there's an actual paycheck with a positive number, and a bit does get withheld for fed/state income tax.  Also keep in mind you can make a company match. If your plan is a solo 401(k) with just you and your wife as the sole employees, consider the 25% match for both of you. The match is not subject to payroll taxes because it is a company expense. IRS web page: http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/One-Participant-401(k)-Plans"}
{"id": "144030", "text": "\"There are many questions and good answers here regarding investment choices. The first decision you need to make is how involved do you intend to be in investment activity. If you plan to be actively investing by yourself, you should look for questions here about making investment choices. If you intend to be a more passive investor, look for posts by \"\"Bogleheads\"\", who focus on broad-focused, low cost investments. This is the optimal choice for many people. If you are not comfortable managing investments at all, you need to figure out how to find a competent and reasonably priced financial advisor to meet with and guide your investment strategy. This advice generally costs about 1-2% of your total managed assets annually.\""}
{"id": "144054", "text": "\"Google for \"\"unclaimed funds\"\" You might need to do it for each state separately.\""}
{"id": "144114", "text": "As you are in UK, you should think in terms of Tax Free (interest and accumulated capital gains) ISA type investments for the long term AND/OR open a SIPP (Self Invested Pension Plan) account where you get back the tax you have paid on the money you deposit for your old age. Pensions are  the best bet for money you do not need at present while ISAs are suitable for short term 5 years plus  or longer."}
{"id": "144190", "text": "You can receive funds from US Client as an individual. There is no legal requirement for you to have a company. If the transactions are large say more than 20 lacs in a year, its advisable to open a Private Ltd. Although its simple opening & Registering a company [A CA or a Laywer would get one at a nominal price of Rs 5000] you can do yourself. Whatever be the case, its advisable to have seperate accounts for this business / professional service transactions. Maintain proper records of the funds received. There are certain benefits you can claim, a CA can help you. Paying taxes in Advance is your responsibility and hence make sure you keep paying every quarter as advance tax. Related questions Indian citizen working from India as freelancer for U.S.-based company. How to report the income & pay tax in India? Freelancer in India working for Swiss Company Freelancing to UK company from India How do I account for money paid to colleagues out of my professional income?"}
{"id": "144304", "text": "Buy a home. A home is the first and best investment, u can own a home with as little as 3% down and as u pay for your living u pay it off.....also banks will always give you equity loans in case you need your money"}
{"id": "144439", "text": "Depending on your income, you may owe AMT instead of the taxes from the regular code.  Even if you don't do that, you may hit the place where you have to at least check if you owe AMT. As you probably know, AMT was established early on to catch the wealthiest of tax payers who were able to use various loop holes in the code to pay much less tax than one would expect.  Over time the limits on AMT have not risen with the rising wage gap, and AMT catches an increasing number of tax payers each year.  If the limit is not raised at all for 2010 then it will catch even more people this year.   AMT has worked it's way into the upper-middle class fairly solidly, especially if you exercise stock options whose strike price is significantly different than the current sale price."}
{"id": "144628", "text": "Why do all this work yourself? Pay a modest price to have a professional do this for you. Look at the tickers PUTX, PUTW."}
{"id": "144698", "text": "A USD bank draft from any of the major Canadian banks is a good solution. They clear quickly in the U.S. I use them frequently and have never had a problem depositing them in a U.S. bank account.  If you carry more than $10k across the border, even as a cheque, be sure to declare it."}
{"id": "144773", "text": "That actually sheds some useful light on the whole matter. As long as $client gets the paperwork in order, all will likely be well.   Had a discussion with $client today about their recurring practices, just to establish a baseline for their understanding of the same. Not because I know there is or is not a concern, but because their business is risk management and that is a risk worth managing. Or at least worth understanding the scope of the risk and potential exposure."}
{"id": "144824", "text": "There are not as many options here as you fear. If you have no other investments outside this 401K it is even easier. Outside accounts include IRA, Roth IRA, taxable investments (mutual funds, ETF, individual stocks), Employee stock purchase plans. Amount: make sure you put enough in to get all the company match. I assume that in your case the 9% will do so, but check your documents. The company match will be with pre-tax funds.  Roth vs Regular 401K? Most people in their lifetime will need a mix of Roth and Regular retirement accounts. You need to determine if it is better for you to pay the tax on your contributions now or later. Which accounts? If you are going to invest in a target date fund, you can ignore the rest of the options. The target date fund is a mixture of investments that will change over the decades. Calculate which one fits your expected retirement date and go with it. If you want to be able to control the mix, then you will need to pick several funds. The selection depends on what non-401K investments you have. Now here is what I considered the best advice.  Decide Roth or regular, and just put the money into the most appropriate target date fund with the Roth/regular split you want. Then after the money starts flowing into your account, research the funds involved, the fees for those funds, and how you want to invest. Then move the money into the funds you want. Don't waste another day deciding how to invest. Just get started. The best part of a 401K, besides the match, is that you can move money between funds without worrying about taxes. If you realize that you want to put extra emphasis on the foreign stocks, or Mid-cap; just move the funds and redirect future contributions."}
{"id": "145404", "text": "\"Someone has to hand out cash to the seller. Even if no physical money changes hands (and I've bought a house; I can tell you a LOT of money changes hands at closing in at least the form of a personal check), and regardless of exactly how the bank accounts for the actual disbursement of the loan, the net result is that the buyer has cash that they give the seller, and are now in debt to the bank for least that amount (but, they now have a house). Now, the bank probably didn't have that money just sitting in its vault. Money sitting in a vault is money that is not making more money for the bank; therefore most banks keep only fractionally more than the percentage of deposit balances that they are required to keep by the Feds. There are also restrictions on what depositors' money can be spent on, and loans are not one of them; the model of taking in money in savings accounts and then loaning it out is what caused the savings and loan collapse in the 80s. So, to get the money, it turns to investors; the bank sells bonds, putting itself in debt to bond holders, then takes that money and loans it out at a higher rate, covering the interest on the bond and making itself a tidy profit for its own shareholders. Banks lose money on defaults in two ways. First, they lose all future interest payments that would have been made on the loan. Technically, this isn't \"\"revenue\"\" until the interest is calculated for each month and \"\"accrues\"\" on the loan; therefore, it doesn't show on the balance sheet one way or the other. However, the holders of those bonds will expect a return, and the banks no longer have the mortgage payment to cover the coupon payments that they themselves have to pay bondholders, creating cash flow problems. The second, and far more real and damaging, way that banks lose money on a foreclosure is the loss of collateral value. A bank virtually never offers an unsecured \"\"signature loan\"\" for a house (certainly not at the advertised 3-4% interest rates). They want something to back up the loan, so if you disappear off the face of the earth they have a clear claim to something that can help them recover their money. Usually, that's the house itself; if you default, they get the house from you and sell it to recover their money. Now, a major cause of foreclosure is economic downturn, like the one we had in 2009 and are still recovering from. When the economy goes in the crapper, a lot of things we generally consider \"\"stores of value\"\" lose that value, because the value of the whatzit (any whatzit, really) is based on what someone else would pay to have it. When fewer people are looking to buy that whatzit, demand drops, bringing prices with it. Homes and real estate are one of the real big-ticket items subject to this loss of value; when the average Joe doesn't know whether he'll have a job tomorrow, he doesn't go house-hunting. This average Joe may even be looking to sell an extra parcel of land or an income property for cash, increasing supply, further decreasing prices. Economic downturn can often increase crime and decrease local government spending on upkeep of public lands (as well as homeowners' upkeep of their own property). By the \"\"broken window\"\" effect, this makes the neighborhood even less desirable in a vicious cycle. What made this current recession a double-whammy for mortgage lenders is that it was caused, in large part, by a housing bubble; cheap money for houses made housing prices balloon rapidly, and then when the money became more expensive (such as in sub-prime ARMs), a lot of those loans, which should never have been signed off on by either side, went belly-up. Between the loss of home value (a lot of which will likely turn out to be permanent; that's the problem with a bubble, things never recover to their peak) and the adjustment of interest rates on mortgages to terms that will actually pay off the loan, many homeowners found themselves so far underwater (and sinking fast) that the best financial move for them was to walk away from the whole thing and try again in seven years. Now the bank's in a quandary. They have this loan they'll never see repaid in cash, and they have this home that's worth maybe 75% of the mortgage's outstanding balance (if they're lucky; some homes in extremely \"\"distressed\"\" areas like Detroit are currently trading for 30-40% of what they sold for just before the bubble burst). Multiply that by, say, 100,000 distressed homes with similar declines in value, and you're talking about tens of billions of dollars in losses. On top of that, the guarantor (basically the bank's insurance company against these types of losses) is now in financial trouble themselves, because they took on so many contracts for debt that turned out to be bad (AIG, Fannie/Freddie); they may very well declare bankruptcy and leave the bank holding the bag. Even if the guarantor remains solvent (as they did thanks to generous taxpayer bailouts), the bank's swap contract with the guarantor usually requires them to sell the house, thus realizing the loss between what they paid and what they finally got back, before the guarantor will pay out. But nobody's buying houses anymore, because prices are on their way down; the only people who'd buy a house now versus a year from now (or two or three years) are the people who have no choice, and if you have no choice you're probably in a financial situation that would mean you'd never be approved for the loan anyway. In order to get rid of them, the bank has to sell them at auction for pennies on the dollar. That further increases the supply of cheap homes and further drives down prices, making even the nicer homes the bank's willing to keep on the books worth less (there's a reason these distresed homes were called \"\"toxic assets\"\"; they're poisonous to the banks whether they keep or sell them). Meanwhile, all this price depression is now affecting the people who did everything right; even people who bought their homes years before the bubble even formed are watching years of equity-building go down the crapper. That's to say nothing of the people with prime credit who bought at just the wrong time, when the bubble was at its peak. Even without an adjusting ARM to contend with, these guys are still facing the fact that they paid top dollar for a house that likely will not be worth its purchase price again in their lifetime. Even with a fixed mortgage rate, they'll be underwater, effectively losing their entire payment to the bank as if it were rent, for much longer than it would take to have this entire mess completely behind them if they just walked away from the whole thing, moved back into an apartment and waited it out. So, these guys decide on a \"\"strategic default\"\"; give the bank the house (which doesn't cover the outstanding balance of course) and if they sue, file bankruptcy. That really makes the banks nervous; if people who did everything right are considering the hell of foreclosure and bankruptcy to be preferable to their current state of affairs, the bank's main threat keeping people in their homes is hollow. That makes them very reluctant to sign new mortgages, because the risk of default is now much less certain. Now people who do want houses in this market can't buy them, further reducing demand, further decreasing prices... You get the idea. That's the housing collapse in a nutshell, and what banks and our free market have been working through for the past five years, with only the glimmer of a turnaround picking up home sales.\""}
{"id": "145458", "text": "If you are investing for 10 years, then you just keep buying at whatever price the fund is at. This is called dollar-cost averaging. If the fund is declining in value from when you first bought it, then when you buy more, the AVERAGE price you bought in at is now lower. So therefore your losses are lower AND when it goes back up you will make more. Even if it continues to decline in value then you keep adding more money in periodically, eventually your position will be so large that on the first uptick you will have a huge percent gain. Anyway this is only suggested because you are in it for 10 years. Other people's investment goals vary."}
{"id": "145864", "text": "\"As the comments above have been trying to get across, the prospective employer is offering to pay you for the bonus/unvested compensation that you would be losing by jumping ship right now to go work for them.  They are not offering to buy any securities that you already hold, regardless of whether they're profitable or unprofitable. Example 1. You participate in your current company's 401(k), and your company matches your contributions at 50%.  However, the matching funds are not yours immediately; they vest in 20%/year increments until you have been at the company for 5 years.  Let's say you've been there for 3 years and have contributed $50K to the plan.  Your company has matched you at $25K, but only 60% of that ($15K) has vested.  If you leave right now for the new employer, you're leaving $10K behind.  So the new employer might offer to \"\"buy out\"\" (i.e. pay you) that $10K to help encourage you to switch now.  You might then counter their offer by pointing out that if you stay where you are that $10K is coming to you tax-deferred, whereas their $10K signing bonus would be taxed.  So you ask for $15K instead. Example 2. You work for a Wall Street investment bank.  Each December you receive a performance bonus.  Since you began working there, your three yearly bonuses have been (in chronological order) $500K, $750K, and $1M.  It's June, so you've worked halfway towards your next bonus.  You have a lot of incentive to NOT leave your current employer.  A competing employer may offer to \"\"buy you out\"\" of your anticipated bonus by giving you a $1.25M signing bonus (since you'd almost certainly not be eligible for a performance bonus during your first year there).  You might negotiate with them and say \"\"I'm on track for $2M this year\"\", and then they would figure out if you're really worth that much to them. So you can see this all has to do with the prospective employer trying to compensate you for any income you're already counting on receiving from your current employer.  By jumping ship now you would be foregoing that guaranteed/expected income, so the competitor wants to remove that anchor that might be holding you back from making the move. Stocks/options that you already own are irrelevant to the prospective employer.  Since you wouldn't be giving those up by changing jobs, there's no reason for them to factor into the equation.\""}
{"id": "146020", "text": "I would do a Roth Conversion and put it at the same place where the rest of your Roth funds are before withdrawing it."}
{"id": "146027", "text": "An aim of the government to fetch out all the illegal financial dealings which has been deleted or de-activated more than 11.44 lakh permanent account numbers (PANs) as of 27th of July in cases where multiple numbers were found allotted to one person."}
{"id": "146388", "text": "You've got two options.  Deduct the business portion of the depreciation and actual expenses for operating the car.  Use the IRS standard mileage rate of $.575/mile in 2015. Multiply your business miles by the rate to calculate your deduction.  Assuming you're a sole proprietor you'll include a Schedule C to your return and claim the deduction on that form."}
{"id": "146441", "text": "\"Written with some mild snark , but no insult intended, because financial stuff can be ridiculously confusing... Looked at another way, you're basically asking if the Biblical \"\"Parable of the Talents\"\" can be implemented as a business model.  You as the investor wish to be the \"\"master\"\", with the entity doing the investing playing the part of the \"\"servant\"\". Since the law prohibits actual servitude as described in scripture, the model must substitute a contractual profit- and loss-sharing scheme. OK, based on what you've proposed, and by way of example, let's say you invested a thousand dollars. You give the investment service your money. At the end of a year, they give you back   - Your capital ($1000)  - Plus 1/2 of any profits  OR  - Less 1/2 of any losses So let's say the worst happens and they lose ALL of it. According to your proposal, they have to cover 1/2 of the loss. You end up with $500...but they end up with LESS than nothing. They will be in a deficit situation because all the expense was theirs. They don't just fail to make a profit. They go in the hole. It doesn't matter what percentages you use. Regardless of how the loss is shared, you've only guaranteed YOU can't lose all your money. The company CAN. Given a large enough investment, or enough market fluctuation, a big shared loss could shut down a smaller firm. To summarize:   - You want a service that charges you nothing   - Does all the work of expertly managing and investing your capital  - Takes on part of the risk you would normally bear  - (on top of their usual risk and liability)  - Agrees to do so solely for a percentage of any return (where higher returns will likely involve a higher degree of risk)  - AND that guarantees, after just 1 year, you'll get X% of your capital back, no matter what. Win or lose.  - Even if the market crashes and all your capital, and theirs, is wiped out Superbest, um, to be serious briefly: what you're proposing is, if nothing else, inherently unfair and inequitable. I believe you intended it as a mutually beneficial scenario, but the real-world imbalance in risk and reward prevents it being so. Any financial service that would accept those terms along with the extra degree of risk would be fiscally irresponsible. From a business standpoint it's an untenable model, and no company would build on it. It would be tantamount to corporate suicide. The requirement that a service promise to give you back X% of your money, no matter how great the loss, makes your proposal impossible. You need to think about how much all this costs, realistically, as well what kind of returns you can actually expect. And that more risk for higher return is exactly what a service could NOT take a chance on if it had to \"\"share\"\" investors' losses. Besides, it's not really sharing, now is it? They will always lose more than you, always end up in a negative situation, unable even to recoup costs. Circumstances beyond their control could result in a drop in the value that not only wipes out any profit, but requires them to pay YOU for work performed and expenses incurred on your behalf.  Why would they let anyon double-dip like that? Yeah, we all prefer getting something for nothing...but you want valuable services and for them to pay you money for the privilege of providing them? I totally agree that would be fantastic, but in this world even \"\"free\"\" doesn't come cheap anymore. And getting back to costs:  Without consistent income the service would have nowhere to work and no resources to work with. No office, computer, phone, electricity, Internet, insurance, payroll, licensing, training, maintenance, security, lobbying, etc., etc., etc. Why do people always forget overhead? There's a reason these services operate the way they do. Even the best are working with fairly slim margins in a volatile sector. They're not into 1-year gambles unlikely to cover their cost of doing business, or having to pay for a negative return out of their own pocket. Look, if you're the Biblical master asking your servant to manage things, overhead is built-in. You're taking all the risk as well. You're paying for all three servants' food, home, clothing, etc, plus you had to buy the servants themselves. So its reasonable that you reap the reward of their labor. You paid for it, and you didn't even punish the servant who buried your money in a hole. The two good servants may have done the legwork, but you took on the burden of everything else. In your proposed service, however, contrary to the servant's usual role, the servant - i.e., the company - would be assuming a portion of your risk on top of their own, yet without any guarantee of profit, income, or even coverage of costs. They're also subject to regulations, fees, liability, legal stuff, etc. that you're not, against most of which you are indemnified and held harmless. If they agree to cover a share of your loss, it exposes to greater liability and more related risk. It robs them of resources they need to  invest in their own business, while at the same time forcing them to do all the work. As a result, your model doesn't give such a service a fighting chance. Getting it off the ground and lasting past the first-year payouts would require more luck than skill.  They'd be better off heading to Vegas and the blackjack table, where the only overhead is a cheap flight and room, where the odds and rules don't change overnight, and they at least get free drinks. If none of the equivalents satisfies, then the Biblical parable appears to describe your only option for obtaining exactly what you want: Move to a country where slavery is legal and buy an investor  :-) Cheers, c\""}
{"id": "146479", "text": "From what I read, if the monthly average of the stock falls below 1 dollar, it can be delisted from the NYSE, which of course means you lose everything.  I've been playing this same stock on a day by day basis.  Twice I've finished up 15% on the day, with AMR, but  I don't plan on being able to do this for much longer though.  I dumped it all today just in case they decide to remove it this weekend."}
{"id": "146653", "text": "This serves as very crucial for the new business manager who is not adept in prospecting the outcomes and for whom, the passages are new! A minor mistake on his part could plunge the whole new venture into the backlash mode which could be potentially dangerous!For More Info:- http://www.startupmentor.co.in/"}
{"id": "146780", "text": "This amazing site will answer all your data questions. You will need some patience and willingness to spend to get the data that you want. A lot of data is available for free too` https://www.quandl.com/"}
{"id": "146926", "text": "\"You have actually asked several questions, so I think what I'll do is give you an intuition about risk-neutral pricing to get you started.  Then I think the answer to many of your questions will become clear. Physical Probability There is some probability of every event out there actually occurring, including the price of a stock going up.  That's what we call the physical probability.  It's very intuitive, but not directly useful for finding the price of something because price is not the weighted average of future outcomes.   For example, if you have a stock that is highly correlated with the market and has 50% chance of being worth $20 dollars tomorrow and a 50% chance of being worth $10, it's value today is not $15.  It will be worth less, because it's a risky stock and must earn a premium.  When you are dealing with physical probabilities, if you want to compute value you have to take the probability-weighted average of all the prices it could have tomorrow and then add in some kind of compensation for risk, which may be hard to compute. Risk-Neutral Probability Finance theory has shown that instead of computing values this way, we can embed risk-compensation into our probabilities.  That is, we can create a new set up \"\"probabilities\"\" by adjusting the probability of good market outcomes downward and increasing the probability of bad market outcomes.  This may sound crazy because these probabilities are no longer physical, but it has the desirable property that we then use this set of probabilities to price of every asset out there: all of them (equity, options, bonds, savings accounts, etc.).  We call these adjusted probabilities that risk-neutral probabilities.  When I say price I mean that you can multiply every outcome by its risk-neutral probability and discount at the risk-free rate to find its correct price.    To be clear, we have changed the probability of the market going up and down, not our probability of a particular stock moving independent of the market.  Because moves that are independent of the market do not affect prices, we don't have to adjust the probabilities of them happening in order to get risk-neutral probabilities. Anyway, the best way to think of risk-neutral probabilities is as a set of bogus probabilities that consistently give the correct price of every asset in the economy without having to add a risk premium. If we just take the risk-neutral probability-weighted average of all outcomes and discount at the risk-free rate, we get the price.  Very handy if you have them. Risk-Neutral Pricing We can't get risk-neutral probabilities from research about how likely a stock is to actually go up or down.  That would be the physical probability.  Instead, we can figure out the risk-neutral probabilities from prices. If a stock has only two possible prices tomorrow, U and D, and the risk-neutral probability of U is q, then Price = [ Uq + D(1-q) ] / e^(rt) The exponential there is just discounting by the risk-free rate.  This is the beginning of the equations you have mentioned.  The main thing to remember is that q is not the physical probability, it's the risk-neutral one.  I can't emphasize that enough.  If you have prespecified what U and D can be, then there is only one unknown in that equation: q. That means you can look at the stock price and solve for the risk neutral probability of the stock going up.   The reason this is useful is that you can same risk-neutral probability to price the associated option.  In the case of the option you don't know its price today (yet) but you do know how much money it will be worth if the stock moves up or down.  Use those values and the risk-neutral probability you computed from the stock to compute the option's price.  That's what's going on here.  To remember: the same risk-neutral probability measure prices everything out there.  That is, if you choose an asset, multiply each possibly outcome by its risk-neutral probability, and discount at the risk-free rate, you get its price.  In general we use prices of things we know to infer things about the risk-neutral probability measure in order to get prices we do not know.\""}
{"id": "147080", "text": "The amount of the income taxes you will owe depends upon how much income you have, after valid business expenses, also it will depend upon your filing status as well as the ownership form of your business and what state you live in.  That said, you will need to be sure to make the Federal 1040ES quarterly prepayments of your tax on time or there will be penalties. You also must remember that you will be needing to file a schedule SE with your 1040.  That is for the social security taxes you owe, which is in addition to your income taxes. With an employer/employee situation, the FICA withhoding you have seen on your paycheck are matched by the same payment by your employer.  Now that you are self-employed you are responcible for your share and the employer share as well; in this situation it is known as self-employment tax.  the amount of it will be the same as your share of FICA and half of the employer's share of FICA taxes.  If you are married and your wife also is working self-employed, then she will have to files herown schedule SE along with yours.  meaning that you will pay based on your business income and she will pay baed on hers. your 1040Es quarterly prepayment must cover your income tax and your combined (yours and hers) Self Employment taxes.  Many people will debate on the final results of the results of schedule SE vrs an employee's and an employer's payments combined.  If one were to provides a ball park percentage that would likely apply to you final total addition to your tax libility as a result of needing schedule SE would tend to fluctuate depending upon your total tax situation; many would debate it.  It has been this way since, I first studied and use this schedule decades ago.  For this reason it is best for you to review these PDF documents, Form 1040 Schedule SE Instructions and Form 1040 Schedule SE. As for your state income taxes, it will depend on the laws of the state you are based in."}
{"id": "147358", "text": "You tagged with S-Corp, so I assume that you have that tax status.  Under that situation, you don't get taxed on distributions regardless of what you call them.  You get taxed on the portion of the net income that is attributable to you through the Schedule K that the S-Corp should distribute to you when the S-Corp files its tax return.  You get taxed on that income whether or not it's distributed. If you also work for the small business, then you need to pay yourself a reasonable wage.  The amount that you distribute can be one factor in determining reasonableness.  That doesn't seem to be what you asked, but it is something to consider."}
{"id": "147439", "text": "\"This is not a full answer and I have no personal finance experience. But I have a personal story as I did this. As Vicky stated Another point: there are various schemes available to help first time   buyers. By signing up for this, you would exclude yourself from any of   those schemes in the future. I did this for my dad when I was 16 or so. I am in Canada and lost $5,000 first time buyers tax rebate. As long as many other bonuses like using your rsps for your first home. I also am having a fair amount of trouble getting a credit card, because even though I am only a part member of the mortgage they expect you to be able to cover the whole thing. So when the banks look at my income of say $3000 a month they say \"\"3000 - rent(500) - mortgage(3000)\"\" You make $-500 a month. I then explain that I do not actually pay the mortage so it is not coming out of my paycheck. They do not care. I am responsible for full payments and they consider it used.\""}
{"id": "147765", "text": "There actually are legitimate reasons, but they don't apply to most people.  Here are a few that I know of: You're self-employed and have to pay quarterly estimated taxes.  Rather than wait for the refund when you already have to pay 1/4 of next year's taxes at the same time, you just have the IRS apply to refund forward.  (so you're not out the money you owe while waiting for your refund). You're filing an amended or late return, and so you're already into the next year, and have a similar situation as #1, where your next year's taxes have already come due. You're planning on declaring bankruptcy, and you're under the Tenth Circuit, those credits might be safe from creditors For almost any other situation, you're better off taking the money, and using it to pay down debt, or put it somewhere to make interest (although, at the current rates, that might not be very much)."}
{"id": "147806", "text": "\"This model would work fine under a couple of assumptions: that market interest rates never change, and that the borrower will surely make all the payments as agreed.  But neither of those assumptions are realistic. Suppose Alice loans $1,000,000 to Bob at 4% under the terms you describe.  Bob chooses to make interest-only payments of $40,000 per year. Some time later, prevailing interest rates go up to 10%.  Now Alice would really like Bob to repay the entire principal as quickly as possible, because that money could be earning her $100,000 per year instead of only $40,000, but under the contract she has no way to force Bob to do so.  And Bob has no incentive to repay any of the principal, because he can earn more interest on it than he has to pay to Alice.  So Alice is not going to be very happy about this. You might say, but at least Alice is only losing \"\"potential\"\" money; she's still turning a profit of $10,000 per year, since her bank only charges her 3% interest.  Ah, but you're assuming that Alice can get a bank loan with a rate of 3% fixed forever.  The bank doesn't want to make such a loan either, for exactly the same reasons. So in practice, any loan like this would be expected to have a variable interest rate. There's a flip side, too.  Suppose instead that market rates drop to 1%.  Now Alice would like Bob to repay the principal as slowly as possible, because she's earning 4% on that money, which is better than any other options available to her.  But Bob now has every incentive to repay it as fast as he can - or even to refinance by taking out another loan at, say, 2%, and using the proceeds to repay the entire principal to Alice.  (This risk still applies with most traditional loans, since the borrower usually always has the right to pay early, but some loans include a \"\"prepayment penalty\"\" in such cases to help compensate the lender.) Thus, when Bob has all the power to decide when to pay, Alice is sure to lose no matter which way interest rates move.  A loan with a fixed term helps insulate Alice against this risk.  She may be able to make a guess about the likelihood of interest rates going up to 10% in the next 15 or 30 years, and increase Bob's fixed rate to account for this; that's much easier than trying to account for the possibility of interest rates going up to 10% ever.  (And if she does have to try to account for this, she's probably going to have to set the interest rate extremely high; so Bob might accept a fixed term of repayment in exchange for a more reasonable rate.) Even if we suppose that Alice has done the best possible credit check and that Bob is a perfectly trustworthy fellow who would never dream of defaulting on his loan, catastrophes do happen.  Maybe Bob is robbed of all his money by an evil accountant, or has a mid-life crisis and spends it all on opera tickets.  Whatever, Bob is now bankrupt and Alice is never going to get her principal back, nor any further interest payments either.  Even if the loan is secured by some collateral, there's still a risk since the collateral might lose value.  Alice has some chance of estimating the risk of this happening in the next 15 or 30 years, and can set the interest rate to compensate for it.  But it is harder for her to estimate the risk of this happening ever, and if she tries, she'll have to set the rate so high that Bob might prefer a fixed term and a lower rate. (There's a side issue as to what happens if Bob dies with the loan still outstanding.  If it's an unsecured loan, typically Alice can try to collect the principal from Bob's estate, but if there isn't enough, too bad for Alice; she can't force Bob's heirs to continue making payments.  If it's a secured loan, Alice may be able to have Bob's heirs continue paying or else she seizes the collateral; but she still has the risk of the collateral losing value.)\""}
{"id": "148030", "text": "There isn't really a correct answer. The 1 year beta will capture any recent changes in the firm's business, but it is estimated less accurately due to fewer data points. But a beta of 0.22 for a distressed firm is very suspicious, since we would expect the stock to be more risky, not less."}
{"id": "148053", "text": "&gt; At what price is the slow customer sending the order? Or are they sending a market order?  So if the high frequency fund sees someone wants to meet the ask at 1.01 they'll push that person back in favor of executing their trade first. They'll then raise the price to 1.02 (that's high though) and make the other person pay that. This happens literally in microseconds."}
{"id": "148141", "text": "\"In essence the problem that the OP identified is not that the FX market itself has poor liquidity but that retail FX brokerage sometimes have poor counterparty risk management. The problem is the actual business model that many FX brokerages have. Most FX brokerages are themselves customers of much larger money center banks that are very well capitalized and provide ample liquidity. By liquidity I mean  the ability to put on a position of relatively decent size (long EURUSD say) at any particular time with a small price impact relative to where it is trading. For spot FX, intraday bid/ask spreads are extremely small, on the order of fractions of pips for majors (EUR/USD/GBP/JPY/CHF). Even in extremely volatile situations it rarely becomes much larger than a few pips for positions of 1 to 10 Million USD equivalent notional value in the institutional market. Given that retail traders rarely trade that large a position, the FX spot market is essentially very liquid in that respect. The problem is that there are retail brokerages whose business model is to encourage excessive trading in the hopes of capturing that spread, but not guaranteeing that it has enough capital to always meet all client obligations. What does get retail traders in trouble is that most are unaware that they are not actually trading on an exchange like with stocks. Every bid and ask they see on the screen the moment they execute a trade is done against that FX brokerage, and not some other trader in a transparent central limit order book. This has some deep implications. One is the nifty attribute that you rarely pay \"\"commission\"\" to do FX trades unlike in stock trading. Why? Because they build that cost into the quotes they give you. In sleepy markets, buyers and sellers cancel out, they just \"\"capture\"\" that spread which is the desired outcome when that business model functions well.  There are two situations where the brokerage's might lose money and capital becomes very important. In extremely volatile markets, every one of their clients may want to sell for some reason, this forces the FX brokers to accumulate a large position in the opposite side that they have to offload. They will trade in the institutional market with other brokerages to net out their positions so that they are as close to flat as possible. In the process, since bid/ask spreads in the institutional market is tighter than within their own brokerage by design, they should still make money while not taking much risk. However, if they are not fast enough, or if they do not have enough capital, the brokerage's position might move against them too quickly which may cause them lose all their capital and go belly up. The brokerage is net flat, but there are huge offsetting positions amongst its clients. In the example of the Swiss Franc revaluation in early 2015, a sudden pop of 10-20% would have effectively meant that money in client accounts that were on the wrong side of the trade could not cover those on the other side. When this happens, it is theoretically the brokerage's job to close out these positions before it wipes out the value of the client accounts, however it would have been impossible to do so since there were no prices in between the instantaneous pop in which the brokerage could have terminated their client's losing positions, and offload the risk in the institutional market. Since it's extremely hard to ask for more money than exist in the client accounts, those with strong capital positions simply ate the loss (such as Oanda), those that fared worse went belly up. The irony here is that the more leverage the brokerage gave to their clients, the less money would have been available to cover losses in such an event. Using an example to illustrate: say client A is long 1 contract at $100 and client B is short 1 contract at $100. The brokerage is thus net flat. If the brokerage had given 10:1 leverage, then there would be $10 in each client's account. Now instantaneously market moves down $10. Client A loses $10 and client B is up $10. Brokerage simply closes client A's position, gives $10 to client B. The brokerage is still long against client B however, so now it has to go into the institutional market to be short 1 contract at $90. The brokerage again is net flat, and no money actually goes in or out of the firm. Had the brokerage given 50:1 leverage however, client A only has $2 in the account. This would cause the brokerage close client A's position. The brokerage is still long against client B, but has only $2 and would have to \"\"eat the loss\"\" for $8 to honor client B's position, and if it could not do that, then it technically became insolvent since it owes more money to its clients than it has in assets. This is exactly the reason there have been regulations in the US to limit the amount of leverage FX brokerages are allowed to offer to clients, to assure the brokerage has enough capital to pay what is owed to clients.\""}
{"id": "148250", "text": "Elance, UpWork, Fivver  Who would've thought taking skilled labor and watering down the price to mere pennies would be bad for everybody involved?  That's why, even though I operate just like a freelancer, I incorporated. Legally, I'm a sole proprietor, not a freelancer...aside the few tax differences, it just saves me a ton of headaches."}
{"id": "148335", "text": "Have you considered investing in real estate? Property is cheap now and you have enough money for several properties. The income from tenants could be very helpful. If you find it's not for you, you can also sell your property and recover your initial investment, assuming house prices go up in the next few years."}
{"id": "148346", "text": "The average of a dozen good answers is close to what would be right, the wisdom of crowds. But any one answer will be skewed by one's own opinions.  The question is missing too much detail. I look at $400K as $16K/yr of ongoing withdrawals. How much do you make now? When the kids are all in school full time, can your wife work? $400K seems on the low side to me, especially with 3 kids. How much have you saved for college?  The $150K for your wife is also a bit low. Without a long tangent on the monetary value of the stay at home spouse, what will you spent on childcare if she passes?  Term life also has a expiration date. When my daughter was born, my wife and I got 20 year term. She is now 16, her college account fully funded, and we are semi-retired. The need for insurance is over. If one of us dies, the survivor doesn't need this big of a house, and will have more than they need to be comfortable in a downsized one. My belief is that the term value should bridge the gap to the kids getting through college and the spouse getting resettled. Too much less, I'd have left my wife at risk. Too much more, she'd be better off if I were dead. (I say that half joking, the insurance company will often limit the size policy to something reasonable.)"}
{"id": "148549", "text": "\"Certainly, there aren't algorithms lying in wait for me to enter a buy order for a couple thousand dollars worth of APPL. However, anybody that has a pension plan or a 401k gets shaved by predatory HFT. This is the majority of *ordinary investors*. Most of the population doesn't trade in individual stocks. The ones that have their investments managed by large funds are most certainly affected. Katsayuma's dissection of the underlying mechanisms makes that abundantly clear. I can understand why those with a financial stake attempt to discredit Katsuyama, but it's fairly transparent bullshit. Bullshit that \"\"you seem to have been suckered in\"\" by.\""}
{"id": "148627", "text": "Thanks. It has taken me some time to understand how all this works, and there are still many gray areas I want to understand further.  The Fed interest rate is the rate charged by banks to loan to each other to balance overnight reserves but only using the reserves they hold at the Fed. That adds no new money to the system, but increases the money multiplier a little since perhaps more loans can be made.   Basically one bank with excess reserves can loan to another bank that needs reserves. The Fed injects no money here, only sets the rate for banks to do this with each other.  When the Fed buys securities that effectively adds that many more dollars into circulation, which then gets hit by the money multiplier, adding a lot of new liquidity.  I think historically the latter tracks increases in the money supply much better than the former. I think the St. Louis Fed has records online for all this dating back to the 1940's or so."}
{"id": "148632", "text": "Also, almost by definition rebalancing involves making more trades   than you would have otherwise; wouldn't the additional trading fees   you incurred in doing so reduce the benefits of this strategy? You forgot to mention taxes. Rebalancing does or rather can incur costs. One way to minimize the costs is to use the parts of the portfolio that have essentially zero cost of moving. These generally are the funds in your retirement accounts. In the United States they can be in IRAs or 401Ks; they can be regular or Roth. Selling winners withing the structure of the plan doesn't trigger capital gains taxes, and many have funds within them that have zero loads.  Another way to reduce trading fees is to only rebalance once a year or once every two years; or by setting a limit on how far out of balance. For example don't rebalance at 61/39 to get back to 60/40 even if it has been two years.  Given that the ratio of investments is often rather arbitrary to begin   with, how do I know whether I'm selling high and buying low or just   obstinately sticking with a losing asset ratio? The ratio used in an example or in an article may be arbitrary, but your desired ratio isn't arbitrary. You selected the ratio of your investments based on several criteria: your age, your time horizon, your goals for the money, how comfortable you are with risk. As these change during your investing career those ratios would also morph. But they aren't arbitrary.  These decisions to rebalance are separate from the ones to sell a particular investment. You could sell Computer Company X because of how it is performing, and buy stock in Technology Company Y because you think it has a better chance of growing. That transaction would not be a re-balancing. Selling part of your stock in Domestic Company A to buy stock in international Company B would be part of a re-balancing."}
{"id": "148721", "text": "\"Funds which track the same index may have different nominal prices.  From an investors point of view, this is not important.  What is important is that when the underlying index moves by a given percentage, the price of the tracking funds also move by an equal percentage.  In other words, if the S&P500 rises by 5%, then the price of those funds tracking the S&P500 will also rise by 5%.  Therefore, investing a given amount in any of the tracking funds will produce the same profit or loss, regardless of the nominal prices at which the individual funds are trading. To see this, use the \"\"compare\"\" function available on the popular online charting services. For example, in Google finance call up a chart of the S&P500 index, then use the compare textbox to enter the codes for the various ETFs tracking the S&P500.  You will see that they all track the S&P500 equally so that your relative returns will be equal from each of the tracking funds.  Any small difference in total returns will be attributable to management fees and expenses, which is why low fees are so important in passive investing.\""}
{"id": "148976", "text": "I think JohnFx's answer is pretty much the right thing to do. I'd just like to suggest that the budget doesn't have to be fixed. It sounds like you aren't completely sure what an acceptable lifestyle costs for you, and it might feel like a budget locks you into a spending pattern that could end up being unfulfilling, or keep you in debt longer than necessary. To reduce that risk, you could start with a very easy level of contributions, then every month see if you can spend $10-$50 less without sacrificing in the lifestyle department. And eventually if you feel like you're missing out, you can stick with the previous month's budget. You might avoid depriving yourself by starting with something easy, but I think if you make an effort to save money, you'll more likely be surprised how much you can improve your lifestyle while spending less. I like a lot of the advice on Mr. Money Mustache and Early Retirement Extreme, and I'd recommend the introductory sections of both blogs if you ever hit a block at some level of contribution. And one minor (highly situational) comment: You mentioned having less to save if you contribute more, but if you have high interest loans, paying them down early can be (pretty much) a guaranteed very high ROI. So while you might want to prioritize an emergency fund and maybe an employer match first, most saving will probably be less useful than extra contributions."}
{"id": "149004", "text": "You should try to take out other loans sufficient to pay off your 401(k) loan if you can.   Maybe you can take out a home equity loan?  You can also ask your bank about unsecured loans.  You should also check the rules for your new employer's 401(k), if you're rolling over your 401(k).  There's a small possibility that you could take out another loan right now and apply it to the previous loan balance. Or if you need to wait, you could use it to help pay off any temporary loans that were needed to avoid the distribution penalty."}
{"id": "149153", "text": "In most markets, there are fixed fees known as commissions. For instance, with a retail broker in the stock market, you can expect every trade to cost you $7.00 as an example, it is $7.00 regardless of if you place a trade for $25 or $25,000. You will see that just opening the trade, with a smaller amount, will eat up all of your profits and a majority of your capital, but if you opened the trade with more capital through the investment group, then the $7.00 commission will be much less of a tax on your trade. Basically, the only advantage is that the tax of commissions will be less if you have a larger account, if the commission is a fixed dollar value, which is not always true either. regardless, at $25 per month, not many markets will be accessible. There is also the possible educational aspect of investing with a group of people, or it can simply be clashing ideals."}
{"id": "149360", "text": "There are quite a few advantages to credit cards in the uk. But don't borrow on them past the grace period. Set up a direct debit to pay amount in full."}
{"id": "149516", "text": "\"So the main reason that you aren't getting answers is that the question is not really answerable on this site without putting a lot of details about the expenses of your company online.  Even then you will need someone who specializes in Canadian taxes to go through those details to be sure.  Most of those people feel like they should be paid a decent amount per hour to go through the details. That being said, I dealt with a similar question for my contract work company by just taking a couple weekends and calculating the taxes myself on estimated numbers.  It was time consuming but not really that hard.  I thought I might have to buy software, but all I needed was a small calculator.  Along the way I learned a few details that helped me lower my overall tax exposure. I found that Neil was generally correct that you are \"\"taxed on profits\"\" but it is worth doing the taxes yourself because the details can really matter.\""}
{"id": "149526", "text": "Just to support this, I'm working in front-office equities right now and this describes us pretty well. We have a pretty open set-up, but still with waist-high cubicles. Our traders are only about 6m away from my desk though, so it's not always that quiet.  FI people are scary, I don't go over there."}
{"id": "149555", "text": "\"Well, the first one is based on the \"\"Pert\"\" formula for continuously-compounded present value, while the second one is the periodically-compounded variant.  Typically, the continuously-compounded models represent the ideal; as the compounding period of time-valued money shrinks towards zero, and the discount rate (or interest rate if positive) stays constant over the time period examined, the periodic equation's results approach that of the continuously-compounded equation. Those two assumptions (a constant rate and continuous balance adjustment from interest) that allow simplification to the continuous form are usually incorrect in real-world finance; virtually all financial institutions accrue interest monthly, for a variety of reasons including simpler bookkeeping and less money paid or owed in interest. They also, unless prohibited by contract, accrue this interest based on a rate that can change daily or even more granularly based on what financial markets are doing. Most often, the calculation is periodic based on the \"\"average daily balance\"\" and an agreed rate that, if variable, is based on the \"\"average daily rate\"\" over the previous observed period. So, you should use the first form for fast calculation of a rough value based on estimated variables. You should use the second form when you have accurate periodic information on the variables involved. Stated alternately, use the first form to predict the future, use the second form in retrospect to the past.\""}
{"id": "149610", "text": "I've got cards with no annual fee that don't get used--I never see a bill from them."}
{"id": "149692", "text": "One thing to consider besides what rules Oregon has, is what rules your old state have. Of course the lack of income tax in Nevada means that most people are trying to convince their new state they are still a resident of Nevada. You are a full-year Oregon resident if you live in Oregon all year.   You are also a full-year Oregon resident, even if you live outside   Oregon, if all of the following are true: Part-year resident: You are a part-year resident if you moved into or out of Oregon during the tax year. The requirement for financial life means that you should: change all your Nevada banks to Oregon banks; Change all your mail to Oregon; Sell any property or end any leases you have in Nevada. Or course you need to research the rules for in state college tuition, death with dignity  if any apply to you. In border areas you must be careful to establish residency for children to attend public schools. Some families try to cheat to get their children into a better school."}
{"id": "149833", "text": "Obligatory comment about debt being to high, eventual hyperinflation and mismanagement by government heralding the end of America.  Obligatory preemptive reply to rational people to say that although this argument could have been made two years ago its different now and you should buy into the fear mongering because its going to happen sooner or later.  Bring on the downvotes!"}
{"id": "149988", "text": "\"I've mostly seen this term peddled by those with large portfolios in gold/commodities. The incentive for these guys, who for example may have a large portfolio in gold, is to drive demand for gold up - which in turn drives the value of the gold they're holding up and makes their assets more valuable. The easiest way to get a large amount of people to invest in gold is to scare them into thinking the whole market is going to fall apart and that gold is their best/only option.  I personally think that the path we're on is not particularly sustainable and that we're heading for a large correction/recession anyways - but for other reasons.  **Example:**  [Peter Shiff YouTube Channel called \"\"The Economist\"\" with conspiracy videos](https://www.youtube.com/user/PeterSchiffChannel/videos)  [Actual \"\"The Economist\"\" magazine researching the market](https://www.youtube.com/user/EconomistMagazine/videos)  (edit: formatting)\""}
{"id": "150070", "text": "Sounds like an absolutely terrible place to work if they treat contractors that way. I say that because I was a contractor a long long time ago and I don't think anyone could pay me enough money to go back to those conditions."}
{"id": "150080", "text": "I recall similar strategies when (in the US) interest rates were quite a bit higher than now. The investment company put 75% or so into into a 5 year guaranteed bond, the rest was placed in stock index options. In effect, one had a guaranteed return (less inflation, of course) of principal, and a chance for some market gains especially if it went a lot higher over the next 5 years.  The concept is sound if executed correctly."}
{"id": "150119", "text": "Much of the absurdity of that amount comes from them adding up all of the time parents spend with their kids, and assuming that the value of that time is the same as if the parents were working during all those hours.  As if, if they weren't parents, they would be spending 120 a week at their job.  It's a nonsense way to evaluate cost for this situation.    Opportunity cost makes sense in business decisions, not in parenting."}
{"id": "150219", "text": "\"We will bill our clients periodically and will get paid monthly. Who are \"\"we\"\"? If you're not employed - you're not the one doing the work or billing the client. Would IRS care about this or this should be something written in the   policy of our company. For example: \"\"Every two months profits get   divided 50/50\"\" They won't. S-Corp is a pass-through entity. We plan to use Schedule K when filing taxes for 2015. I've never filled a schedule K before, will the profit distributions be reflected on this form? Yes, that is what it is for. We might need extra help in 2015, so we plan to hire an additional   employee (who will not be a shareholder). Will our tax liability go   down by doing this? Down in what sense? Payroll is deductible, if that's what you mean.  Are there certain other things that should be kept in mind to reduce the tax liability? Yes. Getting a proper tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) to explain to you what S-Corp is, how it works, how payroll works, how owner-shareholder is taxed etc etc.\""}
{"id": "150355", "text": "People need to stop listening to financial TV shows and actually do real research. When the shares dropped in price all of these people come out of the woodwork, raising concerns that were already covered in the IPO filings with the SEC. The deck is stacked against small investors, but these people didn't do anything to prevent themselves from getting fucked."}
{"id": "150607", "text": "\"In England, currently and for most of the last fifty years, the standard length of the mortgage term is 25 years. A mortgage can be either a capital-and-interest mortgage, or interest-only. In the former, you pay off part of the original loan each month, plus the interest on the amount borrowed. In the latter, you only pay interest each month, and the original amount borrowed never reduces: you pay premiums on a life insurance policy, additionally, which is designed to pay off the original sum borrowed at the end of the 25 years. No one in England thinks that a 25 year loan has any drawbacks. The main point to appreciate is that the longer the period of the loan, the less you need to pay each month, because you are repaying the original loan - the capital - over a longer period of time. Thus, in principle, a mortgage is easier to repay the longer the term is, because the monthly payment is less. If you have a 12 year mortgage, you must pay back the original amount borrowed in half the time: the capital element in your payment each month is double what it would be if repaid over 25 years - i.e. if repaid over a period twice as long. Only if the borrower is less than 25 years away from retirement is a 25 years mortgage seen as a bad idea, by the lender - because, obviously, the lender relies on the borrower having an income sufficient to keep up the repayments. There are many complicating factors: an interest-only mortgage, where you pay back the original amount borrowed from the maturity proceeds from a life policy, puts you in a situation where the original capital sum never reduces, so you always pay the same each month. But on a straight repayment mortgage, the traditional type, you pay less and less each month as time goes by, for you are reducing the capital outstanding each month, and because that is reducing so is the amount of interest you pay each month (as this is calculated on the outstanding capital amount). There are snags to avoid, if you can. For example, some mortgage contracts impose penalties if the borrower repays more than the due monthly amount, hence in effect the borrower faces a - possibly heavy - financial penalty for early repayment of the loan. But not all mortgages include such a condition. If house prices are on a rising trend, the market value of the property will soon be worth considerably more than the amount owed on the mortgage, especially where the mortgage debt is reducing every month, as each repayment is made; so the bank or other lender will not be worried about lending over a 25 year term, because if it forecloses there should normally be no difficulty in recovering the outstanding amount from the sale proceeds. If the borrower falls behind on the repayments, or house prices fall, he may soon get into difficulties; but this could happen to anyone - it is not a particular problem of a 25 year term. Where a default in repayment occurs, the bank will often suggest lengthening the mortgage term, from 25 years to 30 years, in order to reduce the amount of the monthly repayment, as a means of helping the borrower. So longer terms than 25 years are in fact a positive solution in a case of financial difficulty.  Of course, the longer the term the greater the amount that the borrower will pay in total. But the longer the term, the less he will pay each month - at least on a traditional capital-and-interest mortgage. So it is a question of balancing those two competing factors.  As long as you do not have a mortgage condition that penalises the borrower for paying off the loan more quickly, it can make sense to have as long a term as possible, to begin with, which can be shortened by increasing the monthly repayment as fast as circumstances allow. In England, we used to have tax relief on mortgage payments, and so in times gone by it did make sense to let the mortgage run the full 25 years, in order to get maximum tax relief - the rules were very complex, but it tended to maximise your tax relief by paying over the longest possible period. But today, with no income tax relief given on mortgage payments, that is no longer a consideration in this country. The practical position is, of course, that you can never tell how long it might take you to pay off a mortgage. It is a gamble as to whether your income will rise in future years, and whether your job will last until your mortgage is paid off. You might fall ill, you might be made redundant, you might be demoted. Mortgage interest rates might rise. It is never possible to say that you \"\"can\"\" pay off the loan in a short time.  If you hope to do so, the only matters that actually fall within your control are the conditions of the mortgage contract itself. Get a good lawyer. Tell him to watch out for early-redemption penalties. Get a good financial adviser. Tell him to work out what you will need to pay in additional premiums on your life policy if you are considering taking an interest-only mortgage. Try to fix your mortgage rate in the first few years, for as long as possible, so that in your most vulnerable period, with the greatest amount owing, you are insulated against unexpected interest rate fluctuations. Only the initial conditions can be controlled, so it might be prudent to take as long a term as possible, even though a prudent borrower will leave himself room to reduce that term, and a prudent lender will leave room to extend it, in case of unpredictable changes in the financial circumstances. In England, most lenders are, in my experience, reluctant to grant mortgages for less than 25 years. That is simply a policy. Rightly or wrongly, the borrower usually has no choice about the length of the mortgbage term. Hence, in the UK it can be difficult to find a choice of interest rates based on differing mortgage terms. I am aware that the situation in the USA is rather different, but if I personally were faced with the choice I would be uncomfortable about taking on a short term mortgage, because of the factors I have outlined above.\""}
{"id": "150650", "text": "\"Excess Cash = Cash & Equivalents + Long-Term Investments - Current Liabilities The problem this calculation of excess cash is that \"\"long-term investments\"\" can be illiquid things like real estate. Another flaw is that it gives no credit for Current Assets, like receivables, which can be used to offset Current Liabilities. The first thing I'd do is \"\"net out\"\" Current Assets and Current Liabilities, then add Cash back in.  Excess Cash = Current Assets - Current Liabilities + Cash & Equivalents. It would be nice if GAAP would require Long-Term Investments to be broken out as a) liquid long-term investments (stocks, bonds) b) illiquid long-term investments (real estate, private equity, etc)\""}
{"id": "150672", "text": "&gt;Banks benefit from lower interest rates because it decreases the rate at which they can borrow from the Federal Reserve from.  But what matters is the spread: if rates on the borrowing and lending side go down, the spread % shrinks, which makes banks less profitable. That's why bank stocks go up when higher rates are anticipated. You can think of a bank stock as being long interest rates.  That's why bank stocks have lagged the rest of the market during this long bull market.  &gt;Bank's Assets aren't all debt  The vast majority is for most banks. GS and MS are the rare exceptions."}
{"id": "150707", "text": "Defined benefit pension funds will typically target treasuries + a spread that depends on how well funded the plan is and the duration of the liabilities. So for example, if a DB fund is 90% funded (meaning assets are 90% of liabilities) and the liabilities have a duration of 20 years, they will target the 20 year treasury rate + a spread that will bring the plan to just over 100% funded in around 20 years. This spread will usually be much lower than 8% p.a. Obviously it's much more complicated than this, but hopefully this gives a general idea."}
{"id": "150857", "text": "\"If you're \"\"living off the land\"\" and make no money, then you don't have to file.  Though you might be able to actually make money through credits and the like if you do file. If you've lost more than you've made, then you'll probably need to file since someone will have needed to report that they paid you (W-2 or 1099-MISC).  If the IRS receives a form saying that you made X and you don't file, they aren't going to just take your word for it that you lost more than you made, right?  That, and if you want a refund, you'll almost certainly need to file to get it.\""}
{"id": "150893", "text": "\"I would strongly consider renting; as homes are often viewed by people as \"\"investments\"\" but in reality they are costs, just like renting. The time-frame for return is so long, the interest rate structure in terms of your mortgage payments; if you buy, you must be prepared to and willing to stay at minimum 7-10 years; because anything can happen. Hot markets turn cold. Or stale, and just the closing costs will cause it be less advantageous to renting.  Before buying a property, ask yourself does it meet these 5 criteria:  IDEAL I - Income; the property will provide positive cash flow through renters.  D - Depreciation; tax savings.  E - Equity; building equity in the property- the best way is through interest only loans. There is NO reason to pay any principle on any property purchase. You do 5 year interest only loans; keep your payments low; and build equity over time as the property price rises. Look how much \"\"principle\"\" you actually pay down over the first 7 years on a 30 year mortgage. Virtually Nil.  A - Appreciation - The property will over time go up in value. Period. There is no need to pay any principle. Your Equity will come from this... time.  L - Leverage; As the property becomes more valuable; you will have equity stake, enabling you to get higher credit lines, lines of equity credit, to purchase more properties that are IDEA.  When you are RICH, MARRIED, and getting ready for a FAMILY, then buy your home and build it.  Until then, rent, it will keep your options open. It will keep your costs low. It will protect you from market downturns as leases are typically only 1 year at most. You will have freedom. You will not have to deal with repairs. A new Water Heater, AC unit, the list goes on and on. Focus on making money, and when you want to buy your first house. Buy a duplex; rent it out to two tenants, and make sure it's IDEAL.\""}
{"id": "151121", "text": "Bank of America is the worst. Once I had a joint account with another individual that I had funded out of my account to make payroll.   When I found out that he had screwed two other people by stealing the payroll money I decided to disburse it myself and transferred it back to my corporate account on which I was the only signer.  He went back to the bank and effected a withdrawal from my account to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars, put the money in the joint account and removed me as a signer.   The bank wouldn't give me my money back and I never collected from him.  Another time I tried to close my sons' accounts which were in inactive status.  Every day for a week they told me they could not close the account until it was active, but they were working on making it active.  Chase could do this in a minute.  I finally went to a branch and loudly informed the manager that maybe the bank was insolvent and that I should call the FDIC to see why they won't release my money.  He wanted to take me into his office.  I told him loudly, I know all about DDAs, Savings and CDs, I have run deposit operations for a major bank and wrote software to process them.  Just put a hold on the account, write me two cashiers check and offset them with a suspense voucher.  You do know how to write a suspense voucher don't you? It's just a general ledger entry to a suspense account.  Well he was so embarassed he would do anything to get me out of the branch and gave me the cashier's checks.  Fuck B of A."}
{"id": "151145", "text": "You can't do what you would like to do, unless your business has another, unrelated investor or is willing to invest an equal amount of funds + .01 into a corporation which will employ you.  You will then need to set up a self-directed IRA. Additionally, you will need a trustee to account for all the disbursements from your IRA."}
{"id": "151442", "text": "Not sure why people are suggesting CFP or CFA to someone who hasn't graduated with a BS yet.   With that said, CFA had a claritas (fundamentals course) with like 20-20 page chapters going over basic finance and investment info. Pretty sure you can still get those pdfs for free. Investopedia is also great for general concepts for banking and investments.   CFA is very expensive and I wouldn't touch it until you've taken general business classes and really built up your foundation."}
{"id": "151452", "text": "&gt;observe their contractual obligations.    If not having to pay you is part of the deal, then it's not a good deal. Clearly companies have no reason to not just keep that money, and they keep it every chance they get. Why wouldn't they?"}
{"id": "151514", "text": "You can't cash the check silly.  How can you go off on a rant when you can't even tell the difference between a real check and a promotional tool.  If you don't want to call in an get info throw it away....simple.  This thread made me laugh.  Thanks for that.  Good day."}
{"id": "151555", "text": "\"Care to elaborate? It is my understanding that any asset can be rehypothecated at least in theory. By saying these car loans \"\"aren't\"\" rehypo'd, do you mean this is not the practice, or that there is a law/regulation prohibiting it?\""}
{"id": "151587", "text": "This is dependent on the broker according to The Options Industry Council.  Your broker will specify what they would do upon expiry (or hours before last trade) if you did not indicate your preference. Most likely they will conduct a probabilistic simulation to see whether exercising the contracts may result in margin deficit even after selling the delivered shares under extreme circumstances. In most cases, brokers tend to liquidate the option for you (sell to close) before expiry.  I've seen people complain about certain brokers forcing liquidation at terrible bid-ask spreads even though the options are still days to expiry. It is better for you to close the position on your own beforehand. The best brokers would allow margin deficit and let you deposit the required amount of money afterward.  Please consult your broker's materials. If you can't find them, use live chat or email tickets."}
{"id": "151723", "text": "First, If you buy $10K of a penny stock and try to sell it that afternoon, you probably won't get your money back. The bid/ask spread may cost you dearly.  On the shady side, if you are able to afford to trade enough shares to attract attention, the interest of those who believe the volume is an indication of some real event happening, you may pump it high enough to make some nice money, selling into the ensuing rise. This is a classic pump and dump (which often but not always, includes posts on message boards) and it is illegal. The same way this volume attracts traders, it can also attract the attention of the SEC.  This should be read as a narrative, not as advice. If anything, it's advice on what not to do."}
{"id": "151741", "text": "\"Paying the mortgage down is no different than investing in a long term taxable fixed instrument. In this economy, 4.7% isn't bad, but longer term, the stock market should return higher.  When you have the kid(s), is your wife planing to work? If not, I'd first suggest going pre-tax on the IRAs, and when she's not working, convert to Roth. I'd advise against starting the 529 accounts until your child(ren) is actually born.  As far as managed funds are concerned, I hear \"\"expenses.\"\" Why not learn about lower cost funds, index mutual funds or ETFs? I'd not do too much different aside from this, until the kids are born.\""}
{"id": "151746", "text": "If you do the financing, get a large down payment and make a short loan.  Do not expose yourself to risk with a 30 year note, and get some major money up front so the buyer has some skin in the game and will continue to make payments."}
{"id": "151817", "text": "\"Technically, this doesn't seem like a scam, but I don't think the system is beneficial.  They use a lot of half-truths to convince you that their product is right for you. Some of the arguments presented and my thoughts. Don't buy term and invest the rest because you can't predict how much you'll earn from the \"\"rest\"\"   Also Don't invest in a 401k because you can't predict how much you'll earn They are correct that you won't know exactly how much you'll have due to stock market, but that doesn't mean the stock market is a bad place to put your money.  Investing in a 401k is risky because of the harsh 401k withdrawal rules  Yes, 401ks have withdrawal rules (can't typically start before 59.5, must start by 70.5) but those rules don't hamper my investing style in any way.    Most Term Life Insurance policies don't pay out  They are correct again, but their conclusions are wrong. Yes, most people don't die while you have a term insurance policy which is why Term life insurance is relatively cheap.   But they aren't arguing you don't need insurance, just that you need their insurance which is \"\"better\"\" You need the Guaranteed growth they offer  The chart used to illustrate their guaranteed growth includes non-guaranteed dividends.   They invest $10,000 per year for 36 years and end up with $1,000,000.   That's a 5% return!  I use 10% for my estimate of stock market performance, but let's say it's only 8%.   The same $10,000 per year results in over $2 Million dollars.  Using 10.5% (average return of the S&P 500 over it's lifetime) the result is a staggering $3.7 MILLION.   So if I'm looking at $3.7M vs. $1M, It costs me $2.7 Million dollars to give me the same coverage as my term life policy. That's one expensive Term Life Insurance policy. My personal favorite: Blindly following the advice of Wall Street and financial \u201cgurus\u201d such as Dave Ramsey and Suze Orman got you where you are. Are you happy with the state of your finances? Do you still believe their fairytale, \u201cBuy Term (insurance) and Invest the Difference\u201d?  Yes, I sure do believe that fairytale and I'm prospering quite well thank you. :) While I don't think this is a scam, it's outrageously expensive and not a good financial choice.\""}
{"id": "151853", "text": "\"In no particular order:  - Plumbers are not the kind of trade where advertising to end-customers is very effective. People don't generally write down phone numbers and keep track of them on the basis that \"\"I'll probably need a plumber some day, and I might never have any way to way to learn their phone number unless I write this down right now.\"\"  - References through other tradesmen are worth 10x as much as references through end-customers. Get a network of electricians and carpenters and HVAC guys referring to you, and vice-versa.   - Especially in the early stages, do whatever it takes to make it right with every customer. A lot of tradesmen offer sloppy low-ball estimates to get the business, and then get stuck explaining why the bill is 3x higher. Nobody is ever going to give you a positive review or referral in that situation.   - Forget about your hourly rate and focus on building the business, even if it means losing money on some jobs. Employees get paid by the hour, owners get paid based on satisfied customers. You will make some mistakes in the beginning. Plan to eat them. Eventually, you will make less mistakes, and will learn to price variability into the job.   - Don't work with impossible customers, but do whatever it takes to keep lucrative customers happy. A lot of tradesmen get this completely wrong. 20% of your customers will produce 80% of your profits, usually. Do whatever it takes to keep them happy, and avoid the customers who want 80% of your business but who produce 0% profit.   - Don't be a dick. Give good customers clear and fair estimates, and tell them where and how you are charging a markup. Don't pick a fight if the guy up the road is charging less, and don't give the customer shit for not knowing how to compare quotes. Show them the meaningful difference in your estimate, explain to them why it's not worth your time to match lowball quotes for junk work, and let them make the decision.   - Do every job right. This is something that pays off in the long-run, exponentially. If you can't do it right, don't take it. Make sure that everyone who has ever done business with you comes out happy and satisfied that you were the best option available.   - Having the lowest price might get you the most business in the first couple of years, but doing the best work will earn you the most profits and will help build a multi-million-dollar business in the decades to come.\""}
{"id": "151980", "text": "If one wants to have a bound on the loss percentages that are acceptable, this is would be a way to enforce that. For example, suppose someone wants to have a 5% stop-loss but doesn't want this to be worse than 10% as if the stock goes down more than 10% then the sell shouldn't happen. Thus, if the stock opened in a gap down 15% one day, this triggers the stop-loss and would exit at too low of a price as the gap was quite high as I wonder how familiar are you with how much a stock's price could change that makes the prices not be as continuous as one would think. At least this would be my thinking on a volatile stock where one may want to try to limit losses if the stock does fall within a specific range."}
{"id": "151984", "text": "\"There was a time when government policy was actually pretty damn smart. There were a range of \"\"automatic stabilizers\"\" that kicked in when there was a recession and they had a fast and large impact.  It wasn't until Reagan that we started to chip away at those as well as go into a perpetual debt stimulus posture. These two actions helped to prime the system for an inevitable \"\"large\"\" shock.  Even now, after one of the longest expansions in history we're STILL running a substantial deficit. And as such the appetite to expand it when the next recession hits will be diminished (as it was during the great recession when we really needed 3 trillion in stimulus spending and got less than 1).\""}
{"id": "152096", "text": "The simplest answer is that you can convert the IRA to a Roth, and since it was already taxed, pay no tax on conversion.  If, in your hypothetical situation, you happen to have an IRA already in place, you are subject to pro-rata rules on conversions, e.g. your balance is total $40K, $10K 'not deducted', a conversion is 75% taxed, convert $20K and the tax is on $15K of that money. But, there also might be a time when you are able to transfer IRA money into a 401(k), effectively removing the pretax deposits, and leaving just post tax money for a free conversion."}
{"id": "152216", "text": "With rates expected to increase later this month, why is there a decreasing trend in mortgage interest rates?  I am thinking lenders might be lowering prices to grab more share in the run up, but don't have much data to back that up."}
{"id": "152286", "text": "I don't want to get involved in trading chasing immediate profit  That is the best part. There is an answer in the other question, where a guy only invested in small amounts and had a big sum by the time he retired. There is good logic in the answer. If you put in lump sum in a single stroke you will get at a single price. But if you distribute it over a time, you will get opportunities to buy at favorable prices, because that is an inherent behavior of stocks. They inherently go up and down, don't remain stable. Stock markets are for everybody rich or poor as long as you have money, doesn't matter in millions or hundreds, to invest and you select stocks with proper research and with a long term view. Investment should always start in small amounts before you graduate to investing in bigger amounts. Gives you ample time to learn. Where do I go to do this ?  To a bank ? To the company, most probably a brokerage firm. Any place to your liking. Check how much they charge for brokerage, annual charges and what all services they provide. Compare them online on what services you require, not what they provide ? Ask friends and colleagues and get their opinions. It is better to get firsthand knowledge about the products. Can the company I'm investing to be abroad? At the moment stay away from it, unless you are sure about it because you are starting. Can try buying ADRs, like in US. This is an option in UK. But they come with inherent risk. How much do you know about the country where the company does its business ? Will I be subject to some fees I must care about after I buy a stock? Yes, capital gains tax will be levied and stamp duties and all."}
{"id": "152407", "text": "Federal income taxes are indeed expenses, they're just not DEDUCTIBLE expenses on your 1120. Federal Income Tax Expense is usually a subcategory under Taxes. This is one of the items that will be a book-to-tax difference on Schedule M-1. I am presuming you are talking about a C corporation, as an S corporation is not likely to be paying federal taxes itself, but would pass the liability through to the members. If you're paying your personal 1040 taxes out of an S-corporation bank account, that's an owner's draw just like paying any of your personal non-business expenses. I would encourage you to get a tax professional to prepare your corporate tax returns. It's not quite as simple as TurboTax Business makes it out to be. ;) Mariette IRS Circular 230 Notice: Please note that any tax advice contained in this communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by anyone to avoid penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law."}
{"id": "152502", "text": "\"Even under the executive exemption, see Exemption for Executive Employees Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Section 13(a)(1) as defined by Regulations, 29 CFR Part 541, it seems that a minimum compensation is required. To qualify for the executive employee exemption, all of the following tests must be met: The employee must be compensated on a salary basis (as defined in the regulations) at a rate not less than $455 per week... etc. There is one other possibility under FLSA Section 13(a)(1), as a \"\"bona fide exempt executive\"\". Exemption of Business Owners   Under a special rule for business owners, an employee who owns at least a bona fide 20-percent equity   interest in the enterprise in which employed, regardless of the type   of business organization (e.g., corporation, partnership, or other),   and who is actively engaged in its management, is considered a bona   fide exempt executive.\""}
{"id": "152709", "text": "\"Members of the Federal Reserve System keep track of what money a bank has (if it's not in the vault), who owns what shares of stock, who owns what bond, etc. The part of the Federal Reserve System that tracks stock ownership is the Depository Trust Company (DTC). They have a group of subsidiaries that settle various types of security transactions. DTC is a member of the U.S. Federal Reserve System, a limited-purpose   trust company under New York State banking law and a registered   clearing agency with the Securities and Exchange Commission. There's lots of information on their website describing this process. DTCC's subsidiary, The Depository Trust Company (DTC), established in   1973, was created to reduce costs and provide clearing and settlement   efficiencies by immobilizing securities and making \"\"book-entry\"\"   changes to ownership of the securities. DTC provides securities   movements for NSCC's net settlements1, and settlement for institutional   trades (which typically involve money and securities transfers between   custodian banks and broker/dealers), as well as money market   instruments. Black pools are trades done where the price is not shared with the market. But the DTC is the one who keeps track of who owns which shares. They have records of all net transactions2. The DTC is the counterparty for transactions. When stock moves from one entity to another the DTC is involved. As the central counterparty for the nation's major exchanges and   markets, DTCC clears and settles virtually all broker-to-broker equity 1. This is the link that shows that settlements are reported on a \"\"net basis\"\". 2. If broker A sells 1000 shares of something to broker B at 8 and then five minutes later broker B sells the 1000 shares back to A, you cannot be sure that that total volume will be recorded. No net trading took place and there would be fees to pay for no reason if they reported both trades. Note: In dark pool trading quite often the two parties don't know each other. For shares (book-keeping records) to be exchanged it has to be done through a Clearing House.\""}
{"id": "152827", "text": "\"Generally when you open a new account, you'd be given a checkbook (usually \"\"starter\"\" checks with no personal information, but some banks will later mail you a proper checkbook with your personal details) and a debit card (again, some banks will give you a \"\"starter\"\" one on the spot with a personalized following up in the mail, others will mail you). With the debit card you can use your bank's ATM to withdraw cash from your account, or use it for purchases (will debit, as the name says, directly from your account). You can also use it in other ATMs, but that will usually be with significant fees ($2-$5 per withdrawal to both the ATM owner and your bank). Checks - you can write a check to someone or use the check to go to the cashier in the bank and withdraw money (although usually they have special withdrawal slips for that in the branches, so you don't really need to waste your own checks). As to how to deposit money in your home country - you'll have to check with the bank you have an account at back at home. Usually, you can \"\"wire\"\" transfer money from your BoA account to the account back home, but that is usually comes at a fee of about $30-$50 per transfer (in the US, additional fees may be charged at the receiving end + currency conversion costs). You can also write yourself a check and deposit that check at the home country bank, but that depends on the specific bank whether it is possible, how much it would cost, and how long it would take for them to credit the money to your account after they take your check - may take weeks with personal checks.\""}
{"id": "152845", "text": "In Australia anyone thinking about retirement should be concentrating on superannuation. Contribution is compulsory (I think the current minimum contribution rate is 9.5% of salary) and both contributions and investment returns are very tax efficient. The Government site is quite comprehensive - http://www.australia.gov.au/topics/economy-money-and-tax/superannuation - have a read and come back with any specific questions."}
{"id": "153104", "text": ""}
{"id": "153112", "text": "The ETF is likely better in this case. The ETF will generally generate less capital gains taxes along the way.  In order to pay off investors who leave a mutual fund, the manager will have to sell the fund's assets.  This creates a capital gain, which must be distributed to shareholders at the end of the year.  The mutual fund holder is essentially taxed on this turnover.  The ETF does not have to sell any stock when an investor sells his shares because the investor sells the shares himself on the open market.  This will result in a capital gain for the specific person exiting his position, but it does not create a taxable event for anyone else holding the ETF shares."}
{"id": "153274", "text": "\"&gt;  So now instead of just businessman A buying materials he has two other buyers looking to utilize a scarce amount of resources  Well yes, but this can be a good thing. Those \"\"resources\"\" are often employees, so we're talking about higher employment.  &gt; The problem is interest rates that are not set by the market, but by a centralized bureau who couldn't possibly have enough information to determine what the cost of financing should be.  No, only the base rate is set centrally. Banks can and always do charge more than this, with rates set by market competition.\""}
{"id": "153417", "text": "Your over-thinking this.  As long as the owner has the title and the vehicle is titled in there name they can sign it over to you then you can take it to the DMV and put it in your name. If they do not own the vehicle because they are still making payments then you will also need the signature from their bank or lien holder. You can ask to see their ID to verify they are the owner marked on the title. I've bought ~10 vehicles in the last 5 years and never had a problem doing it this way, my experiences have all been in California."}
{"id": "153452", "text": "\"The answer was provided to me at the Gnucash chat by \"\"warlord\"\". The procedure is as follows: After doing this you will have:\""}
{"id": "153541", "text": "\"First, filing status. If you and your wife are legally married, you should be filing your tax returns as married, either jointly or separately. In the US, \"\"head of household\"\" has a specific meaning and is for unmarried people who are supporting one or more relatives, per the IRS. If you are working full-time and your wife is not, then likely you will file a joint return, including all your income and all the expenses for your wife's business. So yes, the losses in her business will offset your income. Depending on how complex things are, you may want to hire a professional to help with your taxes. The rules for what can and cannot be deducted as a business expense can be opaque.\""}
{"id": "153922", "text": "\"http://annualcreditreport.com gives you free access to your 3 credit bureau records. (Annual, not \"\"free\"\". The \"\"free\"\" guys will try to sell you something.)\""}
{"id": "153955", "text": "What would be the best way to estimate / calculate the basis risk exposure of a commodity trading company? Naturally companies are very cagey when it comes to such info, but is there a way to come up with an approximate number?"}
{"id": "153968", "text": "\"As an investment opportunity: NO. As a friendly assist with money you don't mind ever getting back, legal depending on amount. A few years back I was in the housing market myself and researching interest rates and mortgages.  For one property I was very interested in, I would need about $4K extra in liquid cash to complete the down-payment.  A pair of options I saw were a \"\"combo loan\"\" 15yr 4% interest for the house, 1yr 8% interest for the $4K.  Alternately, the \"\"bank of mom and dad\"\" could offer the 4K loan for a much lower rate. The giftable limit where reporting is not required was $12,000 at the time I did the review.  IRS requires personal loans to be counted as having interest at the commercial rate.  Thus an interest free loan of $10K with commercial interest rate of 1% (for easy math) would be counted as a gift of $10,100 for that calendar year. Disclaimer: Ultimately, I did not use this approach and did not have it subjected to a legal review.\""}
{"id": "154178", "text": "Having money held from one paycheck hardly counts as being covered by a retirement plan in my book! It's not your book that counts, it's the Congress' book called the Internal Revenue Code. No, you cannot rescind a contribution after the fact. Maybe during the year you can do something with employer balancing it out, but not after the year is closed. (That, by the way, is different for IRAs where you can actually do re-characterization until the tax day of the next year)"}
{"id": "154229", "text": "\"In this environment, I don't think that it is advisable to buy a broad emerging market fund.  Why? \"\"Emerging market\"\" is too broad... Look at the top 10 holdings of the fund... You're exposed to Russia & Brazil (oil driven), Chinese and Latin American banks and Asian electronics manufacturing. Those are sectors that don't correlate, in economies that are unstable -- a recipie for trouble unless you think that the global economy is heading way up. I would recommend focusing on the sectors that you are interested in (ie oil, electronics, etc) via a low cost vehicle like an index ETF or invest using a actively managed emerging markets fund with a strategy that you understand.  Don't invest a dime unless you understand what you are getting into. An index fund is just sorting companies by market cap. But... What does market cap mean when you are buying a Chinese bank?\""}
{"id": "154707", "text": "\"Your return from a bond fund corresponds to the return on the underlying bonds (minus fees) during your holding period. So you can buy AND sell at any time. Some funds charge a penalty of 2% or whatever if you sell your fund shares within 30 or 60 days of buying it. There are two basic ways to profit from a bond fund. 1) you get dividends from the interest paid on the bonds. 2) you have a capital gain (or loss) on the bonds themselves. 1) is likely to happen. MOST (not all) bonds pay interest on time, and on a regular basis. This component of returns is ALMOST guaranteed. 2) There are no guarantees on what the \"\"market\"\" will pay for bonds at any given time, so this component of bonds is NOT AT ALL guaranteed. Your \"\"total return is the sum of 1) and 2) (minus fees). Since 2) is uncertain, your \"\"total return\"\" is uncertain.\""}
{"id": "154768", "text": "This has never really adequately explained it for me, and I've tried reading up on it all over the place. For a long time I thought that in a trade, the market maker pockets the spread *for that trade*, but that's not the case.  The only sensible explanation I've found (which I'm not going to give in full...) is that the market maker will provide liquidity by buying and selling trades they have no actual view on (short or long), and if the spread is higher, that contributes directly to the amount they make over time when they open and close positions they've made.  It would be great to see a single definitive example somewhere that shows how a market maker makes money."}
{"id": "154774", "text": "For case 1, there is no tax due as you sold the book for less than your cost basis. If you had sold for more than $100, then you would have had a profit. For case 2, that depends on the value of the gift card with respect to the value of your fare. Most likely that gift card is less than the cost of the fare. And in that case it would generally be treated as a reduction in the purchase price. The same way that rebates and cash back on credit card are treated. Note if for some reason a 1099 was generated that would change the situation and you would need to consult a tax professional. Since that would indicate that the other party to the transaction had a different view of the situation."}
{"id": "154829", "text": "\"I've been listening to Dave Ramsey a lot lately, and he encourages (encourage might be too light of a word for him) this priority list for budgeting: I would strongly advise you to tackle this list before you start to think about any sizable \"\"fun\"\" spending.  If you don't have #1, set that aside first. The options you mentioned: New roof: You should ask yourself \"\"what is the potential cost of not getting a new roof?\"\" If you can save up for it a little at a time, while putting most of the rest of your money to paying off debt, that's what I would do.  Unless, of course, there is damage or risk of damage to your house by not doing it now. Then, you need to do the same measurement (of doing the roof now) against the goal of saving three to six months of expenses.  Especially in your case, with your mortgage underwater, you want to be sure you are prepared should anything happen (for example, losing a job, and potentially being forced to move for a new job). Cars/student loan: (Refer to #3 above \u2014 in other words, yes).\""}
{"id": "154886", "text": "It's not a full credit course but part time comic James Cunningham has speaking tour that promotes personal finance in high schools."}
{"id": "155490", "text": "This new roof should go on the 2016 LLC business return, but you probably won't be able to expense the entire roof as a repair.  A new roof is most likely a capital improvement, which means that it would need to be depreciated over many years instead of expensed all in 2016.  The depreciation period for a residential rental property is 27.5 years.  Please consider seeking a CPA or Enrolled Agent for the preparation of your LLC business return. See also: IRS Tangible Property Regulations FAQ list When you made the loan to the LLC (by paying the contractor and making a contract with the LLC), did you state an interest rate?  If not, you and your brother should correct the contract so that an interest rate is stated, then follow it.  The LLC needs to pay you interest until the loan is paid off.  You need to report the interest income on your personal return, and the LLC needs to report the interest expense in its business return."}
{"id": "155616", "text": "Once you own no shares for 31 days, it's game over. Even though the accounting has wash sales to consider, in the end, gains and losses all cancel to one net position of break even, gain or loss.  It's when there are shares remaining at the end of a period of time that the wash sale rules really impact the numbers."}
{"id": "155797", "text": "\"FSEMX has an annual expense ratio of 0.1% which is very low. What that means is that each month, the FSEMX will pay itself one-twelfth of 0.1% of  the total value of all the shares owned by the shareholders in the mutual fund.  If the fund has cash on hand from its trading activities or dividends collected from companies  whose stock is owned by FSEMX or interest on bonds owned by FSEMX, the  money comes out of that, but if there is no such pot (or the pot is not large enough), then the fund manager has the authority to sell some shares of the stocks held by FSEMX so that the employees can be paid, etc. If the total of cash generated by the trading and the dividend collection in a given year is (say) 3% of the share value of all the outstanding mutual fund,  then only 2.9% will be paid out as dividend and capital gain distribution  income to the share holders, the remaining 0.1% already having been paid to FSEMX management for operating expenses.   It is important to keep in mind that expenses are always paid even if there are no profits, or even if there are losses that year so that no dividends or capital gains distributions are made.  You don't see the expenses explicitly on any statement that you receive.  If FSEMX sells shares of stocks that it holds to pay the expenses, this reduces  the share value (NAV) of the mutual fund shares that you hold.  So, if your mutual fund account \"\"lost\"\" 20% in value that year because the market was falling, and you got no dividend or capital gains distributions either, remember that only 19.9% of that loss can be blamed on the President or Congress or Wall Street or public-sector unions or your neighbor's refusal to ditch his old PC in favor of a new Mac, and the rest (0.1%) has gone to FSEMX to pay for fees you agreed to when you bought FSEMX shares. If you invest directly in FSEMX through Fidelity's web site, there is no sales charge, and you pay no expenses other than the 0.1% annual expense ratio.  There is a fee for selling FSEMX shares after owning them only for a short time since  the fund wants to discourage short-term investors. Whatever other fees finance.yahoo.com lists might be descriptive of the uses that FSEMX puts its expense ratio income to in its internal management, but are not of any importance to the prudent investor in FSEMX who will never encounter them or have to pay them.\""}
{"id": "155899", "text": "\"This article acts like it's the fault of the person for not making enough money to pay for rent, food, insurance, and gas - \"\"Surely if I just tried hard enough I could make $280,000 a year and put 30% of it into investments.\"\"  No financial software is going to change the labor market.\""}
{"id": "156029", "text": "That is the standard set by most securities exchanges: T+3 : trades complete three days after the bargain has been struck."}
{"id": "156092", "text": "I think what you're asking is,  Can I buy 1000 shares of the stock at $1.  For $1000.   it goes up to $2, then sell 500 shares of the stock with proceeds of $1000, now   having my original $1000 out of it, and still owning 500 shares.    And that not create a taxable event. Since all I   did was take my cost basis back out, and didn't collect any gains.   And then I want to repeat that over and over. Nope, not in the USA anyway.   Each sale is a separate taxable event. The first sale will have proceeds of $1000 and a cost basis of $500, with $500 of capital gains, and taxes owed at the time of that sale. The remaining stock will have a cost basis of $500 and proceeds of whatever you sell it for in the future. The next batch of stock will have a cost basis of whatever you pay for it.   The only thing that works anything like the way you're thinking, is a Roth IRA...   You can put your cost basis in, pull it back out, and put it back in again, all tax free.   But every time your cost basis cycles in, that counts towed your contribution limits unless you do it fast enough to call it a rollover."}
{"id": "156211", "text": "\"Extrinsic value is not a factor with respect to gold.  Intrinsic value by definition is the natural value of a commodity set by the market -- extrinsic value is externally set. The \"\"extrinsic\"\" value of gold in the United States is $50/oz. If the market value of gold fell below $50/oz, a US American Eagle coin would be worth $50 in the US. If you take away the attributes that make a commodity valuable, the value drops. Substitutes of equal or better quality for most industrial or other uses of gold exist, so if if the popularity of gold declines, or if the hoarders of gold have to liquidate, it's value will diminish. I have no idea what that value would be, but it would set by the market demand for gold jewelry and other valuable industrial uses.\""}
{"id": "156326", "text": "Wow, I had never heard of this before but I looked into it a bit and Mikey was spot on. It seems that if you don't pay attention to the fine print when making credit card purchases (as most of us tend to skip) many companies have stipulations that allow continued charges if they are recurring fees (monthly, yearly, etc.) even after you have cancelled the card."}
{"id": "156499", "text": "There are a few methods you can use to estimate your taxes. On the results screen, the app will show you your estimated tax burden, your estimated withholding for the year, and your estimated overpayment/refund or shortfall/tax due.  It may also have recommendations for you on how to adjust your W-4 (although, this late in the year, I think it only tells you to come back next year to reevaluate).   Your state might also have income tax, and if you are curious about that, you can find the state tax form and estimate your state income tax as well. My guess is that you will be getting a refund this year, as you have only worked half of the year.  But that is only a guess."}
{"id": "156553", "text": "\"Buying lotteries tickets makes you the fish not the fisher. Just like casinos or drugs. If you like, you can call buying tickets an \"\"investment\"\" or better yet, a donation in the lottery's owner wealth. No real investor is dumb enough to get into a business where 99.9999999% of the \"\"investors\"\" lose EVERYTHING they invested. Besides, a real investments means BIG money. You can call it so if you are ready to sell your house and buy tickets of all those money, but still, the risk is so high that it's not worth it.\""}
{"id": "156554", "text": "\"This is a great question! I've been an entrepreneur and small business owner for 20+ years and have started small businesses in 3 states that grew into nice income streams for me. I've lived off these businesses for 20+ years, so I know it can be done! First let me start by saying that the rules, regulations, requirements and laws for operating a business (small or large) legally, for the most part, are local laws and regulations. Depending on what your business does, you may have some federal rules to follow, but for the most part, it will be your locality (state, county, city) that determines what you'll have to do to comply and be \"\"legal\"\". Also, though it might be better in some cases to incorporate (and even required in some circumstances), you don't always have to. There are many small businesses (think landscapers, housekeepers, babysitters, etc.) that get income from their \"\"business operations\"\" and do so as \"\"individuals\"\". Of course, everyone has to pay taxes - so as long as you property record your income (and expenses) and properly file your tax returns every year, you are \"\"income tax legal\"\".  I won't try to answer the income tax question here, though, as that can be a big question. Also, though you certainly can start a business on your own without hiring lawyers or other professionals (more on that below), when it comes to taxes, I definitely recommend you indeed plan to hire a tax professional (even if it's something like H&R Block or Jackson Hewitt, etc). In some cities, there might even be \"\"free\"\" tax preparation services by certain organizations that want to help the community and these are often available even to small businesses. In general, income taxes can be complicated and the rules are always changing. I've found that most small business owners that try to file their own taxes generally end up paying a lot more taxes than they're required to, in essence, they are overpaying! Running a business (and making a profit) can be hard enough, so on to of that, you don't need to be paying more than you are required to!  Also, I am going to assume that since it sounds like it would be a business of one (you), that you won't have a Payroll. That is another area that can be complicated for sure. Ok, with those generics out of the way, let me tackle your questions related to starting and operating a business, since you have the \"\"idea for your business\"\" pretty figured out. Will you have to pay any substantial amount of money to attorneys or advisors or accountants or to register with the government? Not necessarily. Since the rules for operating a business legally vary by your operating location (where you will be providing the service or performing your work), you can certainly research this on your own. It might take a little time, but it's doable if you stick with it. Some resources: The state of Florida (where I live) has an excellent page at: http://www.myflorida.com/taxonomy/business/starting%20a%20business%20in%20florida/ You might not be in Florida, but almost every state will have something similar. What all do I need to do to remain on the right side of the law and the smart side of business?  All of the answers above still apply to this question, but here are a few more items to consider: You will want to keep good records of all expenses directly related to the business. If you license some content (stock images) for example, you'll want to document receipts. These are easy usually as you know \"\"directly\"\". If you subscribe to the Apple Developer program (which you'll need to if you intend to sell Apps in the Apple App Stores), the subscription is an expense against your business income, etc. You will want to keep good records of indirect costs. These are not so easy to \"\"figure out\"\" (and where a good accountant will help you when this becomes significant) but these are important and a lot of business owners hurt themselves by not considering these. What do I mean? Well, you need an \"\"office\"\" in order to produce your work, right? You might need a computer, a phone, internet, electricity, heat, etc. all of which allow you to create a \"\"working environment\"\" that allows you to \"\"produce your product\"\". The IRS (and state tax authorities) all provide ways for you to quantify these and \"\"count them\"\" as legitimate business expenses. No, you can't use 100% of your electric bill (since your office might be inside your home, and the entire bill is not \"\"just\"\" for your business) but you are certainly entitled to some part of that bill to count as a business expense. Again, I don't want to get too far down the INCOME TAX rabbit hole, but you still need to keep track of what you spend! You must keep good record of ALL your income. This is especially important when you have money coming in from various sources (a payroll, gifts from friends, business income from clients and/or the App Stores, etc.) Do not just assume that copies of your bank deposits tell the whole story. Bank statements might tell you the amount and date of a deposit, but you don't really know \"\"where\"\" that money came from unless you are tracking it! The good news is that the above record keeping can be quite easy with something like Quicken or QuickBooks (or many many other such popular programs.) You will want to ensure you have the needed licenses (not necessarily required at all for a lot of small businesses, especially home based businesses.) Depending on your business activity, you might want to consider business liability insurance. Again, this will depend on your clients and/or other business entities you'll be dealing with. Some might require you to have some insurance.  Will be efforts even be considered a business initially until some amount of money actually starts coming in?  This might be a legal / accountant question as to the very specific answer from the POV of the law and taxing authorities. However, consider that not all businesses make any money at all, for a long time, and they definitely \"\"are a business\"\". For instance, Twitter was losing money for a long time (years) and no one would argue they were not a business. Again, deferring to the attorneys/cpas here for the legal answer, the practical answer is that you're performing \"\"some\"\" business activity when you start creating a product and working hard to make it happen! I would consider \"\"acting as\"\" a business regardless! What things do I need to do up-front and what things can I defer to later, especially in light of the fact that it might be several months to a couple years before any substantial income starts coming in? This question's answer could be quite long. There are potentially many items you can defer.  However, one I can say is that you might consider deferring incorporation. An individual can perform a business activity and draw income from it legally in a lot of situations. (For tax purposes, this is sometimes referred to as \"\"Schedule-C\"\" income.) I'm not saying incorporation is a bad thing (it can shield you from a lot of issues), but I am saying that it's not necessary on day 1 for a lot of small businesses. Having said that, this too can be easy to do on your own. Many companies offer services so you can incorporate for a few hundred dollars. If you do incorporate, as a small business of one person, I would definitely consider a tax concept called an \"\"S-Corp\"\" to avoid paying double taxes.) But here too, we've gone down the tax rabbit hole again. :-)\""}
{"id": "156640", "text": "\"Short answer, yes. But this is not done through the deductions on Schedule A. This can happen if the employer creates a Flexible Spending Account (FSA) for its employees. This can be created for certain approved uses like medical and transportation expenses (a separate account for each category). You can contribute amounts within certain limits to these accounts (e.g. $255 a month for transportation), with pre-tax income, deduct the contributions, and then withdraw these funds to cover your transportation or medical expenses. They work like a (deductible) IRA, except that these are \"\"spending\"\" and not \"\"retirement\"\" accounts. Basically, the employer fulfills the role of \"\"IRA\"\" (FSA, actually) trustee, and does the supporting paperwork.\""}
{"id": "156793", "text": "According to my calculations, you always lose money on group B.  x = average monthly balance  Income for a year = 0.015 * (12 * x) = 0.18 * x  Cost of funds for one month = 0.04 * x  Cost of funds for one year = 12 * (0.04 * x) = 0.48 * x  Profit? at end of year   = income_for_year - cost_of_funds_for_one_year  = (0.18 * x) - (0.48 * x)  = forever loss"}
{"id": "156908", "text": "\"This is basically the short-term/long-term savings question in another form: savings that you hope are long-term but which may turn short-term very suddenly. You can never completely eliminate the risk of being forced to draw on long term savings during a period when the market is doing Something Unpleasant that would force you to take a loss (or right before it does Something Pleasant that you'd like to be fully invested during). You can only pick the degree of risk that you're willing to accept, balancing that hazard of forced sales against the lower-but-more-certain returns you'd get from a money market or equivalent. I'm considered a moderately aggressive investor -- which doesn't mean I'm pushing the boundaries on what I'm buying (not by a long shot!), but which does mean I'm willing to keep more of my money in the market and I'm more likely to hold or buy into a dip than to sell off to try to minimize losses. That level of risk-tolerance also means I'm willing to maintain a ready-cash pool which is sufficient to handle expected emergencies (order of $10K), and not become overly paranoid about lost opportunity value if it turns out that I need to pull a few thou out of the investments. I've got decent health insurance, which helps reduce that risk. I'm also not particularly paranoid about the money. On my current track, I should be able to maintain my current lifestyle \"\"forever\"\" without ever touching the principal, as long as inflation and returns remain vaguely reasonable. Having to hit the account for a larger emergency at an Inconvenient Time wouldn't be likely to hurt me too much -- delaying retirement for a year or two, perhaps. It's just money. Emergencies are one of the things it's for. I try not to be stupid about it, but I also try not to stress about it more than I must.\""}
{"id": "156923", "text": "A rough estimate of the money you'd need to take a position in a single stock would be: In the case of your Walmart example, the current share price is 76.39, so assuming your commission is $7, and you'd like to buy, say, 3 shares, then it would cost approximately (76.39 * 3) + 7 = $236.17. Remember that the quoted price usually refers to 100-share lots, and your broker may charge you a higher commission or other fees to purchase an odd lot (less than 100 shares, usually).  I say that the equation above gives an approximate minimum because  However, I second the comments of others that if you're looking to invest a small amount in the stock market, a low cost mutual fund or ETF, specifically an index fund, is a safer and potentially cheaper option than purchasing individual stocks."}
{"id": "157121", "text": "\"You really don't think 7 trillion dollars is huge?    BTW, There was no \"\" insane spending uptick\"\".  The budget deficit numbers for the Bush years are meaningless, because the wars were \"\"off budget\"\".  Use [Debt to the penny](http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np) to run the numbers.   Bush added 1,438,236,760,982.61 to the debt in his last 12 months.  Call it 1.43 trillion.\""}
{"id": "157219", "text": "\"Read \"\"Stop Acting Rich\"\" by Dr Thomas Stanley. I'm concerned that even before you've earned your first paycheck you want a flashy car. $4800/yr on $63K/yr income is just about half what I'd recommend to someone who starts working. 10% is the minimum, if and only if, the employer matches 5, for a total 15% saved. Do it in a pretax account and when you go back to grad school convert to Roth.\""}
{"id": "157233", "text": "\"An LLC is overkill for 99% of 1 man small businesses. Side-businesses should remain as sole proprieterships until they get much larger and need the benefits of the LLC laws. You can still bill through a company name if you want to start building a brand: And set aside 25% of your gross income for Uncle Sam. He wants you to file a Schedule C with your regular 1040 at tax time. He doesn't care about your company. He just wants your social security number with a big fat check stuck to it. Be sure to maximize your tax savings by tracking your expenses like a hawk. Every mile is worth 50 cents. I recommend using a tracking system like the TaxMinimiser.com (buy the $4 version to see if you like it). Bottom line: EARN MONEY. Don't set up a \"\"corporation\"\".\""}
{"id": "157414", "text": "Let's look at some of your options: In a savings account, your $40,000 might be earning maybe 0.5%, if you are lucky.  In a year, you'll have earned $200.  On the plus side, you'll have your $40,000 easily accessible to you to pay for moving, closing costs on your new house, etc. If you apply it to your mortgage, you are effectively saving the interest on the amount for the life of the loan.  Let's say that the interest rate on your mortgage is 4%.  If you were staying in the house long-term, this interest would be compounded, but since you are only going to be there for 1 year, this move will save you $1600 in interest this year, which means that when you sell the house and pay off this mortgage, you'll have $1600 extra in your pocket. You said that you don't like to dabble in stocks.  I wouldn't recommend investing in individual stocks anyway.  A stock mutual fund, however, is a great option for investing, but only as a long-term investment.  You should be able to beat your 4% mortgage, but only over the long term.  If you want to have the $40,000 available to you in a year, don't invest in a mutual fund now. I would lean toward option #2, applying the money to the mortgage.  However, there are some other considerations: Do you have any other debts, maybe a car loan, student loan, or a credit card balance?  If so, I would forget everything else and put everything toward one or more of these loans first. Do you have an emergency fund in place, or is this $40,000 all of the cash that you have available to you?  One rule of thumb is that you have 3 to 6 months of expenses set aside in a safe, easily accessible account ready to go if something comes up.   Are you saving for retirement?  If you don't already have retirement savings in place and are adding to it regularly, some of this cash would be a great start to a Roth IRA or something like that, invested in a stock mutual fund. If you are already debt free except for this mortgage, you might want to do some of each: Keep $10,000 in a savings account for an emergency fund (if you don't already have an emergency fund), put $5,000 in a Roth IRA (if you aren't already contributing a satisfactory amount to a retirement account), and apply the rest toward your mortgage."}
{"id": "157759", "text": "For a deep in the money, it almost makes no difference because the intrinsic value, the price of the option, is seldom far above the liquidation value, the price of the underlying less the strike price. For an at the money, ceteris paribus, an early exercise would immediately cut the value of the option to 0; however, life is not so simple as JB King has shown. Purely theoretically, for an at or near the money option, an early exercise will be an instantaneous cost because the value after exercise is less than the previously trading or implied option price."}
{"id": "158058", "text": "Your best course of action is to gather your paperwork, ask around your personal network for a recommendation for a good CPA, and pay that person to do your taxes (business and personal).  Read through the completed package and have them walk you through every item you do not understand.  I would continue doing this until you feel confident that you can file for yourself.  Even then, the first couple of times I did my own, I'd pay them to review my work.  Assuming you find a CPA with reasonable fees, they will likely point out tax inefficiencies in the way you do your business which will more than pay for their fees.   It can be like a point of honor for CPAs to ensure that their customers get their money's worth in this way.  (Not saying all CPAs work this way, but to me, this would be a criteria for one that I would recommend.)"}
{"id": "158075", "text": "Over time, fees are a killer. The $65k is a lot of money, of course, but I'd like to know the fees involved. Are you doubling from 1 to 2%? if so, I'd rethink this. Diversification adds value, I agree, but 2%/yr?  A very low cost S&P fund will be about .10%, others may go a bit higher. There's little magic in creating the target allocation, no two companies are going to be exactly the same, just in the general ballpark. I'd encourage you to get an idea of what makes sense, and go DIY. I agree 2% slices of some sectors don't add much, don't get carried away with this."}
{"id": "158091", "text": "Since you are not starting with a lot of cash the commissions may eat into your account. So go with somebody that has no inactivity fee and low/free commission. I think there are number of sites and the ING sharebuilder.com comes to mind. Scottrade also one of the cheaper ones that i used."}
{"id": "158122", "text": "The only professional designations for people allowed to provide tax advice are Attorney, EA or CPA. Attorney and CPA must be licensed in the State they practice in, EA's are licensed by the Federal government. Tax preparers are not allowed to provide any tax advice, unless they hold any of these designations. They are only allowed to prepare your tax forms for you. So no, tax preparer is not a solution. Yes, you need to talk to a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State, you probably don't need a tax attorney). You should do that before you start earning money - so that you can plan properly and understand what expenses you can incur and how they're handled with regards to your future income tax payments. You might also want to consider a bookkeeping service (many EA/CPA offices offer the bookkeeping as well). But that you can also do yourself, not all that complicated if you don't have tons of transactions and accounts."}
{"id": "158310", "text": "Opportunity cost is the term you're looking for. I.e. (quoting from link) Definition of 'Opportunity Cost'   1. The cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action. Put another way, the benefits you could have   received by taking an alternative action."}
{"id": "158364", "text": "I'd look at Fairmark and understand where in your current bracket you fall. If you are only a bit into that 25% rate, I'd go pretax so you end the year right at that level $69K in 2011. I'd Use the 401(k) to capture any match your company offers, and then use the IRAs for the rest. It would take quite a bit saved for retirement to retire you into the 25% rate, so take advantage of that 15% while you can."}
{"id": "158426", "text": "ChrisW's comment may appear flippant, but it illustrates (albeit too briefly) an important fact - there are aspects of investing that begin to look exactly like gambling. In fact, there are expressions which overlap - Game Theory, often used to describe investing behavior, Monte Carlo Simulation, a way of convincing ourselves we can produce a set of possible outcomes for future returns, etc.  You should first invest time. 100 hours reading is a good start. 1000 pounds, Euros, or dollars is a small sum to invest in individual stocks. A round lot is considered 100 shares, so you'd either need to find a stock trading less than 10 pounds, or buy fewer shares. There are a number of reasons a new investor should be steered toward index funds, in the States, ETFs (exchange traded funds) reflect the value of an entire index of stocks. If you feel compelled to get into the market this is the way to go, whether a market near you of a foreign fund, US, or other."}
{"id": "158838", "text": "\"Here is the thing if in 2020-2040 you can buy CD's that pay 4% then you would kick yourself for paying your mortgage early and costing you a no risk 1% revenue on your money. Think about this?  You have a 4% mortgage that is costing you less than 3% after tax deduction\"\" in 2025 you are buying 10 year notes at 7% which is not out of the question.   You will be making 4% on your money with virtually no risk. Personally I agree with JoeTaxpayer.  I have gone a step further and done so with two houses and I netted myself over 20 grand in 30 months. So in short you have to ask yourself \"\"Can I make more than 3% on my money?\"\"\""}
{"id": "158907", "text": "\"I wrote a brilliant guest post at Don't Mess With Taxes, titled Roth IRAs and Your Retirement Income. (Note - this article now reflects 2012 rates. Just updated) Simply put, it's an ongoing question of whether your taxes will be higher now than at any point in the future. If you are in the 25% bracket now, it would take quite of bit of money for your withdrawals to put you in that bracket at retirement. In the case of the IRA, you have the opportunity to convert in any year between now and retirement if your rate that year drops for whatever reason.  The simplest case is if you are now in the 25% bracket. I say go pre-tax, and track, year by year what your withdrawal would be if you retired today.  At 15%, but with a good chance for promotion to the 25% bracket, start with Roth flavor and then as you hit 25%, use a combination. This approach would smooth your marginal rate to stay at 15%.  To give you a start to this puzzle, in 2012, a couple has a $11,900 standard deduction along with 2 exemptions of $3800 each. This means the first $19,500 in an IRA comes out tax free at retirement. If you believe in a 4% withdrawal rate, you need a retirement account containing $500K pretax to generate this much money. This tick up with inflation, 2 years ago, it was $18,700 and $467K respectively. This is why those who scream \"\"taxes will go up\"\" may be correct, but do you really believe the standard deduction and exemptions will go away?  Edit - and as time passes, and I learn more, new info comes to my attention. The above thoughts not withstanding, there's an issue of taxation of Social Security benefits. This creates a The Phantom Tax Rate Zone which I recently wrote about. A single person with not really too high an income gets thrust into the 46% bracket. Not a typo, 46.25% to be exact.\""}
{"id": "158915", "text": "Exactly, the way you phrase the question makes it too vague to explain. Futures are very complicated instruments, and you should not be going after futures contracts if you are not educated in exactly how they work.  I recommend getting a text on [derivative markets](http://books.google.com/books?id=6fNJGQAACAAJ&amp;dq=Fundamentals%20of%20Derivative%20Markets%20McDonald&amp;source=gbs_book_other_versions) and learn all the ropes before jumping in at all."}
{"id": "159076", "text": "\"Couple of clarifications to start off: Index funds and ETF's are essentially the same investments.  ETF's allow you to trade during the day but also make you reinvest your dividends manually instead of doing it for you.  Compare VTI and VTSAX, for example.  Basically the same returns with very slight differences in how they are run.  Because they are so similar it doesn't matter which you choose. Either index funds and ETF's can be purchased through a regular taxable brokerage account or through an IRA or Roth IRA.  The decision of what fund to use and whether to use a brokerage or IRA are separate. Whole market index funds will get you exposure to US equity but consider also diversifying into international equity, bonds, real estate (REITS), and emerging markets.  Any broker can give you advice on that score or you can get free advice from, for example, Future Advisor.  Now the advice: For most people in your situation, you current tax rate is currently very low.  This makes a Roth IRA a very reasonable idea.  You can contribute $5,500 for 2015 if you do it before April 15 and you can contribute $5,500 for 2016.  Repeat each year.  You won't be able to get all your money into a Roth, but anything you can do now will save you money on taxes in the long run.  You put after-tax money in a Roth IRA and then you don't pay taxes on it or the gains when you take it out. You can use Roth IRA funds for college, for a first home, or for retirement. A traditional IRA is not recommended in your case.  That would save you money on taxes this year, when presumably your taxes are already low. Since you won't be able to put all your money in the IRA, you can put the rest in a regular taxable brokerage account (if you don't just want to put it in a savings account).  You can buy the same types of things as you have in your IRA.   Note that if your stocks (in your regular brokerage account) go up over the course of a year and your income is low enough to be in the 10 or 15% tax bracket and you have held the stock for at least a year, you should sell before the end of the year to lock in your gains and pay taxes on them at the capital gains rate of 0%. This will prevent you from paying a higher rate on those gains later.  Conversely, if you lose money in a year, don't sell. You can sell and lock in losses during years when your taxes are high (presumably, after college) to reduce your tax burden in those years (this is called \"\"tax loss harvesting\"\"). Sounds like crazy contortions but the name of the game is (legally) avoiding taxes.  This is at least as important to your overall wealth as the decision of which funds to buy. Ok now the financial advisor.  It's up to you.  You can make your own financial decisions and save the money but it requires you putting in the effort to be educated.  For many of us, this education is fun.  Also consider that if you use a regular broker, like Fidelity, you can call up and they have people who (for free) will give you advice very similar to what you will get from the advisor you referred to.  High priced financial advisors make more sense when you have a lot of money and complicated finances.  Based on your question, you don't strike me as having those.  To me, 1% sounds like a lot to pay for a simple situation like yours.\""}
{"id": "159137", "text": "\"I would start with long term data. It would show how 40 years worth of stock investing puts the investor so far ahead of the \"\"safe\"\" investor that they can afford to lose half and still be ahead. But - then I would explain about asset allocation, and how the soon to be retired person had better be properly allocated if they weren't all along so that the impact of down years is mitigated. The retiree is still a long term investor as life spans of 90 are common.  Look at the long term charts for the major indexes. So long as you average in, reinvest earnings (dividends) and stay diversified, you will be ahead. The market is still not where it was at the end of 2001, but in the decade, our worth has risen from 5X our income to 12.5X. This was not genius, just a combination of high savings and not panicking.\""}
{"id": "159166", "text": "The methodology for divisor changes is based on splits and composition changes. Dividends are ignored by the index. Side note - this is why, in my opinion, that any discussion of the Dow's change over a long term becomes meaningless. Ignoring even a 2% per year dividend has a significant impact over many decades.  The divisor can be found at http://wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-djiahourly.html"}
{"id": "159245", "text": "I think it's great idea.  Many large brokerages give customers access to a pretty sizable list of zero commission, zero load funds.  In this list of funds will certainly be an S&P 500 index.  So you can open your account for free, deposit your $1,000 for free and invest it in an S&P index for no cost.  You'll pay a very negligible amount in annual expense fees and you'll owe taxes on your gain if you have to use the money.  I don't follow the school of thought that all investment money should be in retirement account jail. But I think if you have your spending under control, you have your other finances in order and just want to place money somewhere, you're on the right track with this idea."}
{"id": "159471", "text": "Why don't you look at the actual funds and etfs in question rather than seeking a general conclusion about all pairs of funds and etfs?  For example, Vanguard's total stock market index fund (VTSAX) and ETF (VTI).  Comparing the two on yahoo finance I find no difference over the last 5 years visually.  For a different pair of funds you may find something very slightly different.   In many cases the index fund and ETF will not have the same benchmark and fees so comparisons get a little more cloudy.  I recall a while ago there was an article that was pointing out that at the time emerging market ETF's had higher fees than corresponding index funds.  For this reason I think you should examine your question on a case-by-case basis.  Index fund and ETF returns are all publicly available so you don't have to guess."}
{"id": "159709", "text": "\"ITR1 or ITR2 needs to be filed. Declare the income through freelancing in the section \"\"income from other sources\"\"\""}
{"id": "159762", "text": "\"When is the best time to pay? At the end of each year? If you save $1,000 each month at 1% so as to pay $12,000 at EOY on a 4.75% loan, you've lost \"\"4.75% - 1% = 3.75%\"\" over that year.  (And that's presuming you put the money in a \"\"high yield\"\" online savings account.) Thus, the best time to pay is as soon as you have the money. EDIT: This all assumes that you have an emergency fund (more than the bare minimum $1K), zero other debt with a higher rate than 4.75% and that you are getting the full company match from 401(k).\""}
{"id": "159949", "text": "If you are allowed to do that then you have a lot of options. Mainly, look at competitor offers and think about consumer utility.   Papa John's is a bit different though because i see them as catering to middle class when really I think those people have dropped their consumption of papa John's sort of goods so really, papa John's should be targeting the same demographic as pizza hut/dominoes.   However, if they do compete in that sphere it is an open announcement of where they stand and I think papa John's thinks too highly of themselves in that regard.   Imo, offer something similar to Costco take out pizza 9.99 for a x-large supreme and that should do a bit. However, lower amount of toppings, but same variety etc. That's pretty much what dominoes did with their large 3 topping carry out. They just lowered the amount of toppings volume wise."}
{"id": "160313", "text": "First, the SSN isn't an issue. She will need to apply for an ITIN together with tax filing, in order to file taxes as Married Filing Jointly anyway. I think you (or both of you in the joint case) probably qualify for the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, if you've been outside the US for almost the whole year, in which cases both of you should have all of your income excluded anyway, so I'm not sure why you're getting that one is better. As for Self-Employment Tax, I suspect that she doesn't have to pay it in either case, because there is a sentence in your linked page for Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident that says However, you may still be treated as a nonresident alien for the   purpose of withholding Social Security and Medicare tax. and since Self-Employment Tax is just Social Security and Medicare tax in another form, she shouldn't have to pay it if treated as resident, if she didn't have to pay it as nonresident. From the law, I believe Nonresident Spouse Treated as a Resident is described in IRC 6013(g), which says the person is treated as a resident for the purposes of chapters 1 and 24, but self-employment tax is from chapter 2, so I don't think self-employment tax is affected by this election."}
{"id": "160464", "text": "\"You have a large number of possible choices to make, and a lot of it does depend upon what interests you when you are older. The first thing to note is the difference between ISAs and pension-contribution schemes tax wise, which is of course the taxation point. When you contribute to your pensions scheme, it is done before taxation, which is why when you draw from your pension scheme you have to pay income tax. Conversely, your ISA is something you contribute to after you have already paid income tax - so besides the 10% tax on dividends if you hold any assets which may them, it is tax free when you draw on it regardless of how much you have accrued over the years.  Now, when it comes to the question \"\"what is the best way to save\"\", the answer is almost certainly going to be filling your pension to the point where you're going to retire just on the edge of the limit, and then putting the rest into ISAs. This way you will not be paying the higher rates of tax associated with breaking the lifetime limit, but also get maximum contributions into your various schemes. There is an exception to this of course, which is the return on investment. If you do not have access to a SIPP (Self Invested Personal Pension), you may be able to receive a far higher return on investment when using a Stocks & Shares ISA, in which case the fact that you have to pay taxes prior to funding it may not make a significant difference. The other issue you have, as others have mentioned is rent.  While now you may be enjoying London, it is in my opinion quite likely that will change when you get older, London has a very high-cost of living, even compared to the home counties, and many of its benefits are not relevant to someone who is retired. When you retire, it is quite possible that you will see it fit to take a large sum out of your various savings, and purchase a house, which means that regardless of how much you are drawing out you will be able to have somewhere to live. Renting is fine when you are working, but when you have a certain amount of (admittedly growing) funds that have to last you indefinitely, who knows if it will last you.\""}
{"id": "160578", "text": "\"If you're still in school, try taking a Training The Street course in financial modeling and excel. Almost all the BB IB's use them and it's very practical for financial modeling (ie using iterative loops properly in Excel and debugging someone else's models).  As someone who did both Finance and Comp Sci undergrad, TTS was extremely useful for \"\"real world\"\" application.\""}
{"id": "160612", "text": "\"The store owners don't know what your intentions are.  All they know is they gave you good cash for a bad check.   Part of this is that you're paying for the bad acts of others in the past, and these people aren't in the business of trying to understand your intentions.  If you show good faith by going in and paying whatever you can, it will go a long way toward getting them to work with you on the balance. I don't know if they'd have much of a criminal case if the check you gave them was clearly marked as \"\"void\"\" and you've shown a willingness to resolve the situation.  Of course you can't blame them for not wanting to accept another check from you.  Good old hard cash, even if it isn't the full amount, will be a better sign of your intent to repay the debt.\""}
{"id": "160625", "text": "I always find this funny. How can government bonds be in attractive and currency be attractive?  With monetary policy America guarantees that it can't default on debt. The only thing that can happen which breaks this is if the government prints itself out of debt. In which case not only will you bonds be worthless but so will your cash.  So to all the investors with boats of cash, you are trading one problem for the same problem. The only difference is you can hold the second problem in your hands.  Fools."}
{"id": "160780", "text": "\"A fascinating view on this. The math of a 10% deposit and projected 10% return lead to an inevitable point when the account is worth 10X your income (nice) and the deposit, 10% of income only represents 1% of the account balance.  The use of an IRA is neither here nor there, as your proposed deposit is still just 1% of your retirement account total. Pay off debt? For one with this level of savings, it should be assumed you aren't carrying any high interest debt.  It really depends on your age and retirement budget. Our \"\"number\"\" was 12X our final income, so at 10X, we were still saving. For you, if you project hitting your number soon enough, I'd still deposit to the match, but maybe no more. It might be time to just enjoy the extra money. For others, their goal may be much higher and those extra years deposits are still needed. I'd play with a spreadsheet and see the impact of reduced retirement account deposits. Note - the question asks about funding the 401(k) vs paying down debt. I'd always advise to deposit to the match, but beyond that, one should focus on their high interest debt, especially by their 50's.\""}
{"id": "160784", "text": "Step 2 (idea worth nothing, traction everything) is about reducing risk for the person buying the company. But traction is a result, not an action. Your idea and your implementation are critical to your achieving traction. That does not mean you need the next industry destroying idea nor that all you need is an idea. But you do need a good idea of some sort for a new business."}
{"id": "160899", "text": "As far as the RRSP goes, see my answer in  self directed RRSP for a non resident Don't forget to file your FBAR and form 8938, if applicable. -Jon"}
{"id": "160922", "text": "You might want to consider 'investing' a portion of that money into educating yourself. The payoff might not be as immediately obvious or gratifying but with appropriate determination, in the long term it will generate you a much greater return. If you would like to learn about investing, a great starting point would be to buy and read the book 'The Intelligent Investor' by Benjamin Graham. This will be a great barometer for how ready you are to invest in the stock market. If you are able to understand the concepts discussed and comprehend why they are important, you will have gone far in ensuring that you will make adequate returns over your lifetime and will - more importantly - increase the odds of safeguarding your capital."}
{"id": "160950", "text": "People will save the money in ira's so it is taxed now instead of later. They don't care about the people at all or the economy in the long run. It is a way to make the economy look like it is growing now, regardless of any long term problem that causes."}
{"id": "161076", "text": "Your 1&2 are the end of that chapter. You can't convert for that year again, and must wait 30 days to convert in the new tax year.  For example, each year for over a decade, I've helped my mother in law with this. In May, we convert a chunk of money/stock to Roth. In April, I'll recharacterize just enough so she tops off her 15% bracket but doesn't hit 25%. 30 days later, the new conversion happens. All the Roth money is money now taxed at 15%, which, in an emergency, a need for a lot of cash, will avoid the potential of 25% or higher, tax. You see, your 3 never really happens."}
{"id": "161230", "text": "This is a bit of an open-ended answer as certain assumptions must be covered. Hope it helps though. My concern is that you have 1 year of university left - is there a chance that this money will be needed to fund this year of uni? And might it be needed for the period between uni and starting your first job? If the answer is 'yes' to either of these, keep any money you have as liquid as possible - ie. cash in an instant access Cash ISA. If the answer is 'no', let's move on... Are you likely to touch this money in the next 5 years? I'm thinking house & flat deposits - whether you rent or buy, cars, etc, etc. If yes, again keep it liquid in a Cash ISA but this time, perhaps look to get a slightly better interest rate by fixing for a 1 year or 2 year at a time. Something like MoneySavingExpert will show you best buy Cash ISAs. If this money is not going to be touched for more than 5 years, then things like bonds and equities come into play. Ultimately your appetite for risk determines your options. If you are uncomfortable with swings in value, then fixed-income products with fixed-term (ie. buy a bond, hold the bond, when the bond finishes, you get your money back plus the yield [interest]) may suit you better than equity-based investments. Equity-based means alot of things - stocks in just one company, an index tracker of a well-known stock market (eg. FTSE100 tracker), actively managed growth funds, passive ETFs of high-dividend stocks... And each of these has different volatility (price swings) and long-term performance - as well as different charges and risks. The only way to understand this is to learn. So that's my ultimate advice. Learn about bonds. Learn about equities. Learn about gilts, corporate bonds, bond funds, index trackers, ETFs, dividends, active v passive management. In the meantime, keep the money in a Cash ISA - where \u00a31 stays \u00a31 plus interest. Once you want to lock the money away into a long-term investment, then you can look at Stocks ISAs to protect the investment against taxation. You may also put just enough into a pension get the company 'match' for contributions. It's not uncommon to split your long-term saving between the two routes. Then come back and ask where to go next... but chances are you'll know yourself by then - because you self-educated. If you want an alternative to the US-based generic advice, check out my Simple Steps concept here (sspf.co.uk/seven-simple-steps) and my free posts on this framework at sspf.co.uk/blog. I also host a free weekly podcast at sspf.co.uk/podcast (also on iTunes, Miro, Mixcloud, and others...) They were designed to offer exactly that kind of guidance to the UK for free."}
{"id": "161254", "text": "Day trading is probably the most often tried and failed activity in the financial world. People think they can parlay $1,000 investment into $1,000,000 in a week with little or no knowledge on how to evaluate stocks and or companies. They think they can just look at where the line graphs' been and forecast where it's going to be next week. Unfortunately if it were that simple everyone would be making money hand over fist in the market.   So in short, the reason day trading is considered a risky venture is because most of the people that attempt to do it are willfully ignorant. They intentionally choose not to read about day trading. They intentionally choose not to learn about how to read a company's financial report and they intentionally choose not to learn how to compare one stock to another. They also don't consider the fact that most of their data is 15 or more min old because of the shady rules brokers have worked into the system.  Real everyday investors that make money in the market do it by careful evaluation of the purchase they are about to make. Guess what, even they lose time to time. That's the game!"}
{"id": "161296", "text": "They mostly make money off of the spread between your order and the spread of the buy and sell currently in the market. As others have previously explained, their buy/sell spreads are a little lacklustre."}
{"id": "161608", "text": "Let's start from the premise that the mortgage is something you will have anyway because you need it to live (as opposed to say getting a bigger mortgage initially in the expectation of paying it down faster than scheduled). In that case I think paying down a mortgage certainly is an investment; one with a well-defined interest rate and maturity that depends on the precise terms of the mortgage. For example I have a (UK) mortgage that's fixed for the next two years at about 5%, and allows overpayments of \u00a3500 per month, which can be withdrawn at any time. So I treat those overpayments as equivalent to savings with quite a nice interest rate, especially since mortgage interest isn't tax deductible and so I actually get the full benefit of that interest rate."}
{"id": "161758", "text": "\"myRA is a name for a proposal Obama made to make IRA more accessible to people who are employed but don't have access to the traditional employer-sponsored retirement plans. However, other than making IRA more accessible - there's nothing in that plan that doesn't exist already. You can open IRA yourself and deposit money there yourself. The only thing \"\"myRA\"\" proposal adds is an ability to deduct money automatically from your paycheck and deposit it into your IRA without you doing it manually. Bottom line - it is just a proposal, not an existing program, that makes things you're already doing easier for people who are not doing it yet.\""}
{"id": "161966", "text": "Does the Spanish market, or any other market in euroland, have the equivalent of ETF's?  If so there ought to be one that is based on something like the US S&P500 or Russell 3000. Otherwise you might check for local offices of large mutual fund companies such as Vanguard, Schwab etc to see it they have funds for sale there in Spain that invest in the US markets.  I know for example Schwab has something for Swiss residents to invest in the US market.  Do bear in mind that while the US has a stated policy of a 'strong dollar', that's not really what we've seen in practice.  So there is substantial 'currency risk' of the dollar falling vs the euro, which could result in a loss for you.  (otoh, if the Euro falls out of bed, you'd be sitting pretty.)  Guess it all depends on how good your crystal ball is."}
{"id": "161985", "text": "\"Are you asking \"\"what does everybody else do/spend\"\"?  I think any amount less that 90% is \"\"safe\"\", but if depends on your goals.  Saving a \"\"dime of every dollar\"\" is a good rule of thumb for retirement, so 90% is left to spend. But I believe that is the wrong way to think about it.  You have expenses; some are optional and some are not.  The percentages aren't the important thing.  What is important is that you meet your obligations and meet your goals.  Everybody is different, so I don't think you can reasonably your percent of expenses to somebody else. In setting up your budget, go the simple route.  You can always get super detailed later if you want. INCOME As you have extra funds, be sure you have an emergency fund (~6 months of expenses) and a fully funded retirement.  Pay off any outstanding debts.  If you are so fortunate to have some left over, then revisit the savings amount or become an investor like many people here; or have fun and go on vacations; or buy a nicer car.  The point being you will know you can afford it. If you put detailed categories under those main categories, that will give you a picture of where you spend you money and you can fix that if desire.  If it bothers you that you spend 15% of your income on imported classical music, you can adjust that with a habit change.\""}
{"id": "162202", "text": "Your parents would file their taxes as they normally do. It would be as if your parents were landlords renting a room to your girlfriend. She would not be claimed on their taxes. If your girlfriend pays rent to your parents (through her parents or otherwise) it would be claimed as rental income. The household size wouldn't change because even though your girlfriend is living with your parents they are not financially responsible for her. Example: A landlord would not claim renters as dependents or in household size on their taxes."}
{"id": "162230", "text": "So you don't have to click the link   &gt;When the 30-year bond yield begins the year below 4%, stocks go up 22.1%.  &gt;When investment grade bonds yield below 4%, stocks go up 16%.  &gt;When high yield bonds yield below 8%, stocks go up 11.6%.  &gt;When cash as a percent of asset for non-financials is above 10%, stocks go up 17.6%.  &gt;When the Fed tightens 0-75 basis points in the year, stocks go up 22%.  &gt;When oil falls more than 20%, stocks go up\u00a027.5%."}
{"id": "162294", "text": "You would be surprised. I work in a grocery store where poor customers use a food stamps card to buy their groceries but pull out a debit card for a $60 carton of cigarettes and a $20 case of beer. They use the money they should be using for food on other things because they get an EBT card."}
{"id": "162330", "text": "\"**Put aside the politics?**  That's laughable for an article that is nothing BUT politics.  For starters the artificially false conflation of *everyone* as if their behavior were homogeneous, when in reality it is a full spectrum (there are many people with not only ZERO debt, but substantial assets, including very productive assets).  Ergo the argument that there is some egalitarian \"\"solution\"\" to this by treating everyone the same way... is in fact a POLITICAL assumption (and a very biased one at that).\""}
{"id": "162630", "text": "Firstly if you've formed a limited company you don't need to register as self-employed.  You're an employee and shareholder of the company and your taxes will be handled that way. Registering as self-employed is only necessary if you're operating as a sole trader (i.e. without a company). Secondly you absolutely do want to get set-up correctly with HMRC as soon as possible, whether you're a company or a sole trader.  Ignoring the legal question your worry about paying taxes when you have no income is groundless - if you're not making any money there won't be any tax to pay.  Furthermore it seems likely that the business is currently losing money.  Those losses, if correctly recorded, can be carried forward and offset against future profits so not only do you not have to pay tax now, but you can reduce the tax you pay later when the money does start rolling in."}
{"id": "162633", "text": "Even if you could get it with no major hassle, $100,000 is just not that much money.  In a cheap third world country, as an expat you're looking at spending about $800-$2000/month, plus unexpected expenses. Locals live on less, but very few of us would be happy with the lifestyle of a Honduran or Thai farmer. Your 100k will last 4-10 years. This is hardly a great deal considering you're cutting off ties back home and almost becoming a fugitive. With USD going down the drain (e.g. in Thailand it went down 25% in 3 years), this period would probably be even shorter.  Of course, you could work in the new country, but if you do then you don't need 100k to start with. The initial amount may improve your security, but from that standpoint being able to go back and work in your home country is worth more."}
{"id": "162745", "text": "Some have suggested you can put the money in the 401k then take a loan to pay off the student loan debt.  Some things to consider before doing that: Check your 401k plan first.  Some plans allow you to continue paying on a loan if you leave the company, some do not.  If you have to change jobs before you pay back the 401k loan, you may only have 90 days to completely pay the loan or the IRS will treat this as an early withdrawal, which means taxes and penalties.  If you don't have another job lined up, this is going to make things much worse since you will have lost your income and may owe even more to the government (depending on your state, it may be up to 50% of the remaining amount).  There are ways to work with some student debt loans to defer or adjust payments.  There is no such option with a 401k plan. This may change your taxes at the end of the year.  Most people can deduct student loan interest payments.  You cannot deduct interest paid to your 401k loan.  You are paying the interest to yourself though.   It may hurt your long term growth potential.  Currently loans on 401k loans are in the 4% range.  If you are able to make more than 4% inside of your 401k, you will be losing out on that growth since that money will only be earning the interest you pay back. It may limit flexibility for a few years.  When people fall on hard times, their 401k is their last resort.  Some plans have a limit on the number of loans you can have at one time.  You may need a loan or a withdrawal in the future.  Once you take the money out for a loan, you can't access it again.  See the first bullet about working with student loan vendors, they typically have ways to work with you under hard circumstances.  401k loans don't. Amortization schedule.  Many 401k loans can only be amortized for a max of 5 years, if you currently have 10 year loans, can you afford to pay the same debt back in 1/2 the time at a lower rate?  You will have to do the math. When considering debt other than student loans (such as credit cards), if you fall on hard times, you can always negotiate to reduce the amount you owe, or the debt can be discharged (with tax penalties of course).  They can't make you take money out.  Once it is out, it is fair game. Just to clarify, the above isn't saying you shouldn't do it under any circumstances, it is a few things you need to evaluate before making that choice.  The 401k is supposed to be used to help secure your financial future when you can't work.  The numbers may work out in the short term, but do they still work out in the long term?  Most credit cards require minimum payments high enough to pay back in 7-10 years, so does shortening that to 5 (or less) make up for the (probably early) years of compounding interest for your retirement?  I think others have addressed some of this so I won't do the math. I can tell you that I have a 401k loan, and when things got iffy at my job for, it was a very bad feeling to have that over my head because, unlike other debts, there isn't much you can do about it."}
{"id": "162767", "text": "I am going to. Like I said I have not traded options much in general, but I can see a lot of potential in derivatives in general, and it makes me kind of grin. In the case of commodities, the advantages are really apparent. The only problem I see with stock options is that they expire, and thus if you are more long term bull on a stock, it would be harder. But for things like commodities, that are shorter term any ways and require margin, it makes a lot of sense IMO. I could see how you could gain a larger diversification through options (being able to bet on Russell 2000, S&amp;P, etc. ) or esoteric markets (electricity).   I will look up that book that you mentioned. Thanks man."}
{"id": "162804", "text": "the difference would be taxes...  Lets say you have two lots, one with a 10 dollar gain, and one with a 20 dollar gain.  And lets say you decide to sell one lot this year, and the other lot in 10 years.  AND, lets say that it turns out the stock price is exactly the same in ten years as it is when you sell the first lot. In all likelyhood, you'll have more income, and therefore you are likely to be in a different marginal tax rate.  If you believe that you're more likely to pay more taxes in 10 years, then sell the lot with the higher gain now.  If you believe you're more likely to pay more taxes now, then sell the lot with the lower gain now."}
{"id": "162916", "text": "In the absence of a country designation where the mutual fund is registered, the question cannot be fully answered.  For US mutual funds, the N.A.V per share is calculated each day after the close of the stock exchanges and all purchase and redemption requests received that day are transacted at this share price. So, the price of the mutual fund shares for April 2016 is not enough information: you need to specify the date more accurately. Your calculation of what you get from the mutual fund is incorrect because in the US, declared mutual fund dividends are net of the expense ratio. If the declared dividend is US$ 0.0451 per share, you get a cash payout of US$ 0.0451 for each share that you own: the expense ratio has already been subtracted before the declared dividend is calculated.  The N.A.V. price of the mutual fund also falls by the amount of the per-share dividend (assuming that the price of all the fund assets (e.g. shares of stocks, bonds etc) does not change that day). Thus. if you have opted to re-invest your dividend in the same fund, your holding has the same value as before, but you own more shares of the mutual fund (which have a lower price per share). For exchange-traded funds, the rules are slightly different. In other jurisdictions, the rules might be different too."}
{"id": "163034", "text": "You're correct. If you have no option position at execution then you carry no risk. Your risk is only based on the net number of options you're holding at execution. This is handled by your broker or clearinghouse. Pretend that you wrote 1000 options, (you're short the call) then you bought 1000 of the same option (bought to cover) ... you are now flat and have zero options exposure. Pretend you bought 1000 options (you're long the calls) then you sold 1000 of them (liquidated your long) ... you are now flat and have zero options exposure."}
{"id": "163641", "text": "Leverage comes in many forms.  You'll learn about things like operational leverage, financial leverage, and total leverage throughout school.  In the real world, tier 1 capital ratio has become the most commonly scrutinized because it is essentially a ratio of the core equity capital of a firm divided by the risk weighted assets (assets multiplied by a credit weighting which for most banks now a days is using the standard of Basel 2.5 and moving towards Basel III).  The multiples you talked about were references to the reciprocal of this formula.  You could reciprocate the T1C ratio and get a whole number that is the multiplier.  This multiplier would show for every 1$ in core capital, how much the firm held in risk weighted assets.  The 30x number would have represented a tier 1 cap of 3.33%.  The concept behind it being, a 10% growth in risk weighted assets with a 3.33% T1CR would result in a 300% growth in core equity capital value.  As proven in 2008, it is a double edge blade and works the same way in both directions."}
{"id": "163670", "text": "\"Long here does not mean you wish for the underlying stock to increase in value, in fact, as the chart shows, just the opposite is true.  \"\"Long means you bought the derivative, and you own the option. The guy that sold it to you is at your mercy, he is short the put, and it's your decision to put the stock to him should it fall in value.  The value of the put itself rises with the falling stock price, you are long the put and want the put, itself, to rise in value.\""}
{"id": "163693", "text": "\"In 2013, an allowance/exemption is like saying, \"\"Please don't tax $3,900 this year.\"\" So 8 allowances is $31K not taxed. It doesn't wipe out your tax withholding.  Circular E will show you the exact amount they'll withhold based on the allowances you claim.  Keep in mind, the withholding is run-rated. i.e. it assumes a full year of work. If you had no income for the first 6 months of the year, you will actually still have too much withheld even though the number is right for the full year, starting 2014.\""}
{"id": "163836", "text": "Outside of a tax sheltered IRA or 401(k) type of account your transactions may trigger tax liability.  However, transactions are not taxed immediately at the time of the transaction; and up to a certain limits capital gains can be offset by capital losses which can mitigate your liability at tax time.  Also, remember that dividend receipts are taxable income as well. As others have said, this has nothing to do with whether or not money has been moved out of the account."}
{"id": "163854", "text": "\"To your first comment: yup. To your second comment, A = L + E. If E goes down, and L goes up, the net effect is 0. Then, if L goes down, and A goes up, the net effect is 0 and we are balanced once again. There is no \"\"rebalancing\"\" equity. You just have to make sure that, at the end of your journal entries, the accounting equation holds.  It's a very unintuitive concept to wrap your head around, but spend some time mapping out the flow of various journal entries. Once it clicks, you'll really understand the logic.\""}
{"id": "164001", "text": "\"Ignoring the complexities of a standardised and regulated market, a futures contract is simply a contract that requires party A to buy a given amount of a commodity from party B at a specified price. The future can be over something tangible like pork bellies or oil, in which case there is a physical transfer of \"\"stuff\"\" or it can be over something intangible like shares. The purpose of the contract is to allow the seller to \"\"lock-in\"\" a price so that they are not subject to price fluctuations between the date the contract is entered and the date it is complete; this risk is transferred to the seller who will therefore generally pay a discounted rate from the spot price on the original day. In many cases, the buyer actually wants the \"\"stuff\"\"; futures contracts between farmers and manufacturers being one example. The farmer who is growing, say, wool will enter a contract to supply 3000kg at $10 per kg (of a given quality etc. there are generally price adjustments detailed for varying quality) with a textile manufacturer to be delivered in 6 months. The spot price today may be $11 - the farmer gives up $1 now to shift the risk of price fluctuations to the manufacturer. When the strike date rolls around the farmer delivers the 3000kg and takes the money - if he has failed to grow at least 3000kg then he must buy it from someone or trigger whatever the penalty clauses in the contract are. For futures over shares and other securities the principle is exactly the same. Say the contract is for 1000 shares of XYZ stock. Party A agrees to sell these for $10 each on a given day to party B. When that day rolls around party A transfers the shares and gets the money. Party A may have owned the shares all along, may have bought them before the settlement day or, if push comes to shove, must buy them on the day of settlement. Notwithstanding when they bought them, if they paid less than $10 they make a profit if they pay more they make a loss.  Generally speaking, you can't settle a futures contract with another futures contract - you have to deliver up what you promised - be it wool or shares.\""}
{"id": "164038", "text": "\"At this level it's not so much about \"\"handling money\"\" in the way we think of it in the first world.   It's more like you have no possible way to get enough capital to get out of a desperately bad situation. But if you do get that capital, you can start digging your way out.  For example, in one case I read about, someone used part of that $1000 to buy a cow. Then she started selling milk and saving money.\""}
{"id": "164044", "text": "\"Assuming no constraints on how much you can move (or how frequently) into and out of your offset mortgage account, the question becomes one of what rate of return you expect from your long-term savings/emergency cash fund. The rate you are getting from the offset mortgage account is known; since it reduces the principal amount owing and thus reduces interest charges, the return is the mortgage rate (though I would not be surprised if the offset mortgage account contract has bells and whistles reducing the effective rate, saying something like 3 pounds reduction of principal for every 5 pounds you put in). So, as a movie character once said, \"\"Do you feel lucky today?\"\"  If so, move money from your offset mortgage account to savings, and earn more.  If not, move money in the opposite direction. A \"\"guaranteed\"\" 2% return on the offset mortgage account might be better than taking a risk on the vagaries of the stock market, and even the possibility of loss in your long term savings account.\""}
{"id": "164137", "text": "\"How about the new Mastercard \"\"In Control\"\" card http://www.pivotalpayments.com/ca/industry-news/mastercard-introduces-in-control-program-to-help-consumers-budget-800077802/ You can set budgets at your bank and go between getting alerts when you go over, or completely declined if you are out of money.  There are going to be obvious loop holes and slack in the system, but this system seems like a pretty neat start. Combine this with a bank account that does bill pay and you might have something to work with.\""}
{"id": "164454", "text": "If you're a customer, TD Ameritrade has a really robust alerting system."}
{"id": "164513", "text": "To mhoran's point, yes, the company, TIAA-CREF is valid. I'd focus on the expenses -   Their S&P fund (Index US Large Cap Equity Portfolio) shows a .11% total fee. You might choose this one, or others, but this number looks great to me. We are in an investment world where fees are still often over 1%, and we are conditioned to think anything less is a good fee. For me, the goal is less than .25% in your retirement fund, college savings, etc."}
{"id": "164672", "text": "You're young.  Build a side business in your spare time.  Invest in yourself.  Fail a few times when you have some time to recover financially. Use the money that you would have let sit in some account and develop your skills, start up an LLC, and build up the capacity to get some real returns on your money. Be a rainmaker, not a Roth taker."}
{"id": "164987", "text": "The difference is that for the one year time frame the data is represented based on daily data and the SMA is 20 days, whilst for the 5 year timeframe the data is automatically represented as weekly data with the SMA represented by 20 weeks not 20 days anymore. This happens due to daily data on this chart being too much data to represent over a 5 year period so the data defaults to weekly data over such a long period. If the chart is represented as weekly data then any indicators will also have to be represented in weekly data. If you use a more sophisticated charting program you can actually select to see daily or weekly data over longer periods such as 5 years or more."}
{"id": "165246", "text": "\"There is no fundamental, good reason, I think; \"\"that's just how it's done\"\" (which is what all the other answers seem to be saying, w/o coming out and admitting it). Just guessing, but I'll bet most of the reason is historical: Before up-to-the-moment quotes were readily available, that was a bit tedious to calculate/update the fund's value, so enacted-laws let it be done just once per day.  (@NL7 quotes the security act of 1940, which certainly has been updated, but also still might contain the results of crufty rationales, like this.) There are genuinely different issues between funds and stocks, though: One share of a fund is fundamentally different from one share of stock: There is a finite supply of Company-X-stock, and people are trading that piece of ownership around, and barter to find an mutually-agreeable-price.  But when you buy into a mutual-fund, the mutual-fund \"\"suddenly has more shares\"\" -- it takes your money and uses it to buy shares of the underlying stocks (in a ratio equal to its current holdings).  As a consequence: the mutual fund's price isn't determined by two people bartering and agreeing on a price (like stock); there is exactly one sane way to price a mutual fund, and that's the weighted total of its underlying stock.  If you wanted to sell your ownership-of-Mutual-Fund-Z to a friend at 2:34pm, there wouldn't be any bartering, you'd just calculate the value based on the stated-value of the underlying stock at that exact moment. So: there's no inherent reason you can't instantaneously price a mutual fund.  BUT people don't really buy/sell funds to each other -- they go to the fund-manager and essentially make a deposit-or-withdraw.  The fund-manager is only required by law to do it once a day (and perhaps even forbidden from doing it more often?), so that's all they do. [Disclaimer: I know very little about markets and finance. But I recognize answers that are 'just because'.]\""}
{"id": "165397", "text": "\"The best reason for endorsing a check is in case it is lost. If the back is blank, a crooked finder could simply write \"\"pay to the order of \"\" on it and deposit it in his own account. You do not need a signature for the endorsement. The safest way to endorse a check is to write \"\"FOR DEPOSIT ONLY\"\" followed by an account number, in which case the signature is not needed. most businesses make up rubber stamps with this and stamp it the minute they receive a check. That way it has no value to anyone else. Depositing checks is increasingly going the way of the dodo. Many businesses today use check truncation - the business scans the check in, sends the digital image to the bank, and stores the check. I was surprised that Chase already has an applet for iPhones that you can use to deposit a check by taking a picture of it!\""}
{"id": "165544", "text": "Shares are partial ownership of the company. A company can issue (not create) more of the shares it owns at any time, to anyone, at any price -- subject to antitrust and similar regulations. If they wanted to, for example, flat-out give 10% of their retained interest to charity, they could do so. It shouldn't substantially affect the stock's trading for others unless there's a completely irrational demand for shares."}
{"id": "165549", "text": "You're ignoring the fact that you still had the taxes from the $5500 (so $1375) left over when making the traditional IRA contribution.  So yes, the Roth IRA grew without further taxing more than the Traditional IRA did; but you could've just as easily invested that $1375 in the same investments. While you'd owe taxes on them, true, you'd still earn a boatload of money.  That's another $10,607 you've earned, not tax-free, but with gains at the 15% CGR is still $9170.  So you now have $60,627 in the Roth, available tax-free, or you have $60,627 available at a 10% or so average rate (12% if you like, though I think you'll find it's more like 10%).   Say $53351, plus $9170 from the not-sheltered income after taxes, for $62,521 after taxes. So you make about $2000 more by using the traditional IRA for $5500 and then just investing the rest in a long term account.  The math might be slightly worse if you invest in something that has regular dividend taxes due, but if you're careful to use tax-favored investments you should be okay, and even if you don't you'll still end up ahead in the end if you make the same exact investment as your tax-sheltered account. Ultimately the question is: are you paying more in taxes now, or later, comparing now marginal rate to later average rate.  If you are paying more in taxes now, then traditional IRA plus invest the rest unsheltered.  If you're paying more later, then Roth IRA."}
{"id": "165645", "text": "Yes, you've summarized it well. You may be able to depreciate your computer, expense some software licenses and may be home office if you qualify, but at this scale of earning - it will probably not cover for the loss of the money you need to pay for the additional SE tax (the employer part of the FICA taxes for W2 employees) and benefits (subsidized health insurance, bonuses you get from your employer, insurances, etc). Don't forget the additional expense of business licenses, liability insurances etc. While relatively small amounts and deductible - still money out of your pocket. That said... Good luck earning $96K on ODesk."}
{"id": "165659", "text": "ETF's are great products for investing in GOLD. Depending on where you are there are also leveraged products such as CFD's (Contracts For Difference) which may be more suitable for your budget. I would stick with the big CFD providers as they offer very liquid products with tight spreads. Some CFD providers are MarketMakers whilst others provide DMA products. Futures contracts are great leveraged products but can be very volatile and like any leveraged product (such as some ETF's and most CFD's), you must be aware of the risks involved in controlling such a large position for such a small outlay. There also ETN's (Exchange Traded Notes) which are debt products issued by banks (or an underwriter), but these are subject to fees when the note matures. You will also find pooled (unallocated to physical bullion) certificates sold through many gold institutions although you will often pay a small premium for their services (some are very attractive, others have a markup worse than the example of your gold coin). (Note from JoeT - CFDs are not authorized for trading in the US)"}
{"id": "165710", "text": "Crazy idea but... on the offchance your friend is near one of Europe's few bitcoin ATM's ... buy some bitcoin, transfer them to your friend, and they can presumably cash them in at the ATM.  I've no idea how much bid-offer spreads will eat into the transfer or whether you can tolerate bitcoin volatility though. Unless there are money laundering regulations that mean anyone wanting to use one of these ATM's has to agree some ID checks that your friend can't satisfy (I don't actually know much about bitcoin at all). If not a bitcoin ATM, maybe there are other ways your friend can convert bitcoin value to something more useful (bitcoin to mobile-phone top-ups seem to be possible, for example)."}
{"id": "165917", "text": "You could always maintain a limit order to sell at a price you're comfortable with."}
{"id": "166056", "text": "I second all of this. It\u2019s worth noting that not all estates require wealth advice. Unless it\u2019s in the millions of dollars and you have no prior experience, I wouldn\u2019t waste time with wealth advisors.   ML is a broker dealer, not a fiduciary."}
{"id": "166204", "text": "I love even _job application technology_ used online these days still don't have an option for self-employment or freelance. Some industries like television or magazines have been almost 100% freelance for a generation. My field, graphic design (and advertising), is probably about 30% freelance. Yet even those firms when posting a job will want to see your experience in neat little boxes that look like past employer A followed by past employer B."}
{"id": "166227", "text": "First off, you should phone your broker and ask them just to be 100% certain. You will be exercised on the short option that was in the money. It is irrelevant that your portfolio does not contain AAPL stock. You will simply be charged the amount it costs to purchase the shares that you owe. I believe your broker would just take this money from your margin/cash account, they would not have let you put the position on if your account could not cover it. I can't see how you having a long dated 2017 call matters. You would still be long this call once assignment of the short call was settled."}
{"id": "166885", "text": "You have no idea where interest rates will go.  A year or two ago people thought 3% was absurdly low, why buy them?  And then interest rates dropped even further, so the people who bought then got more interest AND the present value went up since then.  If you'd done nothing you would have lost money.  Now, rates are REALLY absurdly low.  What do?  Well, they could drop even more!  It's possible.  We could also have 20 years of flatline - see Japan.  Sitting on your hands loses money.  What else should you do?  Put your money in risky equities?  A lot of people these days are buying dividend paying stocks now.  It's extremely foolhardy to treat stocks as fixed income because they are very far from it.  Overextending yourself and taking on too equity risk, IMO, is FAR more risky than accepting low interest rates+interest rate risk.  Finally: I don't exactly use bonds to make money, I use it as a safe haven while I wait for stocks to do something.  Stocks go up, I sell some and buy bonds.  Bonds go up I sell them and buy more stock.  It's nice to get a little interest on the side but not critical.  I could use cash (or 1month tbills) but I'm comfortable with the amount of risk-return that 5-10year bonds provide."}
{"id": "166904", "text": "It\u2019s all about networking in this situation. I don\u2019t mean the gauge business sense of building relationships. It\u2019s about going around 24/7 with the how can I help people attitude. Same for social media. For instance write 15 articles (2000+ words) per month about various things you sell focusing on your area. Attend, as has been a aid, local conferences and volunteer to help at local community events, etc. Small local businesses are hard. Most of the time it\u2019s not about getting one things right, but about getting a lot of little things right over a long period. That\u2019s what made Walmart such a success. Good luck!"}
{"id": "167088", "text": "You can always use those virtual/paper trading games/websites/apps instead of actually investing. They're completely free to use and you can use them to compete. You'll each create a portfolio of stocks and the game will simulate market conditions to see how your stocks would perform real-time.   It's a great way to learn how to invest, and discussing what happened/why _____ sector performed higher/etc. It's a great way to start.  If you're looking for a discussion-type thing, start off by reading the Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham, and discuss amongst the club.  Frankly, I don't see why you can't do both, investing and discussing/learning.  Virtual Trading Websites: MarketWatch Virtual Stock Exchange  Apps: StockWars: Virtual Trading"}
{"id": "167128", "text": ""}
{"id": "167315", "text": "That was my exact feeling reading this. It was a stroke of luck that Bob got bought out and an even bigger stroke of luck that he got into a position that he could help out the supplier.  If none of that had happened, he would have just cost the supplier money and woken somebody up at 2am for something that could have been dealt with the next morning."}
{"id": "167446", "text": "I would put about a month's worth of expenses in the highest-paying savings account that you find convenient to access. For the rest, I recommend Ally's High-Yield CDs \u2014 specifically, the 5-year option. Normally 5 years would be way too long to commit short-term savings to a CD. However, the Ally CDs allow you to break them for a penalty of only two months worth of interest. If you look at the graph below (from when the rates were 3.09% APY), you can see the effective interest rate at every possible time you break the CD early. Doing the math, if you can keep your savings in the account for at least four months, it will outperform any other current FDIC-backed investment that I am aware of, for the length of time the money was invested.  (credit: MyMoneyBlog)"}
{"id": "167684", "text": "It is a Scam. Don't invest more money here. Their website is the proof. Investments may appreciate or depreciate and you may not receive more   than you initially invested. The Peterson Group offers products that   are traded on margin and entail a degree of risk. You may incur losses   that exceed your initial investment. Please ensure you are aware of   and fully understand the risks involved, and seek independent advice   if necessary. Losses exceeding your initial investments does not sound a good investment even if it is not a scam. Not much contact information. Their contact page has only a form. No email. No phone number. No social media links. I would like to point some information from Dumbcoder's answer, Just browsed their website. Not a single name of anybody involved.   Their application process isn't safe(No https usage while transferring   private information). No names of the person's involved is a thing to notice. All the companies websites name their owner, CEO and the like."}
{"id": "167896", "text": "If you are able to buy a 150K home for 50K now that would be a good deal!  However, you can't you have to borrow 100K in order to make this deal happen.  This dramatically increases the risk of any investment, and I would no longer classify it as passive income.   The mortgage on a 150K place would be about 710/month (30 year fixed).  Reasonably I would expect no more than 1200/month in rent, or 14,400.  A good rule of thumb is to assume that half of rental revenue can be counted as profit before debt service.  So in your case 7200, but you would have a mortgage payment of 473/month.  Leaving you a profit of 1524 after debt service.  This is suspiciously like 2K per year.  Things, in the financial world, tend to move toward an equilibrium. The benefit of rental property you can make a lot more than the numbers suggest.  For example the home could increase in value, and you can have fewer than expected repairs.  So you have two ways to profit:  rental revenue and asset appreciation. However, you said that you needed passive income.  What happens if you have a vacancy or the tenant does not pay?  What happens if you have greater than expected repairs?  What happens if you get a fine from the HOA or a special assessment?  Not only will you have dip into your pocket to cover the payment, you might also have to dip into your pocket to cover the actual event! In a way this would be no different than if you borrowed 100K to buy dividend paying stocks.  If the fund/company does not pay out that month you would still have to make the loan payment.  Where does the money come from?  Your pocket.  At least dividend paying companies don't collect money from their shareholders. Yes you can make more money, but you can also lose more.  Leverage is a two edged sword and rental properties can be great if you are financial able to absorb the shocks that are normal with ownership."}
{"id": "167943", "text": "is it a smart thing for an entry level employee with a basic pay to buy a property on debt ? This is opinion based and can't be conclusively answered by others. Only you can make the choice. Their reasoning is that, since I am paying for their house rent right now(I have been doing this ever since I got into graduate school), I could divert it to pay for the loan while getting a property in return If I understand this, you are currently NRI [as you are working in Japan], you would like to take a home loan in India and buy a property in India.  In the current scenario, the EMI towards home loan do not equate to the Rent as property prices have gone up in most places. In 2002 - 2007, there was a time of low interest rates and low property prices, that along with tax breaks made it cheaper to buy than rent. Also note that since you are NRI, you do not get any income tax rebate on interest paid. If you buy please ensure that all the EMI's are paid from NRE account. This would in future help you repatriate funds out of India, if you plan to sell the house. But I am scared of getting into debt so early in my career. If I commit myself like that, it might make me less courageous in making career changes till I finish paying off that debt. This is a valid concern, if you need to pursue further studies, or take a break for a change in career, it would make it difficult. Also note there are additional costs of buying a house, apart from EMI, there property tax, if you staying in society, a monthly maintenance etc."}
{"id": "167950", "text": "\"Fail? What is the standard? If you include the base case of keeping your money under a mattress, then you only have to earn a $1 over your lifetime of investing to not fail. What about making more by investing when compared to keeping money in a checking or savings account? How could 90% of investors fail to achieve these standards? Update: with the hint from the OP to google \"\"90% investors lose their money\"\" it is clear that \"\"experts\"\" on complex trading systems are claiming that the 90% of the people that try similar systems, fail to make money. Therefore try their system, for a fee. The statements are being made by people who have what should be an obvious bias.\""}
{"id": "168440", "text": "No. And I'll let my good friend and fellow blogger Kay Bell answer in some detail, in her article Deducting private mortgage insurance."}
{"id": "168444", "text": "I understand where you're coming from but you're mostly just quoting the plaintiff's attorney. That's not going to be the source of unbiased information. Furthermore, I don't trust general news sources when it comes to complex financial reporting. I don't really even trust business journals as they are mostly filled with j degrees without real experience. Bankruptcy cases can get very complex and unpredictable because judge's have significant leeway; you really need to read the case opinion to see what really went down. I work in finance and deal with bankruptcies on a semi-regular case. I am on the buy side (the side that would be screwed in cases like this) so my inherent bias goes your way against poor management.   If this guy actually moved assets from company 1 to company 2 at a non-arms length transaction then that is misconduct and assets can be recovered from company 2 usually. If Learning Annex was pari passu with Robert and he pulled dividends out to himself, that is misconduct that will be punished by a bankruptcy court. If he did these things they are not smart business practices, and will be punished.  Your condescension does not help your case. I most likely know far more about this topic than you, as I have seen the nuances corporate bankruptcies take on in the real world. I just don't trust grossly oversimplified reporting in a case that is ongoing."}
{"id": "168453", "text": "i would recommend that you establish a landlord/tenant relationship instead of joint ownership (ie 100% ownership stake for one of you vs 0% for the other). it is much cleaner and simpler.  basically, one of you can propose a monthly rent amount and the other one can chose to be either renter or landlord. alternatively, you can both write down a secret rental price offer assuming you are the landlord, then pick the landlord who wrote down the smaller rental price.  if neither of you can afford the down payment, then you can consider the renter's contribution an unsecured loan (at an agreed interest rate and payment schedule). if you must have both names on the financing, then i would recommend you sell the property (or refinance under a single name) as quickly as possible when the relationship ends (if not before), pay the renter back any remaining balance on the loan and leave the landlord with the resulting equity (or debt).  in any case, if you expect the unsecured loan to outlive your relationship, then you are either buying a house you can't afford, or partnering on it with someone you shouldn't."}
{"id": "168561", "text": "On my quarterly statement and the 401K plan website I can see the vesting for various categories. They total all these up and report the total balance and the vested balance. If I do the math I discover that the vested balance is equal to A + B + D + (60% of C) For my company at least, if I was to leave now I would get 60% of the Company match, which does include significant gains. This document for the Department of Labor discuss many aspects of 401K plans including vesting. In a defined contribution plan such as a 401(k) plan, you are always   100 percent vested in your own contributions to a plan, and in any   subsequent earnings from your contributions. However, in most defined   contribution plans you may have to work several years before you are   vested in the employer\u2019s matching contributions. (There are   exceptions, such as the SIMPLE 401(k) and safe harbor 401(k), in which   you are immediately vested in all required employer contributions. You   also vest immediately in the SIMPLE IRA and the SEP.) Currently, employers have a choice of two different vesting schedules   for employer matching 401(k) contributions, which are shown in Table   2. Your employer may use a schedule in which employees are 100 percent vested in employer contributions after 3 years of service (cliff   vesting). Under graduated vesting, an employee must be at least 20   percent vested after 2 years, 40 percent after 3 years, 60 percent   after 4 years, 80 percent after 5 years, and 100 percent after 6   years. If your automatic enrollment 401(k) plan requires employer   contributions, you vest in those contributions after 2 years.   Automatic enrollment 401(k) plans with optional matching contributions   follow one of the vesting schedules noted above."}
{"id": "168791", "text": "Ask any successful person, what's more important, time or money, they'll all say the same thing--time. One can always make more money, but you'll never get the time back you invest. Now, would YOU rather invest 40 hours of your time at $13, or 30 hours of your time at $15. Tell me what's asinine. Choosing to give up your time for less dollars per hour or more?"}
{"id": "168827", "text": "Avoid gold brokers who do business through the mail. Video Full Article"}
{"id": "169240", "text": "You can keep the cash in your account as long as you want, but you have to pay a tax on what's called capital gains. To quote from Wikipedia: A capital gain is a profit that results from investments into a capital asset, such as stocks, bonds or real estate, which exceeds the purchase price. It is the difference between a higher selling price and a lower purchase price, resulting in a financial gain for the investor.[1] Conversely, a capital loss arises if the proceeds from the sale of a capital asset are less than the purchase price. Thus, buying/selling stock counts as investment income which would be a capital gain/loss. When you are filing taxes, you have to report net capital gain/loss. So you don't pay taxes on an individual stock sale or purchase - you pay tax on the sum of all your transactions.  Note: You do not pay any tax if you have a net capital loss. Taxes are only on capital gains.  The amount you are taxed depends on your tax bracket and your holding period. A short term capital gain is gain on an investment held for less than one year. These gains are taxed at your ordinary income tax rate. A long term capital gain is gain on an investment held for more than one year. These gains are taxed at a special rate: If your income tax rate is 10 or 15%, then long term gains are taxed at 0% i.e. no tax, otherwise the tax rate is 15%. So you're not taxed on specific stock sales - you're taxed on your total gain. There is no tax for a capital loss, and investors sometimes take profits from good investments and take losses from bad investments to lower their total capital gain so they won't be taxed as much. The tax rate is expected to change in 2013, but the current ratios could be extended. Until then, however, the rate is as is.  Of course, this all applies if you live in the United States. Other countries have different measures. Hope it helps!  Wikipedia has a great chart to refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax_in_the_United_States."}
{"id": "169275", "text": "You also might want to see what sort of documentation the credit card company has. Companies can get pretty lazy sometimes about recordkeeping; there have been cases where banks tried to foreclose on a property but weren't able to produce documents establishing the mortgage. With your father dead, is there anything other than the credit card company's word that the debt is valid?"}
{"id": "169309", "text": "The price of a bond goes up when yields go down.  For example, you purchase a 5% bond today for $100 and the very next day the same bond is being offered with a rate of 10%.  Will you be able to sell you bond for the $100 you paid?  No, you must compete with the 10% bonds being sold so you will have to sell your bond for less than the $100 you paid to compete with the new bonds being sold.  Thus, bond prices are inversely related to bond yields. The 20-year index you cited tracks bond prices and bond prices have gone up over the last 10 years which means bond yields have gone down.  Why have bond prices gone up?  Demand.  More investors are moving their savings into bonds.  Why?  I believe there a couple of reasons.  One, US Treasuries are thought to be one of the safest investments.  With the financial crisis and increased stock market volatility (see chart below) more investors are allocating more of their portfolios to safer investments.  Two, a large portion of the US population is approaching retirement (see chart below).  These folks are not interested in watching their retirement portfolios potentially shrink in the stock market so they move into bonds."}
{"id": "169496", "text": "The banks figure that they'll get 80% of the value of the property at a sheriff's sale. So, they're lending you what they think they can recover if you default."}
{"id": "169548", "text": "Your impression about banks and bankers is very wrong.  Wall street banks can and often do lose in transactions.  In fact, banks go bankrupt and/or require massive bailouts to survive because they sometimes lose a ton of money.  The business of investment banking often involves bearing risk for customers, which, by definition, means they lose some of the time.  Generally the risks they take on individual transactions are not large enough to bring the whole bank down, but sometimes they are.  Banking is a job like any other, except that it has more risk than most. Anyway, to your point, how do underwriters make money on shares that fall in value before the sale?  On the commission.  The issuing company will normally pay the investment bank a percentage of the funds raised in the offering, regardless of the price.  Of course, it's possible for the bank to still lose money if their contract stipulates a minimum price and they are not able to meet it.  In that case, the bank may lose on that offering, contradicting your preconceived notion. By the way, one other question implicit in your post: Why was the secondary offering considered bad news?  If the CEO and other insiders have private information that indicates that the stock is overvalued, then doing a secondary offering at the inflated price will greatly enrich them.  Because this happens some times, investors are wary about secondary offerings.  This makes companies that would otherwise do a secondary offering shy away from it, even if shares are not overpriced.  Therefore if a company is doing a secondary offering, the market is likely to worry that the stock is overvalued even at a reduced price."}
{"id": "169840", "text": "Did you read your own link?  It lists a lot of conflicting studies and concludes that there is no consensus as a result of those.  Even if you were to cherry pick and select the worst case study, the difference is still less than  5 points, which is too small to be really meaningful."}
{"id": "169921", "text": "Here is an overview of who owns US Debt from Wikipedia, it indicates that approximately 1/3rd of US debt is held by foreigners (mainly the central banks of other countries), approximately 1/2 of US Debt is held by the federal reserve, and the rest is owned by various America organizations (mutual funds, pension funds, etc). The money is loaned via bonds, treasury bills, etc. When you put money in your pension fund, you very likely buying US debt. The US Treasury department all has a comprehensive page about how public debt works in the United States here: an overview of public debt from the treasury. I wasn't able to find a similar breakdown for other countries, but Wikipedia has a comprehensive list of how much debt is owed by other countries: a list of countries by public debt."}
{"id": "169978", "text": "The OP might have obtained his credit card by now but I'm answering now as there is one more easy way to get a credit card. All major Indian banks like SBI, ICICI, HDFC and Axis issue instant credit cards on opening a FD (Fixed Deposit).  For instance ICICI offers one for FD amount of as less as \u20b920000. The credit limit on such cards will be 85% of the deposit amount. Another advantage of these kind of cards is customer won't be charged any annual fees and at the same time interest will be paid on original FD."}
{"id": "170042", "text": "\"If they could really do this, do you really think they would be wasting their time offering this course? You are being lied to. (Or more accurately: It's certainly possible to gamble and get lucky, but those gambles are  more likely to result in your rapidly  losing your money than in your rapidly gaining value.) It is possible to make money in the market. But \"\"market rate of return\"\" has historically averaged around  8%. That won't make you rich by itself, but it's better return than you can get from banks... at higher risk, please note. There are places in the market where, by accepting more risk of losing your money, you can improve on that 8%. For me the risk and effort are too much for the potential additional gains, but de gustibus.\""}
{"id": "170096", "text": "\"For this type of loan, to be considered \"\"arm's length,\"\" the rate needs to be fair (you got that covered), the loan must be secured against the house, via a lien, else it may be considered a non-deductible personal loan, and last, you need the 1099.  You might get away with the first 2, as he's claiming the interest, but the lien is key.\""}
{"id": "170625", "text": "\"+1 on all the answers above. You're in a great position and have the right attitude. A good book on the subject is A Random Walk Down Wall Street - well worth a read. Essentially, go for low tax paying in, low tax taking out approach (in the uk that's a SIPP or ISA), a low cost well diversified unit fund (like a Vanguard LifeStrategy 100), on a low cost platform (\"\"Annual Management Charge\"\" in be UK). Keep paying a regular amount and let compound interest take care of things. I'd also add that you should think about what lifestyle you would want at specific ages and work out what you need to save to achieve these - even though they are probably a long time in the future, it makes your goals \"\"real\"\". Read Mr Money Moustache for some ideas http://www.mrmoneymustache.com\""}
{"id": "170632", "text": "Taxes should not be calculated at the item level. Taxes should be aggregated by tax group at the summary level. The right way everywhere is LINE ITEMS SUMMARY PS:If you'd charge at the item level, it would be too easy to circumvent the law by splitting your items or services into 900 items at $0.01 (Which once rounded would mean no tax). This could happen in the banking or plastic pellets industry."}
{"id": "170752", "text": "And this is why we calculate actual yield and not just coupons. Nobody pays par for high yield notes. If the company performs well, the price of your note goes up and you can realize a gain when is called or your sell it.  High yield works exactly like equity, and in a lot of cases it's better because it spits out cash in the meantime.  I'm not even allowed to call the interest I get on my HY notes as interest. All realized gain."}
{"id": "170887", "text": "&gt;[**Michael Pento \u2013 Gold Setting Up for Huge Spike Higher [28:48]**](http://youtu.be/U3qHMPgYy4c)  &gt;&gt;Financial analyst and money manager Michael Pento says, \u201cI think it is setting up for a huge spike higher.  I don\u2019t think the time for that to start is exactly now, but the gold market is catching a bid here.  The big boom in gold and gold mining shares will be when we have a watershed moment, when the market realizes in mass the central banks have lost control of the economy and the money supply.  That is coming very, very soon, no later than the middle of 2018, and it could probably happen this fall, and that is when the market understands that central banks don\u2019t really control interest rates.  They cannot control the long end of the yield curve, and they will destroy economic growth and stock markets across the world.  That is the big moment when you want to pile into gold.  If you don\u2019t have any gold, you should have at least 10% always.  That\u2019s your base level. . . . Hard assets will go through the roof.\u201d  &gt; [*^Greg ^Hunter*](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG-G8LLr38fQUNZU8K0t-EA) ^in ^News ^&amp; ^Politics  &gt;*^47,716 ^views ^since ^Jul ^2017*  [^bot ^info](/r/youtubefactsbot/wiki/index)"}
{"id": "171054", "text": "\"Self directed IRAs have rules to prevent self-dealing of this sort called \"\"prohibited transactions\"\". You can't buy or sell or lease assets or obtain services from anyone closely linked to you or any beneficiaries of the IRA. You can't loan yourself money from the IRA, and you can't deliberately take the proceeds that should be going to your self directed IRA and give them to another account that you own.\""}
{"id": "171242", "text": "Some banks give you an indemnity form that will allow them to clear the payment available in a different name. This is usually in case the name on the cheque is slightly misspelled. For example, color (American) could be spelt as colour (British). In India for example, names can often be spelt in multiple ways. the indeminity form is common place."}
{"id": "171276", "text": "Thank you for that tip. I've not heard of that but will look into it. I am reading the Pumpkin Patch right now, and working in the Babson College program via Goldman Sach's 10,000 Small Business and it has me spinning on all the things to consider. Great learning experience thus far."}
{"id": "171295", "text": "I don't trust his analysis.  Further, any composite measure that includes a Black Swan year is *at least potentially* misleading. 2009 was a once in multigenerations event unlikely to be repeated anytime soon.  Since Shiller uses a 10 year historical running average it includes 2009 and is therefore, IMO, unreliable. Making 2009 look even more like an aberration is that the hole had been filled and then some in under 4 years."}
{"id": "171420", "text": "\"I struggled with this one at first.   It's easiest if you temporarily ignore the mathematical machinery of martingales and go back to the derivation that Black and Scholes provide in their 1973 paper. They basically show that when you construct a portfolio consisting of a long position in the option (the one being priced) and a short position on the replicating portfolio (consisting of shares of stock and cash in the risk-free bank account), then that portfolio will be entirely risk-less, and hence will earn the risk-free rate of interest. This makes intuitive sense if you think about it - every change in the value of the option is going to be countered by an opposite change in the replicating portfolio; by no arbitrage, that composite portfolio (the option + the replicating portfolio) must therefore earn the risk-free rate.   The fact that the composite portfolio earns the risk-free rate provides the connection to martingale pricing.   Recall that a martingale is basically* a stochastic process that has no drift, only volatility. Here, it's useful to think of the drift as being the \"\"risk  premium\"\" or \"\"return\"\" of a particular asset (like the stock).   What martingale pricing theory says is that to find the price of the option we (1) discount the value of the replicating portfolio by the cash bond (the numeraire asset), and (2) turn the stochastic process of the risky asset in the replicating portfolio into a martingale. This move intuitively makes sense because the Black-Scholes derivation shows that the replicating portfolio + the option must earn the risk-free rate, but if you divide the value of the Black-Scholes replicating portfolio by the numeraire asset, you're going to cancel out that risk-free rate -- e.g. have a Martingale.  (I'm not a mathematician, so please correct me if I've mucked something up in my explanation).   *I say basically because there are some technical conditions that need to be fulfilled, but that's generally true.\""}
{"id": "171483", "text": "No, it's not.  This could be a great question, but with no background, not so much. Do you live there now? For how long, and how much longer? You say investment, are you looking to live in it or rent it out?  I have nothing against China, but I'd not buy anywhere unless the price, location, and timing all were right."}
{"id": "171712", "text": "I would be realistic and recognize that however you invest this money, it is unlikely to be a life-changing sum. It is not going to provide an income which significantly affects your monthly budget, nor is it going to grow to some large amount which will allow you to live rent-free or similar. Therefore my advice is quite different to every other answer so far. If I was you, I would: I reckon this might get you through half the money. Take the other $25,000 and go travelling. Plan a trip to Europe, South America, Asia or Australia. Ask your job for 3 or 6 months off, and quit it they won't give it you. Find a few places which you would really like to visit, and schedule around them a lot of time to go where you want. Book your flights in advance, or book one way, and put aside enough money for the return when you know where you'll be coming back from. Stay in hostels, a tent or cheap AirBnB. Make sure you have a chance to meet other people, especially other people who are travelling around. Figure out in advance how much it will cost you a day to live basically, and budget for a few beers/restaurants/cinema/concert tickets/drugs/whatever you do to have fun.  It's really easy nowadays to go all sorts of places, and be very spontaneous about what you want to do next. You will find that everywhere in the world is different, all people have something unusual about them, and everywhere is interesting. You will meet some great people and probably become both more independent and better at making friends with strangers. Your friends in other countries could stay friends for life. The first time you see Rome, the Great Barrier Reef, the Panama canal or the Tokyo fish market will be with you forever. You have plenty of years to fill up your 401K. You won't have the energy, fearlessness and openmindedness of a 23 year old forever. Go for it."}
{"id": "171819", "text": "\"There some specific circumstances when you would have a long-term gain. Option 1:  If you meet all of these conditions: Then you've got a long-term gain on the stock.  The premium on the option gets rolled into the capital gain on the stock and is not taxed separately.  From the IRS: If a call you write is exercised and you sell the underlying stock, increase your amount realized on the sale of the stock by the amount you received for the call when figuring your gain or loss. The gain or loss is long term or short term depending on your holding period of the stock. https://www.irs.gov/publications/p550/ch04.html#en_US_2015_publink100010630 Option 2: If you didn't hold the underlying and the exercise of the call that you wrote resulted in a short position, you might also be able to get to a long-term gain by buying the underlying while keeping your short position open and then \"\"crossing\"\" them to close both positions after one year. (In other words, don't \"\"buy to cover\"\" just \"\"buy\"\" so that your account shows both a long and a short position in the same security.  Your broker probably allows this, but if not you, could buy in a different account than the one with the short position.)  That would get you to this rule: As a general rule, you determine whether you have short-term or long-term capital gain or loss on a short sale by the amount of time you actually hold the property eventually delivered to the lender to close the short sale. https://www.irs.gov/publications/p550/ch04.html#en_US_2015_publink100010586 Option 1 is probably reasonably common.  Option 2, I would guess, is uncommon and likely not worthwhile. I do not think that the wash sale rules can help string along options from expiration to expiration though.  Option 1 has some elements of what you wrote in italics (I find that paragraph a bit confusing), but the wash sale does not help you out.\""}
{"id": "171831", "text": "Sure, Yahoo Finance does this for FREE."}
{"id": "172128", "text": "\"Read the terms carefully.  With promotional offers, if you do anything \"\"bad\"\", the promotion is terminated and you immediately revert to either your normal rate or a penalty rate. \"\"Bad\"\" includes things like: making a late payment, going over your limit, paying less than the minimum payment, etc. I wouldn't sweat the potential credit score impacts. These promotions are pretty much the best deals that you can get for an unsecured loan.\""}
{"id": "172192", "text": "I don't at all agree that it violates Square terms of service.  But having said that, it's a bloody expensive way to do things.  Square charges beaucoup fees, that more than obliterate any kind of points you might earn. Only for emergencies, should one do this."}
{"id": "172303", "text": "\"As to where the interest comes from: The same place it comes from in other kinds of savings accounts. The bank takes the money you deposit and invests it elsewhere, traditionally by lending it out to others (hence the concept of a \"\"savings and loan\"\" bank). They make a profit as long as the interest they give for \"\"borrowing\"\" from you, plus the cost of administering the savings accounts and loans, is less than the interest they charge for lending to others. No, they don't have to pay you interest -- but if they didn't, you'd be likely to deposit your funds at another bank which did. Their ideal goal is to pay as little as possible without losing depositors, while charging as much as possible without losing borrowers. (yeah, I know, typo corrected) Why do they get higher interest rate than they pay you? Mostly because your deposits and interest are essentially guaranteed, whereas the folks they're lending to may be late paying or default on those loans. As with any kind of investment, higher return requires more work and/or higher risk, plus (ususally) larger reserves so you can afford to ride out any losses that do occur.\""}
{"id": "172305", "text": "How would you respond to these cases: Limited card options - If someone has a bad credit record the cards available may only be those with an annual fee.  Not everyone will have your credit record and thus access to the cards you have. Some annual fees may be waived in some cases - Thus, someone may have a card with a fee that could be waived if enough transactions are done on the card.  Thus, if someone gives enough business to the credit card company, they will waive the fee. On the point of the rewards, if the card is from a specific retailer, there could be a 10% discount for using that card and if the person purchases more than a couple thousand dollars' worth from that store this is a savings of $200 from the retail prices compared to what would happen in other cases that more than offsets the annual fee.  If someone likes to be a handyman and visits Home Depot often there may be programs to give rewards in this case. Credit cards can be useful for doing on-line purchases, flight reservations, rental cars and a few other purchases that to with cash or debit can be difficult if not close to impossible. Some airline cards have a fee, but presumably the perks provide a benefit that outweigh that fee over the year. I'm thinking of the Citibank cards tied to American Airlines, first year free, then an $85 fee."}
{"id": "172443", "text": "\"Except the government in this case has decided to limit itself to Euros, a currency it does not control and therefore one it can \"\"run out of\"\", making deficit spending a risky proposal indeed.  The correct approach is of course to never join such a regime in the first place, and then deficit spend as needed to keep your labor force highly employed.\""}
{"id": "172452", "text": "The Key aspect is the risk of market orders;   You should be worried about point 2 & 3 when you are doing market orders."}
{"id": "172565", "text": "It's not really about nation states, the problem is larger than that.  The West who consumes too much, faced off against the East who makes too much.  Seems like everyone's just waiting for the dollar to fail, so some new order can resolve."}
{"id": "172652", "text": "Sorry, no, any time you sell for a profit you owe tax."}
{"id": "172736", "text": "There are a few factors I like to consider when I'm reasoning financially over my households cars. How many KMs will the car travel each year because I like to factor in how often tires will need to be changed, how much tires for my models cost as well as how gas efficient they are. Knowing how much the car is driven and in what environmental/road conditions is also important factors to know because that will help guestimate possible repairs cost. Also possible taxes should be taken in to consideration. For example a few years ago I had a diesel Citroen C5 that had yearly taxes of roughly 500$. The replacement costs only 150$ a year in taxes. So switching cars 3 years early would have saved me 1050$ in taxes. So some information on possible taxes, how far you drive each year, what environmental conditions, type of driving (daily long rides or just short etc..) as well as the fuel efficiency of both cars would help to better calculate your costs for say three scenarios. Car change in 12, 24 and 32 months respectively."}
{"id": "172745", "text": "\"Re the business license - in California business licenses are given by the municipal/county governments, so you'll have to check that with your city hall or county office. Re taxes - yes, you'll have to pay taxes, as with any income. Services are considered \"\"imputed income\"\", and generally you'd recognize income to the extent they would be paying had they been paying the full price (or the actual cost of services provided, if more). Since this is a hobby and not a for-profit enterprise, your deductions may be limited by the actual income and the 2% AGI threshold. See more here.\""}
{"id": "172761", "text": "\"Banks make money on load origination fees. The \"\"points\"\" you pay or closing costs are the primary benefit to the banks. A vast majority of the time risks associated with the mortgage are sold to another party. FYI, the same is true with investment banks. In general, the transaction costs (which are ignored by modern finance theory) are the main thing running the incentives for the industry.\""}
{"id": "172783", "text": "Lending of securities is done by institutional investors and mutual funds. The costs of dealing with thousands of individual investors, small share blocks and the various screw-ups and drama associated with each individual are too high. Like many exotic financial transactions, if you have to ask about it, you're probably not qualified to do it."}
{"id": "173133", "text": "Tax questions require that you specify a jurisdiction.  Assuming that this is the US, you owe Federal income tax (at the special long-term capital gains tax rate) on the net long-term capital gains (total long-term capital gains minus total long-term capital losses) and so, yes, if these two were your only transactions involving long-term holdings, you would pay long-term capital gains tax on $3000-$50 = $2950.  Many States in the US don't tax long-term capital gains at special rates the way the Federal Government does, but you still pay taxes on the net long-term capital gains. I suspect that other countries have similar rules."}
{"id": "173196", "text": "The debt doesn't have to and never should be paid off.  The fed could print $20T tomorrow and swap all outstanding US govt debt for cash and it would be net neutral in terms of financial assets outstanding.    The result would be a massive removal of income paying assets, and near total loss of control and influence over interest rates however."}
{"id": "173212", "text": "\"I would say to only bother keeping the ones you know you'll use for itemized deductions. This includes any unreimbursed business expenses and vehicle licensing fees. There are a lot of other itemized tax deductions possible, but those are two common ones. Also, keep track of your business mileage (mileage before and after the trip, and commuting doesn't count as \"\"business mileage\"\"). You may also want to keep receipts of all out-of-state purchases if your state is one of those that tries to collect state tax on out-of-state purchases. Ensure your supported charities are 501(c)(3), and they'll give you a receipt at the end of the year. Don't bother keeping fast food or gas receipts (unless they're business expenses).\""}
{"id": "173431", "text": "Wow, hard to believe not a single answer mentioned investing in one of the best asset classes for tax purposes...real estate.  Now, I'm not advising you to rush out and buy an investment property.  But rather than just dumping your money into mutual funds...over which you have almost 0 control...buy some books on real estate investing.  There are plenty of areas to get into, rehabs, single family housing rentals, multifamily, apartments, mobile home parks...and even some of those can have their own specialties.  Learn now! And yes, you do have some control over real estate...you control where you buy, so you pick your local market...you can always force appreciation by rehabbing...if you rent, you approve your renters.  Compared to a mutual fund run by someone you'll never meet, buying stocks in companies you've likely never even heard of...you have far more control. No matter what area of investing you decide to go into, there is a learning curve...or you will pay a penalty.  Go slow, but move forward. Also, all the advice on using your employer's matching (if available) for 401k should be the easiest first step.  How do you turn down free money?  Besides, the bottom line on your paycheck may not change as much as you think it might...and when weighed against what you get in return...well worth the time to get it setup and active."}
{"id": "173566", "text": "I haven't read this article, but the most pressing question I have from the headline is the timeline. We all know that triple-a rated CDOs were horrific in the financial crisis. How about ones that have been created in the past couple of years?"}
{"id": "173745", "text": "Let's consider that transaction cost is 0(zero) for calculation. In the scenario you have stated, maximum profit that could be made is 55$, however risk is unlimited. Hedging can also be used to limit your losses, let's consider this scenario. Stock ABC trading @ 100$, I'll buy the stock ABC @ 100$ and buy a put option of ABC @ strike price 90$ for a premium of 5$ with an expiration date of 1 month. Possible outcomes I end up in a loss in 3 out of 4 scenarios, however my loss is limited to 15$, whereas profit is unlimited."}
{"id": "173846", "text": "CFDs (Contracts for Difference) are basically a contract between you and the broker on the difference in price of the underlying between the time you open a position and close a position. You are not actually buying the underlying. With share CFDs, the outcome is a bit like buying the underlying shares on margin. You pay interest for every day you hold the CFDs overnight for long CFDs. However, with short positions, you get paid interest for every day you hold your short position overnight. Most people use CFDs for short term trading, however they can be used for medium to longer term trading just as you would hold a portfolio on margin. What you have to remember is that because you are buying on margin you can lose more than your initial contract amount. A way to manage this risk is by using position sizing and stop loses. With your position sizing, if you wanted to invest $10,000 in a particular share trading at $10 per share, you would then buy 1000 shares or 1000 CFDs in that share. Your initial expense with the CFDs might be only $1000 (at a margin rate of 10%). So instead of increasing your risk by having an initial outlay of $10,000 with the CFDs you limit your risk to the same as you were buying the shares directly."}
{"id": "173903", "text": "Here's how I have worked it out.  Different answer to the one expected.  Pretty sure it's right though."}
{"id": "173929", "text": "My recommendation is to not ask for a credit increase, but just increase the utilization of one card if you have multiple cards, and decrease the utilization of the others, and continue paying off all cards in full each month.  In a  few months, you  will likely be offered a credit increase by the card that is getting increased use.  The card company that is getting the extra business knows that you are paying off big bills each month and keeping your account in good standing, and they will likely offer you a credit increase all by themselves because they want to keep your business.  If no offer is forthcoming, you can call the card company and ask for a credit increase. If they refuse, tell them that you will be charging very little on the card in the future  (or even canceling your card, though that will cause a hit on your credit score) because of their refusal, and switch your high volume to a different card."}
{"id": "174016", "text": "They will just break the company up into subsidiaries.     A smaller company will run the mail room, another will run the computer repair, yet another will run the sales team and so on an so forth. There will be one small executive company that runs all those companies and siphons all the revenue from all of the subsidiaries. Using your scheme they can make you a 30% owner of a subsidiary that services another subsidiary and makes no money at all and in fact is a money loser and stock options will mean nothing.  Major motion pictures do something similar: each movie is its own entity/company, lets call it BigExpensiveMovie397 Co., that is only around for a single movie. BigExpensiveMovie397 then hires other companies to do the work: catering, set building, production and everything else that makes a movie.  And here is the fun part: if BigExpensiveMove397 is a hit, then it will pay a lot of licensing fees to yet other corporations that allowed it the use of its characters, story and anything else they can think of.  Those licensing fees tend to *always* be more that whatever profit BigExpensiveMove397 makes. And that is how movies like LOTR is a money loser...no matter how much money it makes.  Which is why the convinced Congress to ban using actual money with HSX...   There is no way to beat such accounting. The only choice is not to take jobs like that. But since we are competing with the World and a good annual salary is $6K a year....we have a long way to go down to hit equilibrium."}
{"id": "174019", "text": "There are at least three important aspectss missing from your equation. However they come with some uncertainty as one typically cannot tell the future performance. Appreciation of the rental units value. When comparing to the gain of any alternative investment an increasing value of the flat is a gain too. Increase of rent. Rents are typically adjusted either on a regular basis or at least when changing tennants. Calulation with a flat rent over 20 years is therefore way off. Tax deductions due to capital expenditures (i.e. mortgages), expenses for the upkeep and maintenance of the property, conserving and management, and so on. Obviously those are depending on your local legislation. There are multiple other issues to consider of course, e.g. inadvertant vacancy, which would not act in your favour."}
{"id": "174025", "text": "You are right that even if you do not receive a 1099-MISC, you still need to report all income to the IRS.  Report the $40 on Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ.  Since your net profit was less than $400, you do not need to file Schedule SE.  From the IRS web site: Self-Employment Income It is a common misconception that if a taxpayer does not receive a Form 1099-MISC or if the income is under $600 per payer, the income is not taxable. There is no minimum amount that a taxpayer may exclude from gross income. All income earned through the taxpayer\u2019s business, as an independent contractor or from informal side jobs is self-employment income, which is fully taxable and must be reported on Form 1040. Use Form 1040, Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, or Form 1040, Schedule C-EZ, Net Profit from Business (Sole Proprietorship) to report income and expenses. Taxpayers will also need to prepare Form 1040 Schedule SE for self-employment taxes if the net profit exceeds $400 for a year. Do not report this income on Form 1040 Line 21 as Other Income. Independent contractors must report all income as taxable, even if it is less than $600. Even if the client does not issue a Form 1099-MISC, the income, whatever the amount, is still reportable by the taxpayer."}
{"id": "174122", "text": "Some sample prices for straightforward pay-for-hours-or-deliverables planners: I think I've seen some similar rates elsewhere, too. I'd feel like you might get something perfunctory and boilerplate for too much less than $1000 - how could the person afford to spend much time? - and I'd feel like lots more than $1000 for just a standard straightforward plan might be a ripoff. Basically you're paying $1000 for a day or two of work, you don't want just a couple hours of work, but you don't need a week of work either. Anyway, extracting the general guideline (since prices may vary regionally or over time), you could figure it takes a day or two to do a decent job on a basic complete financial plan without a lot of complexities in it. From there you can decide what's fair, adding or subtracting time if you need less than a complete plan or have complex issues. This is assuming you're paying for time and deliverables, which is not a given. The biggest factor in how much you pay is probably how they charge; a couple of the most common models, (There are other models but these are the ones I've seen most.) The difference between these two models is a lot of money over time. Hourly is going to be much cheaper, because it's a one-time cost instead of ongoing, and unrelated to what you have in assets. However, you won't get investment management, which can be valuable if you aren't the kind to stick to an investment plan or you want someone else to completely take care of it for you. The investment-management planners have the potential to make a lot more money (and are more likely to be in it for the money). Hourly planners don't really have as good a business from a business owner's perspective, but they are cheaper from a customer perspective, as long as you're happy to DIY a bit. One thing I like about hourly planners is that I don't really feel investments are the main place planners can add value, so it makes me nervous to have the compensation based on that. Insurance, estate planning, taxes, etc. are where it's harder for a layperson to know all the ins and outs and DIY. From what I've seen, the cheapest planners are the ones that you can get free or discounted from companies like USAA or Vanguard if you have an account with them. However, they will only recommend products from the company in question, so that's a downside, and you probably won't get to meet them in person. This question may be useful too: What exactly can a financial advisor do for me, and is it worth the money?"}
{"id": "174227", "text": "absolutely $SPY ETF is the way to go if your point of comparison is the S&P and you want to do low maintenance."}
{"id": "174315", "text": "It's not really fair for him to say share buybacks are 4% of GDP, because share buybacks don't directly contribute to GDP. Presumably, if a company has excess cash than what can profitably be reinvested into the business, then it should return that cash to the shareholders (buybacks). Then, it is up to the shareholders to decide how to reallocate that capital. Theoretically, shareholders will allocate that capital into profitable ventures. The assumption being, distributing capital to profitable ventures is more efficient than distributing capital to non-profitable ventures. And the efficient distribution of capital should increase GDP in the long run.  If you believe that sort of thing. Personally, Id rather that every employee was paid a respectable wage for their labor, not the bare minimum that they'll accept to avoid starvation. But that's another issue all together, so nevermind."}
{"id": "174384", "text": "Many banks here have some kind of service that will do this for you. For example, Wells Fargo has 'Bill Pay On Line'. You can use this to make regular payments - for your rent or mortgage, car payment, utilities and so on. You can also go on line and pay any company or person. If they don't have the facilities to accept electronic payment, the bank will actually mail them a check.  See https://www.wellsfargo.com/online-banking/bill-pay/ and https://www.wellsfargo.com/wfonline/tour/olb/high_flash?deep_link=2 Bank of America has something similar, but this forum won't let me post more than two links.  Go to google and search the name of the bank with 'send payments' or 'pay on line'."}
{"id": "174714", "text": "\"When you pay the flight, hotel, conference attendance fees of $100: When you repay the credit card debt of $100: When you receive the gross salary of $5000: Your final balance sheet will show: Your final income statement will show: Under this method, your \"\"Salary\"\" account will show the salary net of business expense. The drawback is that the $4900 does not agree with your official documentation. For tax reporting purposes, you report $5000 to the tax agency, and if possible, report the $100 as Unreimbursed Employee Expenses (you weren't officially reimbursed). For more details see IRS Publication 529.\""}
{"id": "175019", "text": "You are neglecting a few very important things around real estate transactions in Belgium So in the end a 300K building may cost you more than 340K, let's take some unexpected costs into account and use 350K for remainder of calculation. Even worse if it's newly built (which I doubt) the first percentage is 21% (VAT) instead of 10%. All these costs can be checked on the useful site www.hoeveelkostmijnhuis.be Now, aside from that most banks will and actually have to demand you pay part of all this yourself. So you can't do 5*60K (or 5*70K now). Mostly banks will only finance up to about 90% of the value of the building, so 90% of 300K, which is 270K (5*54K), the other 80K (5*16K) you have to pay yourselves. But it could be the bank goes as low as 80%. Another part to complicate the loan is how much you can pay a month. Since the mortgage crisis they're very strict on this. There are lots of banks that will not allow you to make monthly payments of more than 33% of your monthly income when you are going to live there. This is a nuisance even when buying one house, you want to buy 2. Odds seem low they'll accept high monthly payments because you either need an additional loan or need to pay rent, so don't count on a 5y deal. Now this is all based on a single loan, it will probably be a bit different with multiple loans. However, it is unlikely any bank will accept this, even if all loans are with the same bank. You need to consider the basics of a real-estate loan: A bank trusts you can pay it off and if not they can seize the real-estate hoping to regain their initial investment. It's very hard to seize a complete asset if only one out of 5 loan-takers defected. You could  maybe do this with another less restrictive/higher risk type of loan but rates will be a lot higher (think 5-6% instead of 1.5%). And don't underestimate the running costs: for that price and 5 rooms in that city you're likely looking at an older building. Expect lots of cost for maintenance and keeping the building according to code. Also expect costs for repairs (you rent to students...). You'll also have to pay quite a bit of money on insurances and of course on real estate taxes (which are average in Ghent). Also factor in that currently there is not a housing shortage for Ghent students so you might not always have a guaranteed occupation. Also take into account responsibility: if a fire breaks out or the house collapses or a gas leak occurs, you might be sued. It doesn't matter if you're at fault, it's costly and a big nuisance. Simply because you didn't think of any of this: don't do this. It's better to invest in real estate funds. But if you still think you can do better then all the landlords Ghent is riddled with, don't do it as a personal investment. Create a BVBA, put some investment in here (like 10-20K each), approach a bank with a serious business plan to get the rest of the money as a loan (towards a single entity - your BVBA) and get things going. When the money comes in you can either give yourselves a salary or pay out profits on the shares. You may be confused about how rich you can become because we as a nation tend to overestimate the profitability of real estate. It's really not that much better than other investments (otherwise everybody would only invest in real estate funds). There are a few things that skew our vision however:"}
{"id": "175107", "text": "If you just want to know total return, either as dollars or a percentage, just add up the total amount spent on buys and compare this to current value plus money received on sales. In this case, you spent (310 x $3.15 + $19.95) + (277 x $3.54 + $19.95). So your total investment is ... calculator please ... $1996.98. You received 200 x $4.75 on the sale minus the $19.95 = $930.05. The present value of your remaining shares is 387 x $6.06 = $2345.22. So you have realized plus unrealized value of $2345.22 + $930.05 = $3275.27. Assuming I didn't mix up numbers or make an arithmetic mistake, your dollar gain is $3275.27 - $1996.98 = $1278.29, which comes to 1278.29 / 1996.98 = 64%. If you want to know percentage gain as an annual rate, we'd have to know buy and sell dates, and with multiple buys and sells the calculation gets messier."}
{"id": "175196", "text": "What? My last room mate was a teller, and I can tell you this isn't the case. If you're given a bad payroll cheque or a bounced cheque the bank will know before its transferred. If payroll bounces find a new job because you're fucked.   If you're working for a company that makes over 1 million a year, they can issue paper cheques but choose not too for whatever reason."}
{"id": "175272", "text": "There are a few reasons: 1) Deductions and credits. We have a lot of them. While I suppose we could pass this information on to our employers for them to file, why would we want to? That just unnecessarily adds a middle-man as well as sharing potentially private information more than it needs to be shared. This is the one that effects the most people. 2) Income sources. While normal employment, contract work, and normal investment income already gets reported to the IRS, this is not true for all sources of income. For one, the U.S. is almost completely by itself on actually taxing income that its citizens earn outside of the U.S. While this policy is completely absurd, the only way for the government to know about such income is for the person to report it, since the IRS can't require foreign employers to send information to them. Also, barter income as well as other income that doesn't meet the qualifications for the payer to be required to inform the government requires the employee to self-report. Similarly, capital gains on things outside of normal investments (real estate, for instance) require self-reporting. Having said all of this, U.S. reporting requirements are absurd and illogical. For instance, the IRS already knows about all of my stock trading activity. My broker is required to report it to them. Yet, I still have to list out every single trade on my own return, which is really tedious and completely redundant. For charitable contributions, on the other hand, I only have to give the IRS the final total without listing out all of the individual donations, despite the fact that they don't have that information made available to them by another source. It makes no sense at all, but such is the federal government."}
{"id": "175470", "text": "I\u2019m specifically curious as to how employer matches for Roth 401(k)s would work. Even if an employee contributes to a Roth 401(k), matching contributions by the employer must be treated as traditional 401(k) contributions. So even if the treatment of Roth accounts is unchanged, those of us who get an employer match on our Roth 401(k) contributions may still be impacted."}
{"id": "175504", "text": "This depends on the stock exchange in question. Generally if you modify an existing order [including GTC], these are internally treated as Cancel/Replace Orders. Depending on the action, you may lose the time priority position and a new position would get assigned. More here. (f) Cancel/Replace Orders. Depending on how a quote or order is   modified, the quote or order may change priority position as follows: (1) If the price is changed, the changed side loses position and is   placed in a priority position behind all orders of the same type   (i.e., customer or non-customer) at the same price. (2) If one side's quantity is changed, the unchanged side retains its   priority position. (3) If the quantity of one side is decreased, that side retains its   priority position. (4) If the quantity of one side is increased, that side loses its   priority position and is placed behind all orders of the same type at   the same price."}
{"id": "175522", "text": "I have gotten a letter of credit from my credit union stating the maximum amount I can finance. Of course I don't show  the dealer the letter until after we have finalized the deal. I Then return in 3 business days with a cashiers check for the purchase price.  In one case since the letter was for an amount greater then the purchase price I was able drive the car off the lot without having to make a deposit. In another case they insisted on a $100 deposit before I drove the car off the lot. I have also had them insist on me applying for their in-house loan, which was cancelled when I returned with the cashiers check.  The procedure was similar regardless If I was getting a loan from the credit union, or paying for the car without the use of a loan. The letter didn't say how much was loan, and how much was my money.  Unless you know the exact amount, including all taxes and fees,in advance you can't get a check in advance. If you are using a loan the bank/credit Union will want the car title in their name."}
{"id": "175563", "text": "In response to your points #1 and #2: In general, yes it is true that capital gains are only subject to half one's marginal rate of income tax.  That doesn't mean 50% of the gain is due as tax... rather, it means that if one's marginal tax rate (tax bracket) on the next $10K would have been, say, 32%, then one is taxed on the gain at 16%.  (The percentages are examples, not factual.) However, because these are employee stock options, the tax treatment is different than for a capital gain! \u00a0  Details: On the Federal tax return are lines for reporting Security option benefits (Line 101) and Security options deductions (Line 249).  The distinction between a regular capital gain and an employee stock option benefits is important.  In many cases the net effect may be the same as a capital gain, but the income is characterized differently and there are cases where it matters.  Somebody who is about to or has realized employee stock option benefits should seek professional tax advice. In response to your next two points: No, one cannot transfer a capital gain or other investment income into a TFSA immediately after-the-fact in order to receive the tax-free benefits of the TFSA on that income.  Only income and gains earned within a TFSA are free from tax \u2013 i.e. The options would have to have been in the TFSA before being exercised.  Once a gain or other investment income has been realized in a non-sheltered account, it is considered taxable.  The horse has already left the barn, so to speak! However, despite the above, there is another strategy available:  One can create an offsetting deduction by contributing some of the realized gain into an RRSP.  The RRSP contribution, assuming room is available, would yield a tax deduction to offset some tax due on the gain.  However, the RRSP only defers income tax; upon withdrawal of funds, ordinary income tax is due (hopefully, at a lower marginal rate in retirement.) There is no minimum amount of time that money or assets have to be inside a TFSA to benefit from the tax-free nature of the account.  However, there are limits on how much money you can move into a TFSA in any given year, and many folks weren't aware of the rules. p.s. Let me add once more that this is a case where I suggest seeking professional tax advice."}
{"id": "175679", "text": "Put in the maximum you can into the 401(k), the limit should be $16,500 so long as the highly compensated rules don't kick in. Since you cannot deduct the traditional IRA, it's a great option to deposit to a traditional IRA and immediately convert that balance to a Roth account. That puts you at $21,500/yr saved, nearly 18%.  There's nothing stopping you from investing outside these accounts. A nice ETF with low expenses, investing in a stock index (I am thinking SPY for the S&P 500) is great to accumulate long term."}
{"id": "175771", "text": "Can someone please explain how this is not the definition of a Ponzi scheme? Bitcoin has a $100B market cap. This is a financial instrument with very little real value to either consumers or businesses. However, Bitcoin has experienced a meteoric rise in value as more and more people buy in. Is the bottom not going to fall out here?"}
{"id": "175889", "text": "They are already indirectly paying these expenses.  They should be built into your rates. The amount per job or per hour needs to cover what would have been your salary, plus the what would have been sick, vacation, holidays, health insurance, life insurance, disability, education, overhead for office expenses, cost of accountants...and all taxes. In many companies the general rule of thumb is that they need to charge a customer 2x the employees salary to cover all this plus make a profit. If this is a side job some of these benefits will come from your main job. Some self employed get some of these benefits from their spouse.  The company has said we give you money for the work you perform, but you need to cover everything else including paying all taxes. Depending on where you live you might have to send money in more often then once a year. They are also telling you that they will be reporting the money they give you to the government so they can claim it as a business expense. So you better make sure you report it as income."}
{"id": "175951", "text": "Unfortunately, the tax system in the U.S. is probably more complicated than it looks to you right now. First, you need to understand that there will be taxes withheld from your paycheck, but the amount that they withhold is simply a guess.  You might pay too much or too little tax during the year.  After the year is over, you'll send in a tax return form that calculates the correct tax amount.  If you have paid too little over the year, you'll have to send in the rest, but if you've paid too much, you'll get a refund.  There are complicated formulas on how much tax the employer withholds from your paycheck, but in general, if you don't have extra income elsewhere that you need to pay tax on, you'll probably be close to breaking even at tax time. When you get your paycheck, the first thing that will be taken off is FICA, also called Social Security, Medicare, or the Payroll tax.  This is a fixed 7.65% that is taken off the gross salary.  It is not refundable and is not affected by any allowances or deductions, and does not come in to play at all on your tax return form. There are optional employee benefits that you might need to pay a portion of if you are going to take advantage of them, such as health insurance or retirement savings.  Some of these deductions are paid with before-tax money, and some are paid with after tax money. The employer will calculate how much money they are supposed to withhold for federal and state taxes (yes, California has an income tax), and the rest is yours. At tax time, the employer will give you a form W-2, which shows you the amount of your gross income after all the before-tax deductions are taken out (which is what you use to calculate your tax).  The form also shows you how much tax you have paid during the year. Form 1040 is the tax return that you use to calculate your correct tax for the year.  You start with the gross income amount from the W-2, and the first thing you do is add in any income that you didn't get a W-2 for (such as interest or investment income) and subtract any deductions that you might have that are not taxable, but were not paid through your paycheck (such as moving expenses, student loan interest, tuition, etc.)  The result is called your adjusted gross income. Next, you take off the deductions not covered in the above section (property tax, home mortgage interest, charitable giving, etc.).  You can either take the standard deduction ($6,300 if you are single), or if you have more deductions in this category than that, you can itemize your deductions and declare the correct amount. After that, you subtract more for exemptions.  You can claim yourself as an exemption unless you are considered a dependent of someone else and they are claiming you as a dependent.  If you claim yourself, you take off another $4,000 from your income. What you are left with is your taxable income for the year.  This is the amount you would use to calculate your tax based on the bracket table you found. California has an income tax, and just like the federal tax, some state taxes will be deducted from your paycheck, and you'll need to fill out a state tax return form after the year is over to calculate the correct state tax and either request a refund or pay the remainder of the tax.  I don't have any experience with the California income tax, but there are details on the rates on this page from the State of California."}
{"id": "175982", "text": "Banks can't simply make loans in the void. This is how the cash flow works, generally:  1. Depositers *add* cash into the bank. The Bank now has cash. 10% of that cash is held on *reserve* per law. This cash is held on the balance sheet as an *asset* (cash) *and a liability* (demand deposits).   2. Someone requests a loan. The loan is funded from the non-reserved cash of these deposits. This results in a lessening of an asset (cash), and the creation of a new asset (loan).  3. Traditionally, as the debtor pays back the loan, the interest is distributed in some sort of split between the bank and the depositors. This means cash in from the loan and interest, and a liability (deposits) also go up.  4. Alternatively, while the above still happens, the bank can *securitize* the loan and sell that to investors. Investors then get access to the loan and its income, and the bank collects a fee. However, this means more cash on hand for the bank to originate additional loans without going near the reserve requirement.   If a bank extends too many loans and its reserve is threatened, it must borrow either from the fed or from other banks. These loans must be paid back."}
{"id": "176003", "text": "\"Anybody who would put up their life savings and simply \"\"notice an odd clause\"\" and not have very large bells ringing with flashing signs saying \"\"NO!\"\" is not very financially savvy.  No wonder the banks considered her to be toxic.\""}
{"id": "176017", "text": "\"Checks (in the US, anyway) are only good for six months after they have been written. After that. under the US Uniform Commerical Code they are considered \"\"stale checks\"\" and banks need not accept them. My experience is that they generally won't -- but you probably shouldn't count on that, either when figuring out whether to try depositing an old check or figuring out how much cash you need to keep in your checking account to cover recent stale checks. The check you now hold is certainly a statement of intent to pay you and thus is a useful document to supplement other evidence that they still owe you the money -- but since checks can be cancelled and/or a replacement check may have been issued, its value for that purpose may be limited. You can try depositing it and see what happens. If that doesn't work (or you don't want to bother trying it) you can contact the retirement plan, point out that this check went uncashed, and ask them to send you a replacement. If they haven't already done so (you might want to check your own records for that), there shouldn't be any problem with this. (Note: Many business checks have a statement printed on them that they're only good for 90 days or so. If yours does, you can skip trying to cash it; just contact the retirement plan offices.)\""}
{"id": "176161", "text": "\"To understand the VXX ETF, you need to understand VIX futures, to understand VIX futures you need to understand VIX, to understand VIX you need to understand options pricing formulas such as the \"\"Black Scholes\"\" formula Those are your prerequisites. Learn at your own pace. Short Answer: When you buy VXX you are buying the underlying are front month VIX futures. Limited by the supply of the ETF's NAV (Net Asset Value) units. It is assumed that the ETF manager is actually buying and selling more VIX front month futures to back the underlying ETF. Long Answer: Assume nobody knows what an options contract should be worth. Therefore formulas have been devised to standardize how to price an options contract. The Black-Scholes formula is widely used, one of the variables in this formula is \"\"Implied Volatility\"\", which basically accounts for the mispricing of options when the other variables (Intrinsic Value, delta, gamma, theta...) don't completely explain how much the option is worth. People are willing to pay more for options when the perception is that they will be more profitable, \"\"implied volatility\"\" tracks these changes in an option's demand, where the rest of the black-scholes formula creates a price for an option that will always be the same. Each stock in the market that also trades standardized options will have implied volatility which can be computed from the price of those options. The \"\"Volatility Index\"\" (VIX), looks at the implied volatility of MANY STOCK's options contracts. Specifically the \"\"implied volatility of out the money puts on the S&P 500\"\". If you don't know what that quoted part of the sentence means, then you have at least five other individual questions to ask before you re-read this answer and understand the relevance of these followup questions: Why would people buy out-the-money puts on the S&P 500? Why would people pay more for out-the-money puts on the S&P 500 on some days and pay less for them on other days? This is really the key to the whole puzzle. Anyway, now that we have this data, people wanted to speculate on the future value of the VIX. So VIX futures contracts began trading and with it there came a liquid market. There doesn't need to be anything physical to back a financial product anymore. A lot of people don't trade futures, retail investors have practically only heard of \"\"the stock market\"\". So one investment bank decided to make a fund that only holds VIX futures that expire within a month. (front month futures). They split that fund up into shares and listed it on the stock market, like alchemy the VXX was formed. Volatility studies are fascinating, and get way more complex than this now that the VXX ETF also has liquid options contracts trading on it too, and there are leveraged VIX ETF funds that also trade options\""}
{"id": "176230", "text": "Let us consider the risks in the investment opportunities: Now, what are the returns in each of the investment: What are the alternatives to these investments, then?"}
{"id": "176327", "text": "\"From my recollection of Warren Buffett's book \"\"Warren Buffett and the Art of Arbitrage\"\", the following factors determine the difference between the market price of a stock and the future expected price of an acquisition or merger: Time: Assuming the deal will close, the market price should approach the offer price as the closing date approaches. The fact that there is a 14% spread partially reflects the time value of money. Probability: Things could happen between now and closing date which could derail the deal. The higher the spread the more likely the market thinks the deal will not occur. For example, LO shareholders could reject the offer saying it is too low, or anti-trust regulators could say the deal is anti-competitive. Part of this 14% spread indicates the probability of the deal completing.\""}
{"id": "176599", "text": "I work in a bank and see these people first hand. It\u2019s kind of sad really. They come in to open a business account. Full of excitement for this new \u201cbusiness opportunity\u201d.    After a month or two of holding wine parties with their friends and family and making some sales they realize they can\u2019t be hounding their friends and family to buy from them.   Their excitement turns to tempered optimism as they try to come up with more ways to drum up business.   After failing to do so they come back to me, defeated and close their business account. They\u2019ll never tell me exactly why they closed, it\u2019s always \u201cOh, I just don\u2019t have time\u201d or \u201cI\u2019m working too much at my regular job\u201d but I know.   It was a scam all along."}
{"id": "176717", "text": "\"The T+3 \"\"rule\"\" relates only to accounting and not to trading.  It does not prevent you from day trading.  It simply means that the postings in you cash account will not appear until three business days after you have executed a trade.  When you execute a trade and the order has been filled, you have all of the information you need to know the cash amounts that will hit your account three business days later. In a cash account, cash postings that arise from trading are treated as unsettled (for three days), but this does not mean that these funds are available for further trading.  If you have $25,000 in your account on day 1, this does not mean that you will be able to trade more than $25,000 because your cash account has not yet been debited.  Most cash accounts will include an item detailing \"\"Cash available for trading\"\".  This will net out any unsettled business transacted. For example, if you have a cash account balance of $25,000 on day one, and on the same day you purchase $10,000 worth of shares, then pending settlement in your cash account you will only have $15,000 \"\"Cash available for trading\"\". Similarly, if you have a cash balance of $25,000 on day one, and on the same day you \"\"day trade\"\", purchasing $15,000 and selling $10,000 worth of shares, then you will have the net of $20,000 \"\"Cash available for trading\"\" ($20,000 = $25,000 - $15,000 + $10,000). If by \"\"prop account\"\" you mean an account where you give discretion to a broker to trade on your behalf, then I think the issues of accounting will be the least of your worries.  You will need to be worried about not being fleeced out of your hard earned savings by someone far more interested in lining their own pockets than making money for you.\""}
{"id": "176786", "text": "\"Without researching the securities in question I couldn't tell you which cycle each is in, but your answer is that they have different expiration cycles. The following definition is from the CBOE website; \"\"Expiration cycle An expiration cycle relates to the dates on which options on a particular underlying security expire. A given option, other than LEAPS\u00ae, will be assigned to one of three cycles, the January cycle, the February cycle or the March cycle.\"\"\""}
{"id": "176869", "text": "\"Because people are willing to trade for it.  People are willing to trade for Gold because: The value of gold goes up because the demand for it goes up, while the supply has been basically static (or growing at a low static rate) for a long time.  The demand is going up because people see it as a safe place to put their money.   Another reason Gold's value in dollars goes up, is because the value of the item it's traded against (dollars, euros, yen, etc) goes down, while its own value stays roughly the same. You point out Gold is not as liquid as cash, but gold (both traded on an exchange, and held physically) is easily sold.  There is always someone willing to trade you cash for gold.  Compare this to some of the bank stocks during the first part of our current recession.  People were not willing to give much of anything for your shares.  As the (annoying, misleading) advertisements say, \"\"Gold has never been worth zero\"\".\""}
{"id": "177036", "text": "@bstpierre gave you an example of a portfolio similar to IFA's 70 portfolio. Please, look other variants of example portfolios there and investigate which would suit to you.  Although the example portfolios are not ETF-based, required by the op, you can rather easily check corresponding components with this tool here. Before deciding your portfolio, fire up a spreadsheet (samples here) and do calculations and do not underestimate things below: Bogleheads have already answered this type of questions so why not look there? Less reinventing the wheel: google retirement portfolios site:bogleheads.org. I am not making any recommendations like other replies because financial recommendations devalue. I hope I steered you to the right track, use less time to pick individual funds or stocks and use more time to do your research."}
{"id": "177328", "text": "\"First of all to answer the basic question \"\"Is one method correct? Might it depend on local laws?\"\" Yes it does depend on local laws. Because ultimately the business will have to file forms with the sate/county/city.  These forms are going to ask for the total sales based on the tax category (tax free, x%, y%). Each transaction could have parts that fall into each category. The local taxing authority decides what goes into each category. The local taxing authority also determines how often the business needs to submit the taxes. They can even decide to base the rates used by where the customer lives.  A business is not required to charge directly for sales tax. That is why frequently at sporting events, the price on the menu notes that all sales taxes are included. I suppose not directly charging a sales tax makes the monthly calculation harder, but the state will still get their money. Rounding up at the end of the entire transaction is enough to make sure they collect enough taxes, so they don't have to dip into their profits.\""}
{"id": "177430", "text": "RD Interest Calculator - Use the advanced Recurring Deposit Calculator from HDFC Bank to calculate the maturity amount earned on your investment. Simply key in your initial amount, at a desired rate of interest for a specific term for which you wish to invest. Find out how much do you earn through a Recurring Deposit!"}
{"id": "177442", "text": "\"I invested in single family homes and made ok.  Houses can be an investment. (though the OP seems to equate \"\"house\"\" with primary residence)   Just like any other investment buying houses has risks.   I would not treat your primary residence or a vacation  home as an investment.  That is asking for trouble, but for many many years it was safe to assume that you would make a good return on it, and many people did.   If you evaluate the numbers for purchase price, rental market, etc and find that rentals or flipping is worth your exposure then by all means, do it.  But treating your primary residence as an investment apparently is what that comment means. Just like the stock market, many people have gotten wealthy on homes and there are lots of people who lost their shirts.\""}
{"id": "177575", "text": "If you're an American, and willing to give up citizenship, good luck to you.  Otherwise, Uncle Sam still wants his due -- Americans are responsible for paying taxes on income earned anywhere on earth, regardless of their residence."}
{"id": "177903", "text": "\"Not having seen the movie, I don't know what you mean by \"\"fraudulent options buys.\"\" But there are two possibilities: 1) Someone placed buy orders on the account without authorization. In which case it comes down to a protracted lawsuit to determine whether the broker exercised due diligence, or whether Bruce foolishly gave someone his password. 2) The options themselves were fraudulent. In which case the OCC is responsible for making everyone whole.\""}
{"id": "177908", "text": "profit has nothing to do with the level of interest rates. Is this correct? In theory, yes. The difference that you're getting at is called net interest margin. As long as this stays constant, so does the bank's profit. According to this article: As long as the interest rate charged on loans doesn't decline faster than the interest rate received on deposit accounts, banks can continue to operate normally or even reduce their bad loan exposure by offering lower lending rates to already-proven borrowers. So banks may be able to acquire the same net interest margin with lower risk. However the article also mentions new research from a federal agency: Their findings show that net interest margins (NIMs) get worse during low-rate environments, defined as any time when a country's three-month sovereign bond yield is less than 1.25%. So in theory banks should remain profitable when interest rates are low, but this may not actually be the case."}
{"id": "177926", "text": "In the stock market many participants enter orders that are not necessarily set at the current market price of the stock (i.e. they are not market orders, they are limit orders). They can be lower than the market price (if they want to buy) or they can be higher than the market price (if they want to sell). The set of orders at each point of time for a security is called the order book. The lowest selling price of the order book is the offer or ask, the higher buying price is the bid. The more liquid is a security, the more orders will be in the order book, and the narrower will be the bid-ask spread. The depth of the order book is the number of units that the order book can absorb in any direction (buy or sell). As an example: imagine I want to buy 100 units at the lowest offer, but the size of the lowest offer is only 50 units, and there is not any further order, that means the stock has little depth."}
{"id": "178034", "text": "You can trade an index by using a Contract For Difference, or CFD. Various brokers offer this method and the spreads are quite low. They tend to widen outside of market hours, and not all brokers offer the same spreads. I would look for a broker that offers the lowest spread on the index you are interested in. You should also do your due diligence and check they are regulated by the relevant authority  pertaining to their territory, eg FSA for uk"}
{"id": "178059", "text": "Elaborating on kelsham's answer: You buy 100 shares XYZ at $1, for a total cost of $100 plus commissions. You sell 100 shares XYZ at $2, for a total income of $200 minus commissions. Exclusive of commissions, your capital gain is $100 for this trade, and you will pay taxes on that.  Even if you proceed to buy 200 shares XYZ at $1, reinvesting all your income from the sale, you still owe taxes on that $100 gain.  The IRS has met this trick before."}
{"id": "178061", "text": "That article was terribly generic and ripe with grammatical errors. A quick Google search yields dozens of much more informative articles. Furthermore, this topic has a fringe relation to finance, and would be a better post in a small business, entrepreneur, or accounting subreddit."}
{"id": "178446", "text": "\"Correcting Keith's answer (you should have read about these details in the terms and conditions of your bank/broker): Entrustment orders are like a \"\"soft\"\" limit order and meaningless without a validity (which is typically between 1 and 5 days). If you buy silver at an entrustment price above market price, say x when the market offer is m, then parts of your order will likely be filled at the market price.  For the remaining quantity there is now a limit, the bank/broker might fill your order over the next 5 days (or however long the validity is) at various prices, such that the overall average price does not exceed x. This is different to a limit order, as it allows the bank/broker to (partially) buy silver at higher prices than x as long as the overall averages is x or less.  In a limit set-up you might be (partially) filled at market prices first, but if the market moves above x the bank/broker will not fill any remaining quantities of your order, so you might end up (after a day or 5 days) with a partially filled order. Also note that an entrustment price below the market price and with a short enough validity behaves like a limit price. The 4th order type is sort of an opposite-side limit price: A stop-buy means buy when the market offer quote goes above a certain price, a stop-sell means sell when the market bid quote goes below a certain price. Paired with the entrusment principle, this might mean that you buy/sell on average above/below the price you give. I don't know how big your orders are or will be but always keep in mind that not all of your order might be filled immediately, a so-called partial fill.  This is particularly noteworthy when you're in a pro-rata market.\""}
{"id": "178586", "text": "&gt; Umm, one of the benefits of creating a corporation is to keep personal money separate from the business.  you missed the key statement from that little link you posted. Here, I'll help you out:  &gt; An owner of a corporation can be held personally liable if he or she:  personally guarantees a bank loan or a business debt on which the corporation defaults  And for a brand new company, you can sure as shit guarantee that as an owner, you'll be held personally liable."}
{"id": "178668", "text": "The key idea he should focus on is that every debt includes interest - the money he didn't borrow, but now owes. The interest goes straight to the lender pocket and the debtor has to get money somewhere for that interest. That's the key reason of why getting another loan only increases pressure on the debtor - with the new loan he owes new interest in addition to what he already owed."}
{"id": "178684", "text": "Usually the amount of the ESPP stocks is very small compared to the overall volume of the trading, so it shouldn't matter. But check if for your company it not so (look at the stock history for the previous ESPP dates, and volumes)."}
{"id": "178697", "text": "\"This seems to depend on what kind of corporation you have set up. If you're set up as a sole proprietor, then the Solo 401k contributions, whether employee or employer, will be deducted from your gross income.  Thus they don't reduce it. If you're set up as an S-Corp, then the employer contributions, similar to large employer contributions, will be deducted from wages, and won't show up in Box 1 on your W-2, so they would reduce your gross income.  (Note, employee contributions also would go away from Box 1, but would still be in Box 3 and 5 for FICA/payroll tax purposes). This is nicely discussed in detail here. The IRS page that discusses this in more (harder to understand) detail is here. Separately, I think a discussion of \"\"Gross Income\"\" is merited, as it has a special definition for sole proprietorships. The IRS defines it in publication 501 as: Gross income.    Gross income is all income you receive in the form of money, goods, property, and services that is not exempt from tax. If you are married and live with your spouse in a community property state, half of any income defined by state law as community income may be considered yours. For a list of community property states, see Community property states under Married Filing Separately, later. Self-employed persons.    If you are self-employed in a business that provides services (where products are not a factor), your gross income from that business is the gross receipts. If you are self-employed in a business involving manufacturing, merchandising, or mining, your gross income from that business is the total sales minus the cost of goods sold. In either case, you must add any income from investments and from incidental or outside operations or sources. So I think that regardless of 401(k) contributions, your gross income is your gross receipts (if you're a contractor, it's probably the total listed on your 1099(s)).\""}
{"id": "178875", "text": "You are correct that over a short term there is no guarantee that one index will out perform another index. Every index goes through periods of feat and famine. That uis why the advice is to diversify your investments. Every index does have some small amount of management. For the parent index (the S&P 500 in this case) there is a process to divide all 500 stocks into growth and value, pure growth and pure value. This rebalancing of the 500 stocks occurs once a year. Rebalancing The S&P Style indices are rebalanced once a year in December. The   December rebalancing helps set the broad universe and benchmark for   active managers on an annual cycle consistent with active manager   performance evaluation cycles. The rebalancing date is the third   Friday of December, which coincides with the December quarterly share   changes for the S&P Composite 1500.  Style Scores,   market-capitalization weights, growth and value midpoint averages, and   the Pure Weight Factors (PWFs), where applicable across the various   Style indices, are reset only once a year at the December rebalancing. Other changes to the U.S. Style indices are made on an as-needed   basis, following the guidelines of the parent index. Changes in   response to corporate actions and market developments can be made at   any time. Constituent changes are typically announced for the parent   index two-to-five days before they are scheduled to be implemented. Please refer to the S&P U.S. Indices Methodology document for   information on standard index maintenance for the S&P 500, the S&P   MidCap 400,the S&P SmallCap 600 and all related indices. As to which is better: 500, growth,value or growth and value? That depends on what you the investor is trying to do."}
{"id": "178942", "text": "If your business name is your name, you are automatically considered a sole-proprietorship and any income you generate and expenses you incur can be calculated on your personal tax return. You can use QuickTax Home & Business tax software to lead you through the steps; you don't even need an accountant. One drawback of a sole-proprietorship in your name is liability. You are personally responsible for the business because you are the business. If you get sued, you can lose everything. To limit that liability you can look into opening a corporation. If the corporation gets sued you are insulated from that; the corporation goes bankrupt, not you. A lawyer and an accountant will be required to give you solid advice on this direction."}
{"id": "179042", "text": "Very subjective question. some may do it in the first year, some lose money all their life. Some make a fortune and then lose it. Investing time is only a small part of it. some people can never do it just because investing is not for everyone. Just like any other business. or you can invest into t-bill and CDs, you'll be profitable from day one."}
{"id": "179223", "text": "Based upon what little is publicly known at this time, it doesn't look good for CAT, PWC or outside counsel. The economic substance they offered up sounds like *post hoc* reasoning. The tax court buying their current explanations would have to accept some exceptionally astute, long-range planning took place that accepted the initial costs exceeding the nascent parts revenue, as well as the risks of over-optimizing tax operations if the necessary revenue didn't materialize; and it doesn't seem they are yet offering any evidence to show that kind of foresight. It will be fascinating to follow, for sure."}
{"id": "179248", "text": "You can afford the mortgage but would you have had enough for the down payment? I certainly didn't have $50 grand laying around when I was in my 20s (which is what you'd need to put down on a 250k house if 20 percent convention holds)"}
{"id": "179408", "text": "A Roth IRA is just an account wrapper.  Inside a Roth IRA you can have a plain 0.1% savings account, or a brokerage account, or an annuity or whatever.  There's no rate of return for a Roth IRA. That particular calculator seems to assume you'll be wrapping a brokerage account in a Roth IRA and investing in the stock market.  Over a long period 6% is probably a reasonable rate of return considering the S&P 500 has returned about 7% over the last decade."}
{"id": "179485", "text": "I'd be find with smart contracts that were a requirement with each new hire.  This would also eliminate the legal fiddling that goes on where employers screw employee right up to the amount that it would take to litigate so they just walk away."}
{"id": "179520", "text": "Your question is unanswerable as you haven't provided enough information. I.e. If those shares cost $1000 and you have $50000 ( or any number above $1000) of cash available in the account then you can't possibly free ride. I think your understanding of the free ride rule is incorrect. Basically what this rule is stating is that you have to have the cash when the trade is placed in order to settle the trade. Otherwise you are taking on margin (which you can't do in a cash account). So at order entry you have to have the cash to cover the purchase so it's able to be settled. If you do, no problem and you can sell that stock before trade settlement. There is no law that says you have to hold it past trade settlement. However, you cannot spend the same dollar more than once before it settles.  This site does a good job explaining this more throughly with examples: http://www.invest-faq.com/articles/trade-day-free-ride.html"}
{"id": "179563", "text": "Yeah basically an ad consulting firm. The thing is they bring all their networks in, so we are very close to revenue. We have planned 20k for this year, starting in late October. Not needing sales for the first year is huge."}
{"id": "179631", "text": "If the business owner doesn't want you to pay him directly, the only reason I can think of is breaking a law. It can be because the business doesn't legally exists, or because the barber wants to evade taxes, or because he doesn't pay his child support or doesn't want his income to be apparent to his debtors in a bankruptcy proceedings. Either way, stinks."}
{"id": "179679", "text": "\"Some very general advice. Lifestyle borrowing is almost always a bad idea. You should limit your borrowing to where it is an investment decision or where it is necessary and avoid it when it is a lifestyle choice. For example, many people need to borrow to have a car/house/education or go without. Also, if you are unemployed for a long period of time and can't find work, charging up the credit cards seems very reasonable.  However, for things like entertainment, travel, and other nice-to-haves can easily become a road to crushing debt. If you don't have the cash for these types of things, my suggestion is to put off the purchase until you do. Note: I am not including credit cards that you pay off in full at the end of the month or credit used as a convenience as \"\"borrowing\"\"\""}
{"id": "179808", "text": "Debt consolidation is basically getting all your debt into one loan. This is possibly more convenient, and lets you close the other accounts (in the case of credit cards, preventing you from incurring any more debt). Ideally, your consolidated debt will have a better interest rate, so it saves you money as well. If you're defaulting on your debt already, you're likely combining this process with some negotiation with your existing creditors."}
{"id": "179855", "text": "\"While derivative pricing models are better modeling reality as academia invests more into the subject, none sufficiently do. If, for example, one assumes that stock returns are lognormal for the purposes of pricing options like Black Scholes does, the only true dependent variable becomes log-standard deviation otherwise known as \"\"volatility\"\", producing the infamous \"\"volatility smile\"\" which disappears in the cases of models with more factors accounting for other mathematical moments such as mean, skew, and kurtosis, etc.  Still, these more advanced models are flawed, and suffer the same extreme time mispricing as Black Scholes.  In other words, one can model anything however one wants, but the worse the model, the stranger the results since volatility for a given expiration should be constant across all strikes and is with better models. In the case of pricing dividends, these can be adjusted for the many complexities of taxation, but the model becomes ever more complex and extremely computationally expensive for each eventuality.  Furthermore, with more complexity in any model, the likelihood of discovering a closed form in the short run is less. For equities in a low interest rate, not high dividend yield, not low volatility, low dividend tax environment, the standard swap pricing models will not provide results much different from one where a single low tax rate on dividends is assumed. If one is pricing a swap on equity outside of the bounds above, the dividend tax rate could have more of an effect, but for computational efficiency, applying a single assumed dividend tax rate would be optimal with D*(1-x), instead of D in a formula, where D is the dividend paid and x is the tax rate. In short, a closed form model is only as good as its assumptions, so if anomalies appear between the actual prices of swaps in the market and a swap model then that model is less correct than the one with smaller anomalies of the same type.  In other words, if pricing equity swaps without a dividend tax rate factored more closely matches the actual prices than pricing with dividend taxes factored then it could be assumed that pricing without a dividend tax factored is superior.  This all depends upon the data, and there doesn't seem to be much in academia to assist with a conclusion. If equity swaps do truly provide a tax advantage and both parties to a swap transaction are aware of this fact then it seems unlikely swap sellers wouldn't demand some of the tax advantage back in the form of a higher price.  A model is no defense since volatility curves persist despite what Black Scholes says they should be.\""}
{"id": "179893", "text": "For Canada No distinction is made in the regulation between \u201cnaked\u201d or \u201ccovered\u201d short sales. However, the practice of \u201cnaked\u201d short selling, while not specifically enumerated or proscribed as such, may violate other provisions of securities legislation or self-regulatory organization rules where the transaction fails to settle. Specifically, section 126.1 of the Securities Act prohibits activities that result or contribute \u201cto a misleading appearance of trading activity in, or an artificial price for, a security or derivative of a security\u201d or that perpetrate a fraud on any person or company. Part 3 of National Instrument 23-101 Trading Rules contains similar prohibitions against manipulation and fraud, although a person or company that complies with similar requirements established by a recognized exchange, quotation and trade reporting system or regulation services provider is exempt from their application. Under section 127(1) of the Securities Act, the OSC also has a \u201cpublic interest jurisdiction\u201d to make a wide range of orders that, in its opinion, are in the public interest in light of the purposes of the Securities Act (notwithstanding that the subject activity is not specifically proscribed by legislation). The TSX Rule Book also imposes certain obligations on its \u201cparticipating organizations\u201d in connection with trades that fail to settle (see, for example, Rule 5-301 Buy-Ins).  In other words, shares must be located by the broker before they can be sold short. A share may not be locatable because there are none available in the broker's inventory, that it cannot lend more than what it has on the books for trade.  A share may not be available because the interest rate that brokers are charging to borrow the share is considered too high by that broker, usually if it doesn't pass on borrowing costs to the customer.  There could be other reasons as well. If one broker doesn't have inventory, another might.  I recommend checking in on IB's list.  If they can't get it, my guess would be that no one can since IB passes on the cost to finance short sales."}
{"id": "180003", "text": "No. As long as you live in the house for 3 years, it's yours to keep. Financing has nothing to do with that."}
{"id": "180196", "text": "Not according to the SEC: A mutual fund is an SEC-registered open-end investment company that pools money from many investors and invests the money in stocks, bonds, short-term money-market instruments, other securities or assets, or some combination of these investments.  The combined securities and assets the mutual fund owns are known as its portfolio, which is managed by an SEC-registered investment adviser.  Each mutual fund share represents an investor\u2019s proportionate ownership of the mutual fund\u2019s portfolio and the income the portfolio generates.  And further down: Mutual funds are open-end funds."}
{"id": "180247", "text": "Stockpiled as treasuries, which are a debt security, they are liabilities.  You're making the case that as the gov't spends it's ability to spend increases as the economy grows? It's not like we're flipping a switch and turning on a light bulb  Edit: it's more like walking out on a tight-rope while people are yelling at you haha"}
{"id": "180345", "text": "It's a tax shelter. Foreign affiliates hold most of Microsoft's cash and investments. The cost of borrowing is much cheaper than repatriating the money and paying taxes. Those bonds are selling at rates similar to US Treasury Debt. Also, many people and organizations with lots of assets still borrow money for day to day expenses. Why? You tend to make a better return on investments which are committed for a number of years, and the timing of income from those investments may not coincide with your expenses."}
{"id": "180500", "text": "Is this money taxable in US?  From what you described you're likely to have been a US tax resident. As such, you're taxed on your worldwide income. Foreign tax deferral schemes are not considered qualified under the US law (unless a treaty says otherwise), so you're liable for taxes on them now. Get a new tax adviser."}
{"id": "180564", "text": "as long as US bonds will keep their status of a safe haven and the dollar will continue to be the world reserve currency the bond rates will stay low. hell, after S&amp;P downgraded the US credit rating, the bond yields actually dropped, indicating an influx on money.   the shock will come. sooner or more probably later.. it won't be the end of the world, just another nasty downturn."}
{"id": "180571", "text": "\"The end result is basically the same, it's just a choice of whether you want to base the final amount you receive on your salary, or on the stock market. You pay in a set proportion of your salary, and receive a set proportion of your salary in return. The pension (both contributions and benefit) are based on your career earnings. You get x% of your salary every year from retirement until death. These are just a private investment, basically: you pay a set amount in, and whatever is there is what you get at the end. Normally you would buy an annuity with the final sum, which pays you a set amount per year from retirement until death, as with the above. The amount you receive depends on how much you pay in, and the performance of the investment. If the stock market does well, you'll get more. If it does badly, you could actually end up with less. In general (in as much as anything relating to the stock market and investment can be generalised), a Defined Benefit plan is usually considered better for \"\"security\"\" - or at least, public sector ones, and a majority of people in my experience would prefer one, but it entirely depends on your personal attitude to risk. I'm on a defined benefit plan and like the fact that I basically get a benefit based on a proportion of my salary and that the amount is guaranteed, no matter what happens to the stock market in the meantime. I pay in 9% of my salary get 2% of my salary as pension, for each year I pay into the pension: no questions, no if's or buts, no performance indicators. Others prefer a defined contribution scheme because they know that it is based on the amount they pay in, not the amount they earn (although to an extent it is still based on earnings, as that's what defines how much you pay in), and because it has the potential to grow significantly based on the stock market. Unfortunately, nobody can give you a \"\"which is best\"\" answer - if I knew how pension funds were going to perform over the next 10-50 years, I wouldn't be on StackExchange, I'd be out there making a (rather large) fortune on the stock market.\""}
{"id": "180592", "text": "\"Primerica's primary value proposition is that switching from whole or universal life to term life, and investing the difference is a good idea for most people. However, there are a number of other important factors to consider when purchasing life insurance, and I would also be wary of anyone claiming that one product will be the \"\"best\"\" for you under all circumstances. Best Insurance? Without getting into a much larger discussion on how to pick insurance companies or products, here are a few things that concern me about Primerica: They have a \"\"captive\"\" sales force, meaning their agents sell only Primerica products. This means that they are not shopping around for the best deal for you. Given how much prices on term life have changed in recent years, I would highly recommend taking the time to get alternate quotes online or from an independent broker who will shop around for you. Their staff are primarily part-time employees. I am not saying they are incompetent or don't care, just that you are more likely to be working with someone for whom insurance is not their primary line of work. If you have substantial reason to believe that you may someday need whole life, their products may not suit you well. Primerica does not offer whole life as far as I am aware, which also means that you cannot convert your term life policy through them to whole life should you need to do so. For example, if you experience an accident, are disabled, or have a significant change in your health status in the future and do not have access to a group life policy, you may be unable to renew your individual policy. Above Average Returns? I am also highly skeptical about this claim. The only possible context in which I could find this valid would be if they mean that your returns on average will be better if you invest in the stock market directly as compared to the returns you would get from the \"\"cash value\"\" portion of a life insurance product such as universal life, as those types of products generally have very high fees. Can you clarify if this is the claim that was made, or if they are promising returns above those of the general stock market? If it is the latter, run! Only a handful of superstar investors (think Warren Buffet, Peter Lynch, and Bill Gross) have ever consistently outperformed the stock market as a whole, and typically only for a limited period of time. In either case, I would have the same concerns here as stated in reasons #1 and #2 above. Even more so than with insurance, if you need investment advice, I'd recommend working with someone who is fully dedicated to that type of work, such as a fee-only financial planner (http://www.napfa.org/ is a good place to find one). Once you know how you want to invest, I would again recommend shopping around for a reputable but inexpensive broker and compare their fees with Primerica's. Kudos on having a healthy level of skepticism and listening to your gut. Also, remember that if you are not interested in their offer, you don't have to prove them wrong - you can simply say \"\"no thank you.\"\" Best of luck!\""}
{"id": "180733", "text": "\"This is what is called \"\"stock dividend\"\". In essence the company is doing a split, the difference is in financial accounting and shouldn't concern you much as an individual investor. \"\"Fully paid up\"\", in this context, probably means \"\"unconditioned\"\", aka fully vested.\""}
{"id": "181013", "text": "See the Moneychimp site. From 1934 to 2006, the S&P returned an 'average' 12.81%. But the CAGR was 11.26%.  I wrote an article Average Return vs Compound Annual Growth to address this issue.  Interesting that over time only a few funds have managed to get anywhere near this return, but the low cost indexer can get the long term CAGR minus .05% or so, if they wish."}
{"id": "181333", "text": "\"The cost of the tax may be transferred directly to the costumers but how many times have you heard people who support these taxes say \"\"ABC company has had $XXXX profit,  They should be able to afford this small tax increase.\"\"  Most people don't understand economics.\""}
{"id": "181360", "text": "\"Can't vouch for LA, but property typically is taxed at either the appraised value, the most recent purchase price (\"\"if it wasn't worth that much, you wouldn't have paid that much\"\"), or some combination of the two (usually highest of the two, to prevent \"\"$1 and other goods and services\"\" from lowering the tax to zero). You have now explicitly paid a total of $125k for the property; the fact that you bought it in two stages shouldn't be relevant. But \"\"should\"\" and law are only tangentially connected. I'd recommend asking a tax accountant who know your local practices, unless someone here can give you an authoritative answer.\""}
{"id": "181398", "text": "My guess would be a black American express. Or, the accountants will make them switch out throughout the year to get maximum benefits. Sometimes, 1% maxes out at a certain amount, so they'll use a different CC every quarter or so."}
{"id": "181538", "text": "You probably don't need to call the bank. Today is Sunday, so three days ago was probably Friday (or Thursday depending on how you count the days). Banks normally don't post transactions on weekends - and transactions that do happen on the weekend sometimes don't get posted until Tuesday. I would give it till Tuesday and then call them if you still don't see it show up on your account."}
{"id": "181624", "text": "There's no one answer. You need to weigh the fees and quality of investment options on the one side against the slowly vesting employer contribution and tax benefits of 401k contributions in excess of IRA limits."}
{"id": "181673", "text": "Why would a shareholder lend the investor the shares? Some brokers like IB will pay you to lend your shares: http://ibkb.interactivebrokers.com/node/1838 If you buy shares on margin, you don't have much of a choice. Your broker is allowed to lend your shares to short-sellers."}
{"id": "181827", "text": "First: In most cases when you inherit stocks the cost basis is stepped up to the date of the death of the person you inherited them from. So the capital gain/loss is likely reset to zero. The rules vary a bit for joint accounts, but retirement accounts (401k/ROTH) are considered individual accounts by the IRS. The rules on this have changed a lot in recent history, so it may depend on when he died. Update: As JoeTaxpayer pointed out and I confirmed via this site , the gains are NOT stepped up for retirement accounts, so this is a moot point anyway.  Further evidence that retirement accounts can be complicated and seeking professional guidance is a good idea. ...[T]here is no step-up in cost basis   upon the death of the IRA owner. Most   other assets owned by an individual   receive a step-up in cost basis upon   the death of the person, eliminating   all capital gains on those assets up   to that point in time. Second:  Even if you can deduct an investment (capital) loss, you can only deduct it to offset capital gains on another investments. Also you can only do this up to $3k per year, though you can roll over excess capital losses into future years. Bottom line: I really doubt you are going to be able to claim a deduction. However, due to the complexity of the situation and the amount of money involved. I strongly suggest you talk to a qualified tax adviser and not rely solely on information you gather through this site."}
{"id": "182118", "text": "Does it teach anything else other than the DCF approach?  I've already learned that in on of my financing courses. I'm more interested in the more exotic valuation techniques, and how to use and weigh multiple techniques for valuation."}
{"id": "182168", "text": "It's not quite clear what you are asking, so I'll answer a few possible interpretations. Businesses pay taxes on their profits. So if your business took a million pounds in revenue (e.g. sold a million pounds worth of stuff) then you would subtract (roughly speaking) everything the business spent on making and selling that stuff, and pay taxes only on the profit. VAT however is a different matter, and you would have to pay VAT on all of that income (technically the VAT portion isn't even income - it's tax you are forced to collect on behalf of the government). If your business made a million pounds pounds profit, it would pay tax on all of that million (subject to what a tax accountant can do to reduce that, which ought to be considerable).  You can't subtract your personal living expenses like that. However the company can pay you a salary, which counts as an expense and the company doesn't pay tax on that. You might also take some money from the company as dividends. Both salary and dividends count as personal income to yourself, and you will need to pay personal income tax on them.  As for the Ferrari, it depends on whether you can justify it as a business expense. A lot of companies provide cars for their employees so that they can use them for business - however you have to be able to show that IS for business, otherwise they are taxed like salary. The rules for company cars are quite complicated, and you would need an accountant. If this is a real rather than hypothetical situation, definitely get a tax accountant involved."}
{"id": "182217", "text": "\"Depends. If you can choose where to relocate to, then I second the \"\"no income tax\"\" states. But even of these chose wisely, some have no income taxes at all, others have taxes on some kinds of income. Some don't have neither individual nor corporate taxes, some tax businesses in some ways. Some compensate with higher property taxes, others compensate with higher sales taxes. On the other hand, you might prefer states with income taxes but no sales taxes. It can happen if your current income is going to be low, but you'll be spending your savings. If you don't have a choice (for example, your employer wants you to move closer to their office), then you're more limited. Still, you can use the tax break on moving expenses (read the fine print, there are certain employment requirements), and play with the state taxes (if you're moving to a state with less/no taxes - move earlier, if its the other way - move later). Check out for cities that have income taxes. In some states it cannot happen by law (for example, in California only the state is allowed to collect income taxes), in others it is very common (Ohio comes to mind). Many things to consider in New York. New York City has its own income tax (as well as Yonkers, as far as I remember these are the only ones in the State of New York). So if you want to save on taxes in NYS but live close to the city, consider White Plains etc. If you work in NYC its moot, you're going to pay city taxes anyway. That is also true if you live in NJ but work in the city, so tax-wise it may be more efficient not to live across state lines from your place of work.\""}
{"id": "182297", "text": "Can't read the article. But WHO gets 78 trillion richer? Cause so far it damn sure has not been the working class of the majority of countries in the world. Rather it's been corporations who massively benefit from the cheap labor that globalization provides. And politicians being bribed/blackmailed to let it happen has pretty much been what's happening all along."}
{"id": "182401", "text": "Hire a lawyer familiar with transactional law and they will have a examples in house. Any debt that large will have nuances that Google or Reddit can't help you with.   A term sheet is a term sheet but you will want it to be substantial and air tight."}
{"id": "182511", "text": "\"Read \"\"The intelligent Investor\"\" book before you do anything. I started when I really didn't understand anything about stocks. I bought an internet stock for $150 per share which sold at 75cents a year later. I sold it for a profit but would've been a disaster.\""}
{"id": "182645", "text": "Check the rules with your broker. Usually if it expires in the money, the broker would exercise it. But you need to check with your broker about their rules on the matter."}
{"id": "183100", "text": "Depends on if the stock pays a dividend or not. Some companies in their early years may choose to not pay dividends. Your calculations are off as the dividend stated is annual that you'd have to divide by 4 to get what the quarterly amount would be and there can be variances as Ellison's compensation package may well include options so that the number of shares he owns could fluctuate over the course of a year."}
{"id": "183462", "text": "How much is your time worth This has been useful for me, judging things based on how much their time value is worth to me, weighted more heavily than their actual worth. For instance, there was a time when I used to work on the weekends and pay to have my laundry done. Doing the laundry myself would have cost 25 cents, but taken two hours at least. Since I was making $45 an hour, I would have lost $90 dollars by doing my laundry, instead of paying specialists $28 to do it for me, much better than I would. Your own capital should begin growing at a rate that makes many MANY things worth less than the time it takes for you to entertain it. So in your cable bill example, you shouldn't have argued for a $5 credit for two hours, unless you make $2.25 an hour, after tax. This is simplistic, as you would extrapolate how much this would cost you over a year or two, but such cost benefit analysis' become easy with this simple concept. This can also be used to rationalize your lavish expenditures. Such as not really comparing the costs for a flight, because its a 2 hour flight for $400 and you've found yourself making at least $200 an hour with your $416,000 annual earnings and capital gains. This will cure your frugality while retaining safe guards on your spending."}
{"id": "183477", "text": "\"I would suggest to get an authoritative response from a CPA. In any case it would be for your own benefit to have at least the first couple of years of tax returns prepared by a professional. However, from my own personal experience, in your situation the income should not be regarded as \"\"US income\"\" but rather income in your home country. Thus it should not appear on the US tax forms because you were not resident when you had it, it was given to you by your employer (which is X(Europe), not X(USA)), and you should have paid local taxes in your home country on it.\""}
{"id": "183479", "text": "Well sure, but instead of credit card receivables, car loans, etc, the underlying assets are other ABS/MBS/CLOs...so it's an order of magnitude more securitization. And those aren't happening anymore. ABS is definitely active though, and it's a good thing too!"}
{"id": "183699", "text": "\"&gt;those fossil free funds have been outperforming their fossilized index counterparts  Why am I not surprised that over a 3 year or less time period, during the worst oil crash in at least 20 years, a fund the excludes that sector is performing better? What a misleading statement.   Like saying in early 2000, \"\"oh my tech-free fund is outperforming the funds with tech stocks\"\" while ignoring the dot com bubble bursting having any effect, and implying that tech stocks will never recover.\""}
{"id": "183722", "text": "You have a couple of options: Auto-investing in an open-end mutual fund.  Some companies may waive a minimum if you sign up for an automatic investing, e.g. T. Rowe Price will waive its minimum if you agree to invest $100/month.  There may be some lower ones out there as well. Some brokers like ShareBuilder have programs where someone could auto-invest getting fractional shares with each purchase.  However, something to consider is what percentage is it costing you to buy each time as it may be quite a bit of friction if you are paying $4 a purchase and only buying $40, this is 10% of your investment being eaten up in costs that I'd highly advise taking the first option."}
{"id": "183883", "text": "First, of course, I agree with the comments about paying down debt. Then reserve some of those savings as an emergency fund. After that, the default answer is to invest in an index fund as Mr Belford suggested, such as Vanguard's total stock market index fund, and leave it there forever. Even when the market tanks -- especially don't sell it when the market tanks! I might leave some cash in reserve so I can buy when the market corrects/tanks and stocks go on sale, but I'm paranoid that way. (Pick 5 random people and you'll hear 6 contradictory opinions on where the market will move soon.) I personally would just park it in the index fund. You just graduated; you have so many things you could spend your time on (building career, socializing, learning kickboxing and sailing and rock climbing and woodworking and intramural soccer and.....), and landlording has the potential to become a time sink. On the other hand, if you're really into landlording, why not. Just be aware it's a lot more complex than pay $50k down and collect $500 in easy profit each month. There's a lot of learning to do before jumping in."}
{"id": "183909", "text": "Reminds me when people complain about not being able to retire but they never invested in any indexes or have a 401K. Like no shit you have no money you didn't plan well, why should I be taxed higher bc I did.  I use dividends to reinvests back into stocks or indexes. Capital income isnt the problem its financial education. Dont be upset I know how to handle my money; people should be educated better on financial planning. Teach that in public schools and embrace people investing money, not make out the rich as some kind of criminal. I can agree inherited wealth is bullshit but being self made and investing well shouldn't be looked down upon because people struggle with the realism that its their fault they dont have money to retire. Life is a bunch of opportunities and choices and yes some people get spoon fed opportunities but it's still a choice to be financially responsible. Stop blaming the rich and educate the working poor and below poverty level how to financially plan their future."}
{"id": "183934", "text": "not sure if serious, read on if you don't think the previous comment is sarcasm.  No, they don't. The point of investing is to buy a stake in something that will become more valuable in the future. Other things don't have to devalue for your investment to gain value. This is possible because the net value of everything is increasing over time (compare the value of all the world's private property today to its value in 1900)."}
{"id": "184354", "text": "You're indeed right, this cannot be answered affirmatively. I will try, without going too deep in details, to brush a shallow portrait In its simplest form, a going concern company could be valued by the present value of a growing perpetuity (Cash Flow/(Required return - growth)), assuming compounding perpetual growth. That's a massive assumption for a yet to turn a dime company. That's why comparable transactions are usually used as benchmark. In this case, your PE can be thought as the inverse of a growing perpetuity, and it's size will be determined by the difference between return and growth. So when you're pre-revenue, you're basically trying to value a moonshot with everything to prove, no matter how genius the idea. Considering the high levels of financial risks due to failure, VCs will require biblical levels of returns (50% to 90% is not unheard of). Hence why they usually leave with a good chunk of the company in seed rounds. When you've had a few sales, you got to know your customer and you've tested the markets, your direction gets clearer and your prospects improve. Risks moves down a notch and the next round of financing will be at much lower rates. Your growth rate, still high but nowhere as crazy as before, can be estimated with relatively more precision. Companies turning a recurrent level of profits are the easiest to value (all else being equal). The financial mathematics are more appropriate now, and their value will be derived by current market conditions as well as comparable transactions. With unlimited resources and perfect markets, the value of the company will be the same wether the founder is at the helm or the VCs are in the place. But considering many founders need the VCs' resources to extract the value of their company and markets are imperfect, the value of the company can change significantly depending on the decisions. Hope that helps!"}
{"id": "184535", "text": "For most Americans the date on the check determines the tax year.  A check with the date of Jan X 2016 will be reflected on the tax forms you will file in early 2017. That also means that the 401K money is also 2016 money, and so is the money for the flexible spending account, or health savings account. The change of year impacts everybody differently. That last/first check can make a big difference for some people. If you are trying to make sure you deposit the maximum amount of money into one of those accounts, knowing how many pay checks there is in the year is important. It also works the other way, getting an extra check can cause you to over deposit into those accounts. The taxes for that Jan 2016 paycheck are collected by your employer and periodically sent to the appropriate government office. You are paying those taxes on payday, even though you won't file that paperwork until 2017."}
{"id": "184557", "text": "Make a portfolio with gold and put options for gold. If the price rises again, sell a part of your gold and use it to buy new put options. If the price goes down, then use your put options to sell gold at a favorable price."}
{"id": "184697", "text": "You can simply deposit the check into your joint account. You should be able do that even without his signature. Then you can transfer the money out of that account and into yours."}
{"id": "184905", "text": "First, the recipient is not responsible for any gift tax, the giver pays the tax. The gift is not taxable income to the recipient and so the recipient does not pay any income tax on the gift either. More than that, and they tap into their lifetime exclusion, currently (2015) $5.43M. All that's needed is a simple form. More convoluted, would be to lend you the full amount and then forgive $14,000 per year. Unnescesary paperwork, in my opinion."}
{"id": "184977", "text": "\"I made a throwaway for this...   I work in IT for the government. I was tasked with finding a vendor that provided a particular kind of software. My bosses expected it would take me 4-6 months to source out companies, go through all the paperwork and process to work with them, try to get them to understand what we need, and them aid them in implementing their software on our stack.   Well, that seemed like an enormous waste of time (and ridiculously boring), so instead I wrote the software on my own time over the course of 4 months, built a subscription model around it, and incorporated a company. I've since sold the subscription based model to a number of other government bodies and clients. The government body I work for has around 250 employees, and I recently sold a subscription to a peer government body with over 1500 employees.   I built a free subscription tier that my current company uses so that i'm not taking any payment from them, to avoid any conflicts of interest, and built the entire project on my own time and resources.   The funny thing is, the software product I built easily beat out all the competitors in blind tests, and no one that I work for could ever imagine that I am capable of even being employed by such a company, forget building the whole stack and founding the company. In fact, all of upper management has been impressed with the software I \"\"found\"\", and how well it has worked... there has been a ton of positive feedback on it since it was launched.   I'm basically just sitting on this project (that is mostly self sustaining), until I can just cash out - which should be quite soon.   **Edit** to the people warning me what i'm doing is illegal, a few key points    - 1) The public sector can't legally profit from anything, my job is to limit cost, not make a profit... which leads to...    - 2) I'm not charging the government body I work for, it's a free implementation devoid of contract. I also ensured I do all the work on my own time, not company time. I live somewhere where most government employees work multiple jobs, so this isn't uncommon. In fact, my government body actually does often hire contractors who are also employed. So not only did I create the service on my own time, I gave it to my employer for free (other companies pay, of course)    - 3) I don't live in the US, things are different where I am. It is certainly not illegal, and I would even argue that (given this is the public sector) it is even somewhat ethical. My work saved my employer (the tax payer) a significant amount of money, which is a net positive. The service is of high quality, and I did not break any employment agreements or laws in the process.     - 4) I hired a lawyer to double check everything.     - 5) I absolutely am not in any way using any proprietary information for profit. I'm not even using my contacts through work as leverage for sales - everything so far has been cold calls and positive references from other clients. This was a key part of the project.\""}
{"id": "185077", "text": "This is a topic you need to sit down and discuss with your parents. Income taxes probably aren't going to be a big issue, and will be refunded in April. Social Security and Medicare will not be refunded, but start you on the road to qualifying for them in the future. How much of you expenses you will now cover will be a family decision; how much of your college expenses you will be responsible for will also need to be discussed. These topics need to be understood before it is time to apply to schools in the fall of your senior year of high school. It is nice to know that you are at least thinking about saving money for your future and for emergencies."}
{"id": "185384", "text": "Technically, if you earn in US (being paid there, which means you have a work visa) and live in other country, you must pay taxes in both countries. International treaties try to decrease the double-taxation, and in this case, you may pay in your country the difference of what you have paid in US. ie. your Country is 20% and USA is 15%, you will pay 5%, and vice-versa. This works only with certain areas. You must know the tax legislation of both countries, and I recommend you seek for advisory. This site have all the basic information you need: http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Foreign-Earned-Income-Exclusion Good luck."}
{"id": "185443", "text": "\"First, decide on your asset allocation; are you looking for a fund with 60% stocks/risky-stuff, or 40% or 20%? Second, look for funds that have a mix of stocks and bonds. Good keywords would be: \"\"target retirement,\"\" \"\"lifecycle,\"\" \"\"balanced,\"\" \"\"conservative/moderate allocation.\"\" As you discover these funds, probably the fund website (but at least Morningstar.com) will tell you the percentage in stocks and risk assets, vs. in conservative bonds. Look for funds that have the percentage you decided on, or as close to it as possible. Third, build a list of funds that meet your allocation goal, and compare the details. Are they based on index funds, or are they actively managed? What is the expense ratio? Is the fund from a reputable company? You could certainly ask more questions here if you have several candidates and aren't sure how to choose. For investing in US dollars one can't-go-wrong choice is Vanguard and they have several suitable funds, but unfortunately if you spend in NIS then you should probably invest in that currency, and I don't know anything about funds in Israel. Update: two other options here. One is a financial advisor who agrees to do rebalancing for you. If you get a cheap one, it could be worth it. Two is that some 401k plans have an automatic rebalancing feature, where you have multiple funds but you can set it up so their computer auto-rebalances you. That's almost as good as having a single fund, though it does still encourage some \"\"mental accounting\"\" so you'd have to try to only look at the total balance, not the individual fund balances, over time. Anyway both of these could be alternatives ways to go on autopilot, besides a single fund.\""}
{"id": "185583", "text": "The question seems to be from the point of view actual sales and not its impact on one's taxation. In case you just want to sell, why brokers will respond differently each times. Either there may be issues with ownership and/or the company whose shares it is? In case you feel that the issues lies with brok"}
{"id": "185686", "text": "1- Wells Fargo does not own our current mortgage.  They have bundled it and sold it as an investment. 2- They make their money from 'servicing' the loan.  Even if they only get $50 per month to service it (3% of our monthly payment), that adds up to $50,000,000 per month if they have a million homes under management.  That is $600 million per year for each million homes being serviced 3- Managing the escrow gets them additional profit, because they can invest it and earn 2-3%.  If 1,000,000 homes have an average balance of $2,000 in their escrow accounts, they can earn up to $60 per year, or $60,000,000 annually. 4- They make $1,000 every time they refinance the home.  This is the approximate profit after paying real closing costs.  Refinance those million homes, and you make a cool billion in profit! 5- They also want to be sure that they keep us as a customer.  By lowering our payment, they decrease the likelyhood that we will refinance with someone else, and we are less likely to default.  (Not that they lose if we default, because they don't own the loan!) 6- they make additional profit by paying off the old loan (they don't own it\u2026 remember), then packaging and selling the new mortgage.  Since they are selling it as a security, they sell for future value, meaning they sell our $200,000 loan for a valuation of $360,000.  This means that they sell for $200,000 PLUS some fraction of the additional $160,000.  Let's say they only want a 10% premium of the $360,000 valuation.  That means they sell our $200,000 loan for $236,000.  They pocket $36,000.  If they make a million of these transactions every year, that is $36 billion dollars in profit So\u2026 Wells fargo refinances one million homes every year, and they make: $36,000,000,000 initial profit for selling the loan (with absolutely no risk!), plus $1,000,000,000 for doing the loan $660,000,000 annually to service the loan (Very little risk, since it is being paid by the owner of the loan as a service fee) If they can retain the loans for their entire life (keep us from refinancing with someone else\u2026), they can make $19,800,000,000 (that is 19.8 billion dollars in servicing fees) The profit they make in a refinance is much greater than the money then can make by holding the loan for 30 years."}
{"id": "185999", "text": "You're not physically present in the US, you're not a US citizen, you're not a green card holder, and you don't have a business that is registered in the US - US laws do not apply to you. You're not in any way under the US jurisdiction.  Effectively connected income is income effectively connected to your business in the US. You're not in the US, so there's nothing to effectively connect your income to. Quote from the link: You usually are considered to be engaged in a U.S. trade or business   when you perform personal services in the United States. You ask: If I form an LLC or C corp am I liable for this withholding tax? If you form a legal entity in a US jurisdiction - then that entity becomes subjected to that jurisdiction. If you're physically present in the US - then ECI may become an issue, and you also may become a resident based on the length of your stay."}
{"id": "186671", "text": "This depends on the practise and applications available with the Beneficiary Bank. For a corporate customer, the details are show. For Retail customers they are generally not shown."}
{"id": "187073", "text": "In addition to finding another woman investor, you have an equitable option that is not unreasonable: ask your partner to buy out 3% worth of shares from you (which then gives her 54%, allowing you to then sell 5% to an investor and have it not dilute her below 51%: .54 * .95 = .513).   That keeps you whole but also keeps your woman-owned-business status."}
{"id": "187124", "text": "\"There's already an excellent answer here from @BenMiller, but I wanted to expand a bit on Types of Investments with some additional actionable information. You can invest in stocks, bonds, mutual funds (which are simply   collections of stocks and bonds), bank accounts, precious metals, and   many other things. Discussing all of these investments in one answer   is too broad, but my recommendation is this: If you are investing for   retirement, you should be investing in the stock market. However,   picking individual stocks is too risky; you need to be diversified in   a lot of stocks. Stock mutual funds are a great way to invest in the   stock market. So how does one go about actually investing in the stock market in a diversified way? What if you also want to diversify a bit into bonds? Fortunately, in the last several years, several products have come about that do just these things, and are targeted towards newer investors. These are often labeled \"\"robo-advisors\"\". Most even allow you to adjust your allocation according to your risk preferences. Here's a list of the ones I know about: While these products all purport to achieve similar goals of giving you an easy way to obtain a diversified portfolio according to your risk, they differ in the buckets of stocks and funds they put your money into; the careful investor would be wise to compare which specific ETFs they use (e.g. looking at their expense ratios, capitalization, and spreads).\""}
{"id": "187129", "text": "\"We had a \"\"civics\"\" class when I was a freshman in high school. This was in the Ann Arbor, MI public schools. It covered the very basics (how to balance your checkbook, what are stocks, how do income taxes work, what is interest, etc.) of money management along with an overview of politics and the legal system. It was a really light class, though, and didn't go deeply into personal finance and money management. I agree that such a class would be very valuable, as would cooking, nutrition, and basic home and car repair.\""}
{"id": "187227", "text": "Yes, it's possible (and quite legitimate) to do that using depreciation expenses. While there's a large up-front cash expense (a capital expenditure), you then get many years (depending on the usable life of the asset) of depreciation expense that reduces your taxable income. Many capital-intensive businesses can be attractive for just that reason (for example, real estate).  Your question is a bit of a reverse on the common criticism that companies overemphasize non-GAAP numbers (like EBITDA) to appear more profitable (or profitable at all) compared with their GAAP Net Income. But it is certainly true that plenty of companies (especially private ones) factor tax considerations into capital expenditure timing and choices."}
{"id": "187761", "text": "Wash sale applies. If you purchase shares within 30 days of that Feb 3 sell date, the wash sale kicks in, preventing the loss on that sale, and deferring it into the new shares."}
{"id": "188015", "text": "This is a case where human nature and arithmetic lead to different results. Depending on the your income, the effective interest rate on the mortgage is probably right around 2.5%.  So purely by arithmetic, the absolute cheapest way to go is to put the $11k to the bigger car loan, then pay off the mortgage, then the smaller car loan. The Debt Snowball is more effective however, because it works better for people. Progress is demonstrated quickly, which maintains (and often enhances) motivation to continue.  I can say as a case in point, having tried both methods, that if does indeed work.  So, I am with you ... pay off the car loan first, and roll that payment into the bigger car loan. If you add no extra dollars, you should get the small loan paid off in 6 to 8 months and the bigger car loan in another 16 to 18 months. It sounds like from your message that you have another $1500 or so a month.  If that is the case ... small loan paid off in two months, bigger loan paid off in another year.  If you stick with the Ramsay program, you then build an emergency fund and start investing. Good luck!"}
{"id": "188232", "text": "\"Isn't it true that on the ex-dividend date, the price of the stock goes down roughly the amount of the dividend? That is, what you gain in dividend, you lose in price drop. Yes and No. It Depends! Generally stocks move up and down during the market, and become more volatile on some news. So One can't truly measure if the stock has gone down by the extent of dividend as one cannot isolate other factors for what is a normal share movement. There are time when the prices infact moves up. Now would it have moved more if there was no dividend is speculative. Secondly the dividends are very small percentage compared to the shares trading price. Generally even if 100% dividend are announced, they are on the share capital. On share prices dividends would be less than 1%. Hence it becomes more difficult to measure the movement of stock. Note if the dividend is greater than a said percentage, there are rules that give guidelines to factor this in options and other area etc. Lets not mix these exceptions. Why is everyone making a big deal out of the amount that companies pay in dividends then? Why do some people call themselves \"\"dividend investors\"\"? It doesn't seem to make much sense. There are some set of investors who are passive. i.e. they want to invest in good stock, but don't want to sell it; i.e. more like keep it for long time. At the same time they want some cash potentially to spend; similar to interest received on Bank Deposits. This class of share holders, it makes sense to invest into companies that give dividends, as year on year they keep receiving some money. If they on the other hand has invested into a company that does not give dividends, they would have to sell some units to get the same money back. This is the catch. They have to sell in whole units, there is brokerage, fees, etc, there are tax events. Some countries have taxes that are more friendly to dividends than capital gains. Thus its an individual choice whether to invest into companies that give good dividends or into companies that don't give dividends.  Giving or not giving dividends does not make a company good or bad.\""}
{"id": "188406", "text": "Credit scoring has changed since the time of this question (July 2017) and it is now possible that having a high available credit balance can negatively affect your credit score. ... VantageScore will now mark a borrower negatively for having   excessively large credit card limits, on the theory that the person   could run up a high credit card debt quickly. Those who have prime   credit scores may be hurt the most, since they are most likely to have   multiple cards open. But those who like to play the credit card   rewards program points game could be affected as well. source"}
{"id": "188890", "text": "As I commented, there's confusion on withholding. The 20% pertains to 401(k) accounts, not IRAs."}
{"id": "188893", "text": "Assuming it's your business, endorse the check as yourself and your DBA name, payable to your personal account"}
{"id": "189061", "text": "\"Sell 200 at 142. What does that mean? I haven't seen the movie, so I won't try to put anything in story context.  \"\"Sell 200 at 142\"\" means to sell 200 units (usually shares, but in this case it would likely be gallons or barrels of orange juice or pounds or tons of frozen juice).   In general, this could mean that you have 200 units and want to sell what you have.  Or you could borrow 200 units from someone and sell those--this is called a naked short.  In this case, it seems that what they are selling is a futures contract.  With a futures contract, you are promising to obtain orange juice by some future date and sell it for the agreed price.  You could own an orange grove and plan to turn your oranges into juice.  Or you could buy a futures contract of oranges to turn into juice.  Or you could arbitrage two futures contracts such that one supplies the other, what they're doing here.   In general people make profits by buying low and selling high.  In this case they did so in reverse order.  They took the risk of selling before they had a supply.  Then they covered their position by purchasing the supply.  They profited because the price at which they bought was lower than the price at which they sold.   The reason why this is necessary is that before buying the oranges, the orange juice makers need to know that they can make a profit.  So they sell orange juice on the futures market.  Then they know how much they can afford to pay for oranges on a different market.  And the growers know how much they can get for oranges, so they can pay people to water and pick them.   Without the futures markets, growers and orange juice makers would have to take all the risk themselves.  This way, they can share risks with each other and financiers.  Combined with insurance, this allows for predictable finances.  Without it, growers would have to be wealthy to afford the variation in crop yields and prices.\""}
{"id": "189190", "text": "\"Chris - you realize that when you buy a stock, the seller gets the money, not the company itself, unless of course, you bought IPO shares. And the amount you'd own would be such a small portion of the company, they don't know you exist.  As far as morals go, if you wish to avoid certain stocks for this reason, look at the Socially Responsible funds that are out there. There are also funds that are targeted to certain religions and avoid alcohol and tobacco. The other choice is to invest in individual stocks which for the small investor is very tough and expensive. You'll spend more money to avoid the shares than these very shares are worth.  Your proposal is interesting but impractical. In a portfolio of say $100K in the S&P, the bottom 400 stocks are disproportionately smaller amounts of money in those shares than the top 100. So we're talking $100 or less. You'd need to short 2 or 3 shares. Even at $1M in that fund, 20-30 shares shorted is pretty silly, no offense.  Why not 'do the math' and during the year you purchase the fund, donate the amount you own in the \"\"bad\"\" companies to charity.  And what littleadv said - that too.\""}
{"id": "189678", "text": "\"Remember that risk should correlate with returns, in an investment. This means that the more risk you take on, the more return you should be receiving, in an efficient marketplace. That's why putting your money in a savings account might earn you <1% interest right now, but putting money in the stock market averages ~7% returns over time. You should be very careful not to use the word 'interest' when you mean 'returns'. In your post, you are calling capital gains (the increase in value of owned property) 'interest'. This may be understating in your head the level of risk associated with property ownership. In the case of the bank, they are not in the business of home construction. Rather than take that risk themselves, they would rather finance many projects being done by construction companies that know the business. The bank has a high degree of certainty of getting its money back, because its mortgages are protected by the value of the property.  Part of the benefit of an efficient marketplace is that risk gets 'bought' by individuals who want it. This means that people with a low-risk tolerance (such as banks, people on fixed incomes, seniors, etc.) can avoid risk, and people with a high risk tolerance (stock investors, young people with high income, etc.) can take on that risk for higher average returns. The bank's reasoning should remind you of the risk associated with property ownership: increases in value are not a sure thing. If you do not understand the risk of your investment, you cannot be certain that you are being well compensated for that risk. Note also that most countries place regulations on their banks that limit the amount of their funds that can be placed in 'higher risk' asset classes. Typically, this something along the lines of \"\"If someone places a deposit with your bank, you can only invest that deposit in a low-risk debt-based asset [ie: you can take money deposited by customer A and use it to finance a mortgage for customer B]\"\". This is done in an attempt to prevent collapse of the financial sector, if risky investments start failing.\""}
{"id": "189868", "text": "That expense ratio on the bank fund is criminally high. Use the Vanguard one, they have really low expenses."}
{"id": "189894", "text": "In addition to the excellent answers here I might suggest a reason for investing in leveraged funds and the original purpose for their existence.  Lets say you run a mutual fund that is supposed to track the performance of the S&P 500.   If you have cash inflows and outflows from your fund due to people investing and selling shares of your fund you may have periods where not all funds are invested appropriately because some of the funds are in cash.  Lets say 98% of your funds are invested in the securities that reflect the stocks in the S&P 500.  You will will miss matching the S&P 500 because you have 2% not invested in some money market account.   If you take 1/3 of the cash balance and invest in a triple leveraged fund or take 1/2 of the funds and invest in a double leveraged fund you will more accurately track the index to which your fund is supposed to track.  I am not sure what percentage mutual fund owners keep in cash but this is one use that I know these ETFs are used for. The difference over time that compounding effects have on leveraged funds is called Beta Slippage. There are many fine articles explaining it at you can find one located at this link."}
{"id": "190135", "text": "\"Since you have no sales, I'd likely question how well could you determine the value of the company's assets in a reasonable fashion. You may be better to estimate sales and discount that back to a current valuation. For example, insurance companies could determine that if you wanted to be paid $x/month for the rest of your life, the present day value of that is $y. There are similar mechanisms for businesses but this does get tricky as the estimates have to be somewhat conservative and you have to be prepared for some other scenarios. For example, if you got the $200,000 then would you really never have to ask for more external equity financing in the future or is it quite likely that you'd want another infusion down the road? While you can mark it at $1,000,000 there will be questions about why that value that you'd have to answer and saying, \"\"Cause I like big round numbers,\"\" may not go over well. My suggestion is to consider what kind of sales will the company have over the next 5 years that you could work back to determine a current price. If you believe the company can have $5,000,000 in sales over the 5 years then it may make sense to place the current valuation of $1,000,000 on it. I wouldn't look too much into the money and time you've invested as that isn't likely to go over well with investors that just because you've put in what is worth $x, the business may or may not be worth that. The challenge is that without sales, it is quite difficult to get an idea of what is the company worth. If it makes billions, then it is worth a lot more than a company that never turns a profit. Another way to consider this is the question of what kind of economic output do you think you could do working here for the next 5 years? Could you do thousands of dollars of work, millions of dollars or just a few bucks? Consider how you want this to be seen where if you want some help look up episodes of TV shows like \"\"Dragon's Den\"\" or \"\"Shark Tank\"\" as these give valuations often as part of the pitch which is what you are doing.\""}
{"id": "190687", "text": "\"Assuming your investments aren't in any kind of tax-advantaged account (like an IRA), they are generally not tracked and you indeed may pay more taxes.  What will likely change, however, is your cost basis.  You only pay tax on the difference between the value of the investment when you sell it and its value when you bought it. There is no rule that says once you sell an investment and pay taxes on the gain, you will never again pay any taxes on any other investments you then buy with that money.  If you own some investment, and it increases in value, and then you sell it, you had a capital gain and owe taxes (depending on your tax bracket, etc.).  If you use the money to buy some other investment, and that increases in value, and then you sell it, you had another separate capital gain and again owe taxes. However, every time you sell, you only are subject to capital gains taxes on the gain, not the entire sale price.  The value of the investment at the time you bought it is the cost basis.  When you sell, you take the sale price and subtract the cost basis to find your gain, So suppose you bought $1000 worth of some ETF many years ago.  It went up to $2000 and you sold it.  You have $2000 in cash, but $1000 of that is your original money back, so your capital gain is $1000 and that is the amount on which you owe (or may owe) taxes.  Suppose you pay 15% tax on this, as you suggest; that is $150, leaving you with $1850.  Now suppose you buy another ETF with that.  Your cost basis is now $1850.  Suppose the investment now increases in value again to $2000.  This time when you sell, you still have $2000 in cash, but this is now only $150 more than you paid, so you only owe capital gains taxes on that $150.  (A 15% tax on that would be $22.50.) In that example you had one capital gain of $1000 and a second of $150 and paid a total of $172.50 in taxes (150 + 22.50).  Suppose instead that you had held the original investment and it had increased in value to $2150 and you had then sold it.  You would have a single capital gain of $1150 (2150 minus the original 1000 you paid).  15% of this would be the same $172.50 you paid under the other arrangement.  So in essence you pay the same taxes either way.  (This example is simplified, of course; in reality, the rate you pay depends on your overall income, so you could pay more if you sell a lot in a single year, since it could push you into a higher tax bracket.) So none of the money is \"\"tax exempt\"\", but each time you sell, you \"\"reset the counter\"\" by paying tax on your gain, and each time you buy, you start a new counter on the basis of whatever you pay for the investment.  Assuming you're dealing with ordinary investment instruments like stocks and ETFs, this basis information is typically tracked by the bank or brokerage where you buy and sell them.  Technically speaking it is your responsibility to track and report this when you sell an investment, and if you do complicated things like transfer securities from one brokerage to another you may have to do that yourself.  In general, however, your bank/brokerage will keep track of cost basis information for you.\""}
{"id": "190800", "text": "While there have been plenty of good answers I would like to suggest turning it on it's head--the problem is one of perception. Other than in terms of cash-type emergency funds (my general policy is to have enough cash to get home, however far from there I might be) I consider available credit + assets that can be liquidated reasonably quickly to count as emergency fund money."}
{"id": "190867", "text": "&gt; lol  This univariate model-based inference is a good enough reason for further investigation. I would be interested in knowing how much of the recent returns of the S&amp;P are being driven purely by the Fed bond purchase program, controlling for other macro-economic variables. The bond purchase program is not going to last forever."}
{"id": "190928", "text": "\"All margin is marked to market. Option longs do not post margin because long margin trading is forbidden. Equity longs must post margin if cash is borrowed to fund the purchase. Shorts of all kinds must post margin, and the rates are generally the same: a few standard deviations away from the mean daily change of the underlying. A currency futures trader, because of the involatility of most major monies, can get away with a few percentage points.  Commodities can get to around 10%.  Single equities are frequently around 20%, while indices can get back down to 10%. A future is a special case because both sides are technically short and long at the same time.  The easiest example to perceive is a currency future.  Which one is the buyer and which is the seller?  Both and neither. Contracts may be denominated for one side as the seller and the other the buyer, but contractually, legally, and effectively, both are liable to the other, and both must take delivery.  For non-currency assets, it only appears as if the cash seller is the buyer because cash is not considered an asset in the same way all other assets are, but the \"\"long\"\" is obligated to sell cash and buy the \"\"asset\"\".\""}
{"id": "190931", "text": "When he says shitty, he means less likely to actually pay back the money.   If I have a company that's not doing well enough, and I have already issued $100,000 in bonds onto this market, and I want to pay back all my bond-holders, maybe I convince a near-bankrupt company to give me $100,000 of bonds in their company for $50,000 in goods. I then repay my bondholders with the $100,000 in shitty bonds.  Or maybe I give them $300,000 in goods and they give me $600,000 in their shitty bonds (since thier company is about to fall apart and they know I'll give them a kickback down the line). Then I pay back my 100k bonds with the new shitty bonds, and I go buy $500k worth of raw material for my company and pay for them using almost-bankrupt-company's shitty bonds .   Then I have no debt, $500k worth of raw material, the people I used to owe money to (AND my suppliers) now hold a total of $600k in shitty bonds, and then my friend's almost-bankrupt-company DOES go bankrupt.... and my suppliers and old lenders realize the paper I just gave them is worthless."}
{"id": "190941", "text": "I don't know about India, but here in the US banks, and more friendly institutions such as credit unions, use to offer the option of a 'secured' credit card where the card was secured by placing a lock on money in a savings account equal to the credit limit on the card. So for example, if you had $1500 in savings, you could have them lock say $1000, which you would not be able to withdraw from savings, in return for a credit card account with a credit limit of $1000.  Typically you still earned interest on the full amount of the savings, you were just limited to having to maintain a minimum balance in that account of $1000."}
{"id": "191622", "text": "He is also going to make sure Uber provides 1099s right?  Also report values under $600 to the IRS?  He is also going to make sure all of his drivers have insurance that cover their taxi service right (standard automotive insurance won't cover you for this)? Uber, Lyft, airbnb, taskrabbit gigwalk, etc are like pyramid schemes.  They tell you how to make money, convince you to make transactions, which they take a percentage of.  However, they conveniently don't tell you about the correct regulations, taxes, laws, etc that end up netting you very little at the end of the year."}
{"id": "191925", "text": "Several things to do: Change your bank. $2 for a check? Why?? When shopping for a new bank: ask for a free checking account. College students can get free checking in almost any bank. At least the first box of checks will be free, which will give you enough checks for the next several years (I'm still not half done with the box I got from WaMu 5 years ago). Check out your neighborhood credit union. Most of them have free checking and free checks for students as well. If still no luck - check online check printing services, they'll send you a box for less than $25, that's for sure. Walmart for example (1 box - $7). Also, you can use banks' bill-pay service for any check you write, if you know the address of the person, the amount and the sum a couple of days ahead of time. That should cover rent, and probably most of your other checks."}
{"id": "191965", "text": "You're interpreting this correctly. Furthermore, if your total tax liability is less than $1000, you can not pay estimates at all, just pay at the tax day. See this safe harbor rule in the IRS publication 17: General rule.    In most cases, you must pay estimated tax for 2016 if   both of the following apply. You expect to owe at least $1,000 in tax for 2016, after subtracting your withholding and refundable credits. You expect your withholding plus your refundable credits to be less than the smaller of: 90% of the tax to be shown on your 2016 tax return, or 100% of the tax shown on your 2015 tax return (but see Special rules for farmers, fishermen, and higher income taxpayers , later).   Your 2015 tax return must cover all 12 months."}
{"id": "192292", "text": "The Roth IRA will provide no tax benefit to you if you are contributing after-tax money and then removing it immediately. Also there is more information on tax benefits for parents of disabled children (and a real phone number, I tried calling) at http://www.irs.gov/uac/Tax-Benefits-for-Disabled-Taxpayers"}
{"id": "192295", "text": "\"Yes, you effectively need to \"\"double count\"\" when shifting balances between foreign accounts.\""}
{"id": "192307", "text": "\"The price at which a stock was purchased is a sunk cost--that is, you cannot go back in time and reverse the decision you made to purchase that stock.  Another example of a sunk cost would be purchasing a non-refundable, non-transferable movie ticket.  Sunk costs have the tendency to create a cognitive bias in which we feel that the amount we paid at some point in the past should have some sort of bearing on the decision we make now--the purchaser of the ticket feels he must go see the movie even if he no longer wishes too, lest the ticket \"\"go to waste\"\"... the investor hopelessly clings to a battered stock for that tiny chance that just maybe some day it will return to its former glory.  This is referred to as the \"\"sunk cost fallacy\"\" and is considered to be irrational behavior by economists. Keeping this in mind, your hopes and dreams for the stock at the time you purchased it should have no bearing on the decision you make now.  Similarly, whether the stock has risen or fallen in price since your purchase date should have no bearing.  Instead, you must consider what you expect the stock to do from this very moment on into the future--that is, you must act at the margin. You've indicated that you are faced with two choices--sell the stock now, incur the loss, but benefit from the tax break (Option A).  This benefit is quite easily quantifiable--it is your marginal tax rate multiplied by the additive inverse of the loss (assuming you have/will have other gains to offset).  Let's just assume that you incurred a $1000 loss, at a marginal tax rate of 20%, which means your tax benefit for the loss is $200. The second choice--to hold the stock in hopes of it rising in price (Option B)--is a bit harder to quantify.  You must assume that today is day zero, and that every cent in price the stock rises is a gain to you, and every cent in price the stock looses is a loss to you.  If you believe that the stock will rise to a price that will net your more than your tax benefit from option A, then holding the stock is more favorable than selling it at a loss today.  Conversely, if you believe this stock will fall even further in the future, or not rise enough to net you $200 (per the example), then Option A is preferable. Granted, there are some additional complications that play into your decision.  By selling the stock today, you not only get a tax benefit from the loss, but you've also freed up the funds previously used to purchase that stock to be invested elsewhere (in hopefully a better performing asset).  If you choose to stick with your current stock, then the gains you may have netted elsewhere must be considered as an opportunity cost associated with Option B.  Finally, the tax benefit is essentially guaranteed (so in our example, a $200 risk free return), while sticking with the stock in Option B still comes with some risk.\""}
{"id": "192464", "text": "\"I'd suggest that Bitcoin is not \"\"just\"\" anything. If wealthy Chinese have found it useful, good for them. If enterprising Venezuelan manage to afford basic necessities with it, that's great too.    Both of those are just use cases in the end. There have been others, and there will be more.   It remains to be seen just how draconian capital controls need to be to really prevent Bitcoin from being used in those environments. But if anybody can do draconian, it's probably China, so this will be a great experiment of sort, if they still have the stomach for that kind of thing.  If you're arguing that the market value of bitcoin is only rising because of one use case, I invite you to [look at this historical bitcoin price chart](https://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg2920ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zvzl), spot the period of activity for your given use case, and estimate how the price action was influenced over that period by this use case. Then contrast it with the part of the graph outside of your chosen period, and make sure your idea adequately explains both parts.\""}
{"id": "192541", "text": "What I do not get is why does the author choose to buy an ITM put. If   the goal was to not lose more than 5.6%, he could have chosen a out of   money put where the strike is ~6% OTM. The reason why he is buying a ITM put instead of a put 5-6% below the ATM price, is because he wants to only lose 5-6% after all fee's.  A put at 5-6% below ATM is not free, so it will not actually provide a 6% cushion, more likely 10%-15% maximum loss after it's cost is accounted for. You cannot rely on the strike alone to determine the level of protection you are buying.  Real world example.  SPY DEC 2017 195 strike put, costs $2150, it's about 6% OTM, but it costs roughly 10% of SPY $207, at best it would protect 85% of your net worth.   Strike - Costs = Protection  Did he choose an ITM put because he does not want to pay any time   premium? Does he not lose in wide bid-ask spreads what he gains by not   paying time premium? Nope, you were just misunderstanding how he calculated his protection. He wanted to protect 5-6% after the cost of the hedge. He 'needed' to select an ITM put because time premiums are so high that an OTM put wouldn't suffice."}
{"id": "192669", "text": "That's what I would do; 1.2 million dollars is a lot of money, but it doesn't make you retired for the rest of your life: There is a big crisis coming soon (my personal prediction) in the next 10-15 years, and when this happens: government will hold your money if you leave them in the bank (allowing you to use just part of it; you will have to prove the reason you need it), government will pass bills to make it very hard to close your investment positions, and government will pass new laws to create new taxes for people with a lot of money (you). To have SOME level of security I would separate my investment in the following: 20% I would buy gold certificates and the real thing (I would put the gold in a safe(s)). 20% I would put in bitcoin (you would have to really study this if you are new to crypto currency in order to be safe). 40% I would invest in regular finance products (bonds, stocks and options, FX). 20% I would keep in the bank for life expenses, specially if you don't want work for money any more. 20% I would invest in startup companies exchanging high risk hoping for a great return. Those percentages might change a little depending how good/confident you become after investing, knowing about business, etc..."}
{"id": "192811", "text": "\"First, don't save anything in a tax sheltered vehicle. You will be paying so little tax that there will be essentially no benefit to making the contributions, and you'll pay tax when they come out. Tax free compounding for 40 years is terrific, but start that after you're earning more than a stipend. Second, most people recommend having a month's expenses readily available for emergencies. For you, that would be $1500. If you put $100 a month aside, it will take over a year to have your emergency fund. It's easy to argue that you should pick a higher pace, so as to have your emergency money in place sooner. However, the \"\"emergencies\"\" usually cited are things like home repair, car repair, needing to replace your car, and so on. Since you are renting your home and don't have a car, these emergencies aren't going to happen to you. Ask yourself, if your home was destroyed, and you had to replace all your clothes and possessions (including furniture), how much would you need? (Keep in mind any insurance you have.) The only emergency expense I can't guess about is health costs, because I live in Canada. I would be tempted to tell you to get a credit card with a $2000 limit and consider that your emergency fund, just because grad student living is so tight to the bone (been there, and 25 years ago I had $1200 a month, so it must be harder for you now.) If you do manage to save up $1500, and you've really been pinching to do that (walking instead of taking the bus, staying on campus hungry instead of popping out to buy food) let up on yourself when you hit the target. Delaying your graduation by a few months because you're not mentally sharp due to hunger or tiredness will be a far bigger economic hit than not having saved $200 a month for 2 or 3 years. The former is 3-6 months of your new salary, the latter 5-7K. You know what you're likely to earn when you graduate, right?\""}
{"id": "192857", "text": "Didn't see it mentioned so far, but depending on modified AGI you may be prevented from a tax deduction for your contribution to a Traditional IRA if you or your spouse are offered a retirement plan at work, even if you don't participate in it.  See the IRS page here for the details of deduction limitability: https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/2017-ira-deduction-limits-effect-of-modified-agi-on-deduction-if-you-are-covered-by-a-retirement-plan-at-work In my opinion, because I heavily favor all the benefits of the Roth, I'd contribute first to a Roth IRA and then to the Roth 401(k).   The former first because it puts the money in a place where you have more control over fees and how it is invested.   The latter because the contribution limits are much higher than the IRA, and the money grows tax-free and incurs no taxes on withdrawal."}
{"id": "192888", "text": "Since you're not loaning the company the money, the correct category is Equity. It's not an income type account, rather it represents the balance of Assets - Liabilities = Owner's Equity So you'd put down \u00a3100 as the starting balance of Owner's Equity, and then a Cash Balance of \u00a3100 in a cash account."}
{"id": "192900", "text": "This is the bird's eye view of how shorting works: When you place an order to sell a stock short, your broker attempts to grab the desired number of shares from any accounts of its other customers and makes them available for you to sell. If no other customers own shares of this stock, then generally you are out of luck (It is more complicated like that in practice, but this is just an overview).    Your odds are better if the particular stock has a large float (i.e. a large number of shares that are actually available for trading) and its short ratio is low (which means relatively few shares   are currently being sold short). Also, a large brokerage may be more likely to have access to the shares than a small niche-market broker.   The example you've given, Angie's List (ANGI) is a $600M small-cap with a comparatively low float, and though I haven't been able to glean the short ratio, it appears that a lot of investors are bearish on this stock and probably already had the same idea to short it.  There is really no way to find out if a specific broker has shares in inventory available for shorting, short of (forgive the pun) checking directly with the broker."}
{"id": "193012", "text": "The 'standard' in such moving average crossover systems is 50/200. The numbers are essentially arbitrary as long as the long term average is greater than the short term and there is some different between the averages in terms of the smoothing they provide (i.e. comparing a 74 day MA to a 75 day MA isn't what the system is intended for) There are plenty of software programs that will let you run through many possible values for the system over historical data. I concur with the other answers in that this system/indicator alone isn't very good. However, I disagree with their blanket brushing off of technical analysis. There are many successful traders out there. The moving average cross over system is perhaps the second most primitive example of technical strategies categorized as trend following systems (buying new recent highs and selling new recent lows being the most simple). This particular system isn't very powerful because of its poor use of simple moving averages. A simple moving average is intended to smooth out data, but smoothing comes at the cost of lagging from the present. A simple moving average essentially gives you an idealized smoothing of price action for the day at that is one half of their period ago. So your 200 day simple moving average shows you an idealized smoothing of price action 100 days ago. A lot can happen in 100 days and that is why this system is far from ideal."}
{"id": "193251", "text": "For tax purposes, what matters is your province of residence at December 31st. Quebec Tax abatement therefore applies if you were living in Quebec, regardless of your employer, assuming you are an employee. As for effective tax, your question misses some data and does not quite make sense as effective tax is the result of dividing your total taxes paid after deductions and tax credits by your total income. As such, one cannot tell you your effective tax rate without knowing taxes paid after deductions and tax credits and total income."}
{"id": "193266", "text": "Companies do both quite often.  They have opposite effects on the share price, but not on the total value to the shareholders.  Doing both causes value to shareholders to rise (ie, any un-bought back shares now own a larger percentage of the company and are worth more) and drops the per-share price (so it is easier to buy a share of the stock).  To some that's irrelevant, but some might want a share of an otherwise-expensive stock without paying $700 for it. As a specific example of this, Apple (APPL) split its stock in 2014 and also continued a significant buyback program: Apple announces $17B repurchase program, Oct 2014 Apple stock splits 7-to-1 in June 2014. This led to their stock in total being worth more, but costing substantially less per share."}
{"id": "193398", "text": "I know that in the case of cash dividends I will get the dividend as long as I bought the stock before the ex-date but what happens in the case of an stock dividend? This is same as cash dividends. You would receive the additional stock."}
{"id": "193449", "text": "Someone mentioned sign up bonuses but only mentioned dollar values. You might get points, sweet, sweet airline points :) which some might find compelling enough to churn cards so they always have a few open."}
{"id": "193459", "text": "You might want to talk with your financial planner about any or all of the following: as well as Some of these offer the guarantee of a minimal amount of interest, as well as the ability to take a loan out against the cash value, without lapsing the policy.  They may also offer certain tax advantages depending upon your jurisdiction and situation."}
{"id": "193502", "text": "\"My take on this is that with any short-selling contract you are engaging in, at a specified time in the future you will need to transfer ownership of the item(s) you sold to the buyer. Whether you own the item(s) or in your case you will buy your friend's used  car in the meantime (or dig enough gold out of the ground - in the case of hedging a commodity exposure) is a matter of \"\"trust\"\". Hence there is normally some form of margin or credit-line involved to cover for you failing to deliver on expiry.\""}
{"id": "193559", "text": "That should obscure your name and home address fairly well."}
{"id": "194217", "text": "\"If I invest in individual stocks I will, from time to time, sell stocks that aren't performing well. If the value of my portfolio has gone up by 10%, then the value of my portfolio has gone up by 10%, regardless of whether selling those stocks is labeled as \"\"delete[ing] failures\"\". Same thing for mutual funds: selling underperforming stocks is perfectly ordinary, and calling it \"\"delete[ing] failures\"\" in order to imply some sort of dishonesty is simply dishonest.\""}
{"id": "194319", "text": "\"Yes, there are situations where a stock is a bad buy in spite of a low PE. PE ratio tells you the current share price divided by the prior 4 quarters earnings per share. It does not consider: Imagine someone walked up to you and said, \"\"Do you want to buy a piece of my business? I'll sell you 1% of it for $1000. Last year the business earned $25000.\"\" A quick calculation shows a PE of 4 [$1000/($25000 *.01)]. Even though this PE is comparatively low, you wouldn't buy in without a lot more info. What kinds of things might you ask? PE is one tiny component of an informed investment decision.\""}
{"id": "194363", "text": "You can't get there from here.  This isn't the right data.  Consider the following five-year history:  2%, 16%, 32%, 14%, 1%.  That would give a 13% average annual return.  Now compare to -37%, 26%, 15%, 2%, 16%.  That would give a 4% average annual return.   Notice anything about those numbers?  Two of them are in both series.  This isn't an accident.  The first set of five numbers are actual stock market returns from the last five years while the latter five start three years earlier.  The critical thing is that five years of returns aren't enough.  You'd need to know not just how you can handle a bull market but how you do in a bear market as well.  Because there will be bear markets.   Also consider whether average annual returns are what you want.  Consider what actually happens in the second set of numbers:   But if you had had a steady 4% return, you would have had a total return of 21%, not the 8% that would have really happened.  The point being that calculating from averages gives misleading results.  This gets even worse if you remove money from your principal for living expenses every year.   The usual way to compensate for that is to do a 70% stock/30% bond mix (or 75%/25%) with five years of expenses in cash-equivalent savings.  With cash-equivalents, you won't even keep up with inflation.  The stock/bond mix might give you a 7% return after inflation.  So the five years of expenses are more and more problematic as your nest egg shrinks.  It's better to live off the interest if you can.  You don't know how long you'll live or how the market will do.   From there, it's just about how much risk you want to take.  A current nest egg of twenty times expenses might be enough, but thirty times would be better.  Since the 1970s, the stock market hasn't had a long bad patch relative to inflation.  Maybe you could squeak through with ten.  But if the 2020s are like the 1970s, you'd be in trouble."}
{"id": "194605", "text": "There are a few situations in which it may be advantageous to exercise early. Wikipedia actually has a good explanation: Option Style, Difference in value To account for the American's higher value there must be some   situations in which it is optimal to exercise the American option   before the expiration date. This can arise in several ways, such as: An in the money (ITM) call option on a stock is often exercised just   before the stock pays a dividend that would lower its value by more   than the option's remaining time value.  A put option will usually be   exercised early if the underlying asset files for bankruptcy.[3]  A deep ITM currency option (FX option) where the strike currency has a   lower interest rate than the currency to be received will often be   exercised early because the time value sacrificed is less valuable   than the expected depreciation of the received currency against the   strike.  An American bond option on the dirty price of a bond (such as   some convertible bonds) may be exercised immediately if ITM and a   coupon is due.  A put option on gold will be exercised early when deep   ITM, because gold tends to hold its value whereas the currency used as   the strike is often expected to lose value through inflation if the   holder waits until final maturity to exercise the option (they will   almost certainly exercise a contract deep ITM, minimizing its time   value).[citation needed]"}
{"id": "194862", "text": "the $5500 Roth IRA is not restricted to earned income, you can put whatever money you have tax free and gains free."}
{"id": "195100", "text": "Given those assumptions (which I happen to think are reasonable) it seems to me the obvious place is to buy non-Australian assets, such as the Vanguard VTS (total US share market) and VEU (world ex-US) ETFs, and perhaps also some international fixed-interest ETFs.   I think keeping a certain amount of cash would be prudent anyhow. If you felt very sure this was going to happen, you could borrow in Australia and buy foreign assets, expecting that as the AUD falls, the relative cost of the borrowing will also fall.  This is obviously fairly risky, not least because Australian interest rates are already high and may go much higher, and while the rates go up the exchange rate will also likely go up. As I mentioned on another answer, I think buying gold or other commodity instruments is a poor choice here because the Australian economy and the AUD is so tied to those prices already."}
{"id": "195206", "text": "If you are in a position to have information that will impact the shares of a stock or index fund and you use that information for either personal gain or to mitigate the losses that you would have felt then it is insider trading.  Even if in the end your quiet period passes with little or no movement of the stocks in question.  It is the attempt to benefit from or the appearance of the attempt to benefit from inside information that creates the crime.  This is the reason for the quiet periods to attempt to shield the majority of the companies employees from the appearance of impropriety, as well as any actual improprieties. With an index you are running a double edged sword because anything that is likely to cause APPLE to drop 10% is likely to give a bump to Motorola, Google, and its competitors.  So you could end up in jail for Insider trading and lose your shirt on a poor decision to short a Tech  ETF on knowledge that will cause Apple to take a hit.  It is certainly going to be harder to find the trade but the SEC is good at looking around for activity that is inconsistent with normal trading patterns of individuals in a position to have knowledge with the type of market impact you are talking about."}
{"id": "195385", "text": "Consider searching locally for a rewards checking account.  There are some that must be opened nationally, but you can likely find a local bank (or perhaps even two) that offer these high yield checking accounts.  They will generally pay more than the interest you have on those cards. Try This site to see if one is offered locally to you. These accounts typically require the following:  In return you get higher interest rates, and most credit you ATM fees.  The amount is generally capped between 10K to 25K on the high interest rate, and you'll generally receive a small rate for anything above that. I'm in a smaller city, and I have one local, and one within a 45 minute drive.  If you have a job that allows for split direct deposits, this is even easier.  We never have any trouble knocking out the required debit transactions, but you MUST look at the balance as being an emergency fund, rather than a checking fund with an available balance.  If you find two near you, you can probably earn ~$130 a month in interest.  That's way more than you pay monthly...  I vote to put it to work for you before paying it off."}
{"id": "195571", "text": "You will almost certainly be paying taxes in Czech Republic, short of being American of Eritrean, citizenship has little to no bearing on tax. If you are working from home, you will probably be a contractor. In Romania you would work through either an SRL or you would set up a PFA. Essentially a limited company or a sole trader. You will need to find the Czech equivalents. I would advise finding a small business accountant. They will be able to advise what is the most cost effective solution, in some countries (like my one) you can save considerable amounts of tax by working through a company. There is a link with some information."}
{"id": "195587", "text": "\"I disagree with the IRA suggestion. Why IRA? You're a student, so probably won't get much tax benefits, so why locking the money for 40 years? You can do the same investments through any broker account as in IRA, but be able to cash out in need. 5 years is long enough term to put in a mutual fund or ETF and expect reasonable (>1.25%) gains. You can use the online \"\"analyst\"\" tools that brokers like ETrade or Sharebuilder provide to decide on how to spread your portfolio, 15K is enough for diversifying over several areas. If you want to keep it as cash - check the on-line savings accounts (like Capitol One, for example, or Ally, ING Direct that will merge with Capitol One and others) for better rates, brick and mortar banks can not possible compete with what you can get online.\""}
{"id": "195837", "text": "My favorite story of a strategic default is from my friend who way overpaid for a house in the Bay Area. After the housing market fell, he bought a second home (with a separate mortgage), and THEN defaulted on the first house.   The lender on the first house knew that he bought a 2nd home recently, but they couldn't go after it because it was securing a mortgage to a different bank. His credit score was ruined, but it didn't matter to him because you only really need credit for a new mortgage and he already bought a new house."}
{"id": "195977", "text": "Dividends are supposed to be paid from company profits (in the current or previous financial years), there are nuances around what profits mean from country to country, but the link is the UK definition from the HMRC. Profits from previous financial years are commonly called retained earnings. There are a few items around this"}
{"id": "196427", "text": "Capital gains tax is an income tax upon your profit from selling investments. Long-term capital gains (investments you have held for more than a year) are taxed significantly less than short-term gains. It doesn't limit how many shares you can sell; it does discourage selling them too quickly after buying.  You can balance losses against gains to reduce the tax due. You can look for tax-advantaged investments (the obvious one being a 401k plan, IRA, or equivalent, though those generally require leaving the money invested until retirement). But in the US, most investments other than the house you are living in (which some of us argue isn't really an investment) are subject to capital gains tax, period."}
{"id": "196463", "text": "As a general rule, you must choose between a mileage deduction or an actual expenses deduction.  The idea is that the mileage deduction is supposed to cover all costs of using the car.  Exceptions include parking fees and tolls, which can be deducted separately under either method.  You explicitly cannot deduct insurance costs if you claim a mileage deduction.   Separately, you probably won't be able to deduct the deductible for your car as a casualty loss.  You first subtract $100 from the deductible and then divide it by your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) from your tax return.  If your deductible is over 10% of your AGI, you can deduct it.   Note that even with a $1500 deductible, you won't be able to deduct anything if you made more than $14,000 for the year.  For most people, the insurance deductible just isn't large enough relative to income to be tax deductible.   Source"}
{"id": "196596", "text": "\"The benefit of having gold to trade is that there is almost always someone that will take gold when the fiat currency is in trouble.    The potential downfall of doing this is that when people think the fiat currency is in trouble, they tend to buy up gold, thus driving up the price.  This means that you get less gold for each hour of work you perform (deer-haunch, basket of apples, etc.).    Even more, if the financial crisis is limited to only one fiat currency, you have a situation where that fiat currency devalues but others can gain in value as people try to sell their old currency for the new standard currency.  If people also sell their gold to buy up this currency, that lowers the price of gold in that currency.    For example, let us assume that gold was 1000 dollars an ounce and 1000 euros an ounce.  Suddenly, people start thinking that the euro is in trouble, so they start buying gold.  The law of supply and demand kicks in (more buyers, same supply, so higher prices) and gold is suddenly worth 2000 dollars and 2000 euros an ounce.  If you start buying at this point, you get half as much gold as the person who bought in the beginning.  Suddenly, the euro collapses.  Stores that used to take euros start demanding dollars.  Suddenly, it costs 20,000 euros for an ounce of gold but an ounce of gold will only get you 1,000 dollars since everyone is selling their gold to get dollars.    The people who buy gold in the \"\"panic\"\" end up losing half the value of their money if not more.  The \"\"speculators\"\" that bought gold at $1,000, sold it at $2,000, and bought it back at $1,000 now have all their gold back plus the $1,000 the other people lost.\""}
{"id": "196677", "text": "When it comes to property investing, there are indeed a couple of important things to consider. Even property professionals must know some significant info in order to ensure that they will get the right property for a certain investor. Thank you for sharing this site. I definitely learned more info regarding property investments."}
{"id": "196870", "text": "You don't need credit cards but there are few benefits, if you pay them off right away I assume you do have a debit card, since sometimes (like unattended gas stations or shopping on the web) cash is not accepted."}
{"id": "196920", "text": "From the 1099 instructions: File Form 1099-MISC, Miscellaneous Income, for each person to whom you have paid during the year Your accounting method doesn't matter. You file 1099 for the year you paid the money."}
{"id": "197151", "text": "Assuming US. The only con that I know of is that hassle factor. You have to remember to sell when you get the new shares, and your taxes become a bit more complicated; the discount that you receive is taxed as ordinary income, and then any change in the price of the stock between when you receive it and you sell it will be considered a capital gain or loss. It's not hard to account for properly if you keep good records."}
{"id": "197401", "text": "I'm not, I think this is a good thing, I'm long on PG (3+ years so far).   I was on vacation the past few days and just found out.  I was saying the rest of the portfolio was down, but these two balanced things out."}
{"id": "197495", "text": "\"I don't know if this is \"\"valid\"\" from a bookkeeping/accounting standpoint, but I'm just trying to keep records for myself so this works for me unless someone has another suggestion. I created two Expense accounts for the HSA (Roth, etc would work the same way): (\"\"CY\"\" meaning current year.) When I make a $50 contribution, I enter the following splits: When you look at this in the Accounts tab, it shows the parent account with a zero balance (because the subaccount balance is positive and the parent account is negative). The subaccount has the balance accumulated so far; this lets me see the YTD contributions to my HSAs. At the end of the year I will make a closing transaction in the opposite direction (for whatever the total balance of the CY account is): This will zero-balance these two accounts. The only complication I see remaining is the issue of making contributions for the prior year during the January-April time frame. I don't generally make current-year contributions followed by prior-year contributions, so I can just wait to enter the closing transaction until I know I'm done with prior-year contributions.\""}
{"id": "197546", "text": "One of the triggers for audit is when the IRS can't match 1099 income to the tax return. Whoever got the 1099 in her name should include that income on her return."}
{"id": "198090", "text": "\"If you want to do #1, then you should form an \"\"investment club.\"\" This is an entity that is recognized by the SEC and the IRS.  From the SEC: An investment club is a group of people who pool their money to make investments. Usually, investment clubs are organized as partnerships and, after the members study different investments, the group decides to buy or sell based on a majority vote of the members. Club meetings may be educational and each member may actively participate in investment decisions. https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/invclub.htm You should do your own legal research on how to organize, but I believe that a common way is to form a formal partnership, which then provides the legal structure for distributing gains, tax liability, income, and other costs to the members.  IRS publication 550 has a section on Investment Clubs from a tax perspective, but I'd definitely recommend get professional help on this in addition to whatever you can read yourself. As for #2, I believe that's illegal unless you're licensed.\""}
{"id": "198246", "text": "The reason for the 10% rule of thumb is that this is roughly what you'll need to save for retirement in order to have the same standard of living in retirement as you do during your working years. Since each additional dollar produces less happiness you will maximize your happiness by equalizing your income over your entire life and thus this produces the maximum happiness."}
{"id": "198251", "text": "Forgive me as I do not know much about your fine country, but I do know one thing.  You can make 5% risk free guaranteed.  How, from your link: If you make a voluntary repayment of $500 or more, you will receive a bonus of 5 per cent. This means your account will be credited with an additional 5 per cent of the value of your payment. I'd take 20.900 of that amount saved and pay off her loan tomorrow and increase my net worth by 22.000. I'd also do the same thing for your loan.  In fact in someways it is more important to pay off your loan first.   As I understand it, you will eventually have to pay your loan back once your income rises above a threshold.  Psychologically you make attempt to retard your  future income in order to avoid payback.  Those decisions may not be made overtly but it is likely they will be made. So by the end of the day (or as soon as possible), I'd have a bank balance of 113,900 and no student loan debt.  This amounts to a net increase in net worth of 1900. It is a great, safe, first investment."}
{"id": "198465", "text": "The duration of a bond tells you the sensitivity of its price to its yield. There are various ways of defining it (see here for example), and it would have been preferable to have a more precise statement of the type of duration we should assume in answering this question. However, my best guess (given that the duration is stated without units) is that this is a modified duration. This is defined as the percentage decrease in the bond price for a 1% increase in the yield. So, change in price = -price x duration (as %) x change in yield (in %) For your duration of 5, this means that the bond price decreases by a relative 5% for every 1% absolute increase in its yield. Using the actual yield change in your question, 0.18%, we find: change in price = -1015 x 5% x (4.87 - 4.69) = -9.135 So the new price will be 1015 - 9.135 = \u00a31005.865"}
{"id": "198532", "text": "Since you're a US citizen, submitting W8-BEN was wrong. If you read the form carefully, when you signed it you certified that you are not a US citizen, which is a lie and you knew it. W9 and W8 are mutually exclusive. You're either a US person for tax purposes or you're not, you cannot be both. As a US citizen - you are a US person for tax purposes, whether you have any other citizenship or not, and whether you live in (or have ever been to) the US or not. You do need to file tax returns just like any other US citizen. If you have an aggregate of $10K or more on your bank accounts outside of the US at any given day - you need to file FBAR. FATCA forms may also be applicable, depending on your balances. From foreign banks' perspective you're a US person, with regard to their FATCA obligations. Whether or not you'll be punished is hard to tell. Whether or not you could be punished is easy to tell: you could. You knowingly broke the law by certifying that you're not a US citizen when you were. That is in addition to un-filed tax returns, FBAR, etc etc. The fact that you were born outside of the US and have never lived there is technically irrelevant. Not knowing the law is not a reasonable cause for breaking it. Get a US-licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in the US) to help you sort it out."}
{"id": "198560", "text": "The problem is exactly as described above, they are paying benefits for employees that aren't even born.  Its ridiculous, name one other business who is saving for employees benefits 60 years in advance.  Basically they put 5 billion in bank and made 3 billion last quarter.  Thats pretty damn good IMO."}
{"id": "198572", "text": "\"I have a similar situation -- five different accounts between me and my wife. Just as you and @Alex B describe, I maintain my asset allocation across the combination of all accounts. I also maintain a spreadsheet to track the targets, deviations from the targets, amounts required to get back in balance, and overall performance. I (mostly) don't use mutual funds. I have selected, for each category, 1 or 2 ETFs. Choosing index ETFs with low expense ratios and a brokerage with cheap or free trades keeps expenses low. (My broker offers free ETF trades if you buy off their list as long as you aren't short-term trading; this is great for rebalancing for free 2 or 3 times a year.) Using ETFs also solves the minimum balance problem -- but watch out for commissions. If you pay $10 to buy $500 worth of an ETF, that's an immediate 2% loss; trade a couple of times a year and that ETF has to gain 5% just to break even. One issue that comes up is managing cash and avoiding transaction fees. Say your IRA has all the growth stock funds and your Roth has the bonds. Stocks do well and bonds do poorly, so you sell off some stocks, which creates a bunch of cash in your IRA. Now you want to buy some bonds but you don't have enough cash in your Roth, so you buy the bonds in your IRA. Not a problem at first but if you don't manage it you can end up with small amounts of various funds spread across all of your accounts. If you're not careful you can end up paying two commissions (in two different accounts) to sell off / purchase enough of a category to get back to your targets. Another problem I had is that only one account (401k) is receiving deposits on a regular basis, and that's all going into an S&P 500 index fund. This makes it so that my allocation is off by a fair amount every quarter or so -- too much in large cap equities, not enough of everything else. My solution to this going forward is to \"\"over-rebalance\"\" a couple of times a year: sell enough SPY from my other accounts so that I'm under-allocated in large caps by the amount I expect to add to my 401k over the next 3 months. (So that in six months at my next rebalancing I'm only 3 months over-allocated to large caps -- plus or minus whatever gains/losses there are.)\""}
{"id": "198583", "text": "There is no direct relationship between volume and stock price. High volume indicates how much stock is changing hands. That can be because people are enthusiastically buying OR enthusiastically selling... and their reasons for doing so may not agree with your own sense of the future value of the stock. Higher volume may mean that the price is more likely to change during the day, but it can be in either direction -- or in no direction at all if there isn't a general agreement on how to react to some piece of news. It's a possibly interesting datum, but it means nothing in isolation."}
{"id": "198606", "text": "The number you are trying to calculate is called the Internal Rate of Return (IRR).  Google Spreadsheets (and excel) both have an XIRR function that can do this for you fairly simply. Setup a spreadsheet with 1 column for dates, 1 column for investment. Mark your investments as negative numbers (payment to invest).  All investments will be negative. Mark your last row with today's date and today's valuation (positive). All withdrawals will be positive, so you are pretending to withdrawal your entire account for the purpose of calculation. Do not record dividends or other interim returns unless you are actually withdrawing money. The XIRR function will calculate your internal rate of return with irregularly timed investments. Links: Article explaining XIRR function (sample spreadsheet in google docs to modify)"}
{"id": "199037", "text": "Do some math. Figure out the net (after tax) money you'd have if you left it taxable, then look at the difference. In effect, you'd pay $X (the tax now) for $Y benefit (the tax on the full benefit not paid).  The math works similar to you buying a small policy on your own."}
{"id": "199069", "text": "I still use checks to pay rent and occasionally some bills/liabilities. That said, I did notice an (elderly) lady paying by check at the supermarket a while ago. So is it really common to get a paycheck in the sense that you get a piece of paper? Yes and no.  There are some people that opt for the physical paycheck.  Even if they do not, there is a pay stub which serves as a record of it.  My last employer went to online pay stubs and a bunch of us opted out, sticking with the good old paper in an envelope.  We sure were glad of that when there were technical issues and security concerns with the online service."}
{"id": "199253", "text": "&gt;I would be really surprised if they didn't have more relatively short term debt as they were in the midst of a global freaking conflict, man.  What its spent on is a political decision and isn't relevant, except that its even less useful than how it might be spent today.  &gt;I just don't want to open the unlimited money taps without carefully considering how long we can leave them open  You are the only one saying that. Its a straw man.  &gt;If you're deciding whether or not to spend a crap ton of money you don't have, it helps if you haven't already spent a crap ton of money you don't have  The government is the issuer of the currency. It doesn't have it or not have it. It creates it. They've issued an ~~crap ton of money~~ amount that hasn't been clawed back through taxation and they can add to it if it suits them."}
{"id": "199310", "text": "\"Law is a mass of special cases, informed by but not driven by some general principles. Tax law likewise. Don't try to make it make sense; you will only confuse yourself.  Not all \"\"necessities\"\" are deductable, only those which someone has explicitly passed a law to make deductable.\""}
{"id": "199467", "text": "The safest place to put money is a mixture of cash, local municipal bond funds with average durations under two years and US Treasury bond funds with short durations.  Examples of good short term US municipal funds: I'm not an active investor in Australian securities, so I won't recommend anything specific. Because rates are so low right now, you want a short duration (ie. funds where the average bond matures in < 2 years) fund to protect against increased rates. The problem with safety is that you won't make any money. If your goal to grow the value of your investment while minimizing risk, you need to look at equities. The portfolios posted by justkt are a great place to start."}
{"id": "199568", "text": "The 2012 return was due 4/15/2013 (I'm assuming it didn't fall on a weekend). No late filing penalty if there was no tax due, but he has until 4/15/2016 to file for a refund or to document anything that should have carried forward."}
{"id": "200023", "text": "If you do business under your name, you don't need to register your business.  Your business will be treated as a sole proprietorship.  If your revenue exceeds 30,000 (or wish to collect GST for the government) then you will have to register with the CRA for a GST account, but that is free."}
{"id": "200756", "text": "This is not right. Inferring the employee stock pool\u2019s takeaway is not as easy as just taking a fraction of the purchase price. As an example, that wouldn\u2019t account for any preferred returns of other ownership classes, among other things.   All considered though, it\u2019s reasonable to assume that the employee stock pool will get some premium. Best of luck."}
{"id": "200784", "text": "\"Many companies (particularly tech companies like Atlassian) grant their employees \"\"share options\"\" as part of their compensation. A share option is the right to buy a share in the company at a \"\"strike price\"\" specified when the option is granted. Typically these \"\"vest\"\" after 1-4 years so long as the employee stays with the company. Once they do vest, the employee can exercise them by paying the strike price - typically they'd do that if the shares are now more valuable. The amount they pay to exercise the option goes to the company and will show up in the $2.3 million quoted in the question.\""}
{"id": "200803", "text": "Ah, I am coming from the fund side of things.  The PMs do make some serious coin, but below that, once you factor in commissions, it is just silly.  I actually worked on the compensation model for a certain fund company and I couldn't believe the disparity.  I suppose it depends on how the titles are distributed, perhaps it is a Canadian thing.  The traders title at the other two companies where I worked were entry levelish.  Although they did make about the same as the research analysts if they performed as to plan."}
{"id": "200912", "text": "I found that the Target Date funds for Vanguard have a lower minimum, only $1,000. They are spaced every 5 years from 2010 to 2060. They are available as: General Account, IRA, UGMA/UTMA and Education Saving Account."}
{"id": "200914", "text": "Is Jim right to be worries? Yes, since the statute of limitations for refunds for 2012 is close and he might lose any tax refunds he might be entitled to for that year. Also, the pattern itself may raise some flags of suspicion and trigger audits, both because of such a variance in income and because of the medical expenses (which are generally considered a red flag). So he might get audited. However, if all the income and expenses are properly documented, audit itself should not be a problem."}
{"id": "200921", "text": "I'm a finance newb....sorry ahead of time for everyone slamming their heads against the the wall.  I'm going to go ahead and possibly answer my own question. Do I just go back 4 months at a time from their 10K and record the stock price on that date?"}
{"id": "201222", "text": "I agree that there is no reliable way to buy gold for less than spot, no more than there is for any other commodity. However, you can buy many things below market from motivated sellers. That is why you see so many stores buying gold now.  It  will  be hard to find such sellers now with the saturation of buyers, but if you keep an eye on private sales and auctions you may be able to pick up something others miss."}
{"id": "201317", "text": "Are these calculations correct? These are approximate calculations and are with the assumption that entire corpus will be taxed. The assumption was valid as the wording in the budget speech was not very clear. Subsequently the finance ministry has clarified that only interest generated will be taxed and not the contribution. There are no new calculations done with this assumption. Edit: As per communication from finance ministry this proposal is on hold."}
{"id": "201355", "text": "1031 is a section of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service Code that allows investors to defer capital gains taxes on any exchange of like-kind properties for business or investment purposes. Taxes on capital gains are not charged on the sale of a property if the money is being used to purchase another property - the payment of tax is deferred until property is sold with no re-investment."}
{"id": "201495", "text": "You will maximize your expected wealth by investing all the money you intend to invest, as soon as you have it available. Don't let the mythos of dollar cost averaging induce you to allocate more much money to a savings account than is optimal.  If you want the positive expected return of the market, don't put your money in a savings account.  That's especially true now, when you are certainly earning a negative real interest rate on your savings account. Dollar cost averaging and putting all your money in at the beginning would have the same expected return except that if you put all your money in earlier, it spends more time in the market, so your expected return is higher.  Your volatility is also higher (because your savings account would have very low volatility) but your preference for investment tells me that you view the expected return and volatility tradeoff of the stock market as acceptable. If you need something to help you feel less stress about investing right away, think of it as dollar cost averaging on a yearly basis instead of monthly.  Further, you take take comfort in knowing that you have allocated your wealth as you can instead of letting it fizzle away in real terms in a bank account."}
{"id": "201652", "text": "The instructions for Form W-7 include a table of exceptions to the requirement to attach a tax return.  It looks like you might fall under Exemption 2a, but I don't think there's quite enough information in your question to be sure. The current instructions are here: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw7.pdf The table of exceptions runs from page 7 to page 9, so I won't try to reproduce it here."}
{"id": "201679", "text": "Mutual Funds are relatively evaluated and this is likely what you want.  Your answer is likely the information ratio.  If your interested, Active Portfolio Management by Grinold, Kahn is probably a good book to read.  That  being said, hedge funds will generally have absolute mandates and will be more likely to use a sharpe ratio."}
{"id": "201706", "text": "Market cap should be share price times number of shares, right? That's several orders of magnitude right there..."}
{"id": "201758", "text": "\"Step one: Contact the collection agency. Tell them that they have the wrong person, and the same name is just a coincidence. I would NOT give them my correct social security number, birth date, or other identifying information. This could be a total scam for the purpose of getting you to give them such personal identifying information so they can perform an identity theft. Even if it is a legitimate debt collection agency, if they are overzealous and/or incompetent, they may enter your identifying information into their records. \"\"Oh, you say your social security number isn't 123-45-6789, but 234-56-7890. Thank you, let me update our records. Now, sir, I see that the social security number in our records matches your social security number ...\"\" Step two: If they don't back off, contact a lawyer. Collection agencies work by -- call it \"\"intimidation\"\" or \"\"moral persuasion\"\", depending on your viewpoint. Years after my wife left me, she went bankrupt. A collection agency called me demanding payment of her debts before the bankruptcy went through. I noticed two things about this: One, We were divorced and I had no responsibility for her debts. Somehow they tracked down my new address and phone number, a place where she had never even lived. Why should I pay her debts? I had no legal obligation, nor did I see any moral obligation. Two, Their pitch was that she/I should pay off this debt before the bankruptcy was final. Why would anyone do that? The whole point of declaring bankruptcy is so you don't have to pay these debts. They were hoping to intimidate her into paying even though she wouldn't be legally obligated to pay. If you don't owe the money, of course there's no reason why you should pay it. If they continue to pursue you for somebody else's debt, in the U.S. you can sue them for harassment. There are all sorts of legal limits on what collection agencies are allowed to do. Actually even if they do back off, it might be worth contacting a lawyer. I suspect that asking your employer to garnish your wages without a court order, without even proof that you are responsible for this debt, is a tort that you could sue them for.\""}
{"id": "201770", "text": "Well, the author *could* be right, but not necessarily for the reasons cited.    Several states, including California and Nevada, recently changed their laws to slow down the foreclosure process and protect borrowers.  It took lenders/servicers awhile to figure out how to work within the new legal structure, so foreclosure starts fell during that time.  Now they've got it figured out, so filings went up.  It doesn't mean the sky is falling.  If the economy keeps improving, that will temper potential defaults due to, well, unemployment and HELOC expirations causing higher mortgage payments.    There's not a lot of available inventory right now (investors have been converting short sale and foreclosed properties to rentals) so there is some pent-up demand.  If credit availability is increased by the FICO score reducing the hit for lates and defaults on medical expenses, more people will be eligible to buy a house and that will reduce foreclosure rates.    There's a lot of moving parts here, and this story only focused on a small section so take it with a grain of salt.  And remember:  if the author could really predict the future, he wouldn't be making a living as a writer for the New Republic.  edit: for clarity"}
{"id": "201812", "text": "The organization gives the best Corporation enlistment administrations.  You can discover numerous associations that assistance in applying any sort of Business Organization or even a Delaware LLC and Same day company formation on the web, and all it demands from the customer is to finish a shape on their web page. The claim on their web page says that you can incorporate online in a few minutes, and you will get the exchange check inside 24 hours."}
{"id": "201856", "text": "\"This is going to vary from insurer to insurer, and likely year to year.  Typically an insurer will set what it calls the guaranteed rate of return for whole life policies and will allow you to take loans against the cash value of your policy at some adjustment to that rate.  Also typically you pay the interest back to yourself less some small administrative fee. Some insurers have whole life policies called something along the lines of an \"\"accelerated cash value\"\" policy or a \"\"high early cash value\"\" policy, stick to these ones.  The commission structure is less favorable to the agent/broker but much more of your premium is recognized as cash value earlier. The benefit (for lack of a better word) to taking a loan against your own cash value over taking a loan from a bank is the severely reduced process.  There's no underwriting for your loan like there would be from a bank.  If you're laid off maybe you can't get a loan from a bank but you can scoop some money out of your policy on a loan basis or alternatively you can just surrender the policy and take the accrued cash value. Many people will poo-poo the value of whole life, but fact of the matter is your underwriting status can change in the course of your life and it's possible that in the future you won't be able to buy any life insurance.  There's nothing wrong with having something permanent to supplement your larger term policies. Personally, I view diversification as having money in a lot of different places.  This strategy is probably not as efficient as it could, but I don't like the idea of having all my eggs in one basket.  I have cash in a lock box at home, cash savings, CDs, a personal loan portfolio, bitcoins, index funds, individual stocks, commodity etfs, and bond funds spread in traditional 401(k), ROTH IRA and regular taxable accounts spread out to 6 different institutions.  I don't personally own any whole life, but I'll probably buy a small policy before my next 6-month birthday; I might as well put some money there too.  All of this is to say, do not put all of your money in a whole life policy, and do not buy all of your life insurance needs via whole life.\""}
{"id": "201940", "text": "I'd like to point you to article ten of the bill of rights:  &gt;The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.   It seems to me that the Constitution gives the states the right to do whatever they want so long as the Constitution doesn't specifically forbid it. Either concede the point or show me where the Constitution forbids the states from levying a sales tax."}
{"id": "201964", "text": "Well $100k is approximately the 80th percentile. So it's doing pretty well.   But perhaps [this website](https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/tax-breaks/?utm_term=.4cd4ec597815) will show how much SALT deductions benefit the rich. Just move the dial over to the $1M mark and suddenly your biggest deduction is state and local taxes."}
{"id": "201968", "text": "\"When you refinance, there is cost (guess: around $2000-$3000) to cover lawyers, paperwork, surveys, deed insurance, etc. etc. etc. Someone has to pay that cost, and in the end it will be you. Even if you get a \"\"no points no cost\"\" loan, the cost is going to be hidden in the interest rate. That's the way transactions with knowledgeable companies works: they do business because they benefit (profit) from it. The expectation is that what they need is different from what you need, so that each of you benefits. But, when it's a primarily cash transaction, you can't both end up with more money. So, unless value will be created somewhere else from the process (and don't include the +cash, because that ends up tacked onto the principle), this seems like paying for financial entertainment, and there are better ways to do that.\""}
{"id": "202019", "text": "Your wife doesn't need to file a 2014 tax return because she's a nonresident and she didn't have any U.S. income. Her visa is irrelevant; it only matters what her status was (if she was in the U.S., but she wasn't) and if she had U.S. income. Your child doesn't need to file a tax return because she didn't have any income. There's a certain income threshold below which she doesn't have to file. Children generally never file their own tax returns. I don't know who told you otherwise. You may have to file if you had income (maybe including fellowship income and stuff like that) in the U.S. during the year? Did you? If you didn't then you probably don't need to file a tax return. Also, you said you're nonresident for the year. Are you sure about that? Students are generally nonresident for the first 5 calendar years, and resident thereafter. So if you came in 2009 or before, you would be resident for all of 2014; but if you came in 2010 or after, you would be nonresident for all of 2014. If you were in the first 5 calendar years of being a student, you also need to file Form 8843 regardless of whether you need to file a tax return. Nonresidents generally can't claim dependents. Residents can, however. A dependent will provide you with an exemption (it reduces your taxable income by a certain amount). You can also get the Child Tax Credit if your income is low enough. There is a U.S.-Sweden tax treaty. It has a section covering students. It may exempt some or all of your income from U.S. tax. Most universities provide free international tax programs for their international students and scholars. You should look to see if your school offers this. Don't go to outside tax filing places because those generally don't know anything about how to file for nonresidents."}
{"id": "202208", "text": "Does anyone have any good resources for starting up learning about savings, finances, etc? I'm 20 years old and want to begin really saving consistently and learning about 401Ks, IRAs, savings accounts, how to grow your money safely and slowly, etc.   I'm mainly looking for a website or application that will help me budget and organize things. A phone app would be nice. And any subreddit where I could learn about these things would be extremely helpful too."}
{"id": "202398", "text": "\"&gt; non-traditional borrowers (read: people who didn't meet the requirements for their traditional loan products)  There's a reason these \"\"non-traditional borrowers\"\" don't meet the requirements: They tend to be deadbeats.  The traditional requirements were developed over decades of experience to screen out deadbeats so lenders don't lose money.\""}
{"id": "202731", "text": "I got a credit card as a student with no income, not even a part time job. They called me, I agreed to one thing and they did another and now I have an old credit history. They don't do this anymore. But technically, student loan debt is unsecured?"}
{"id": "202768", "text": "Nope, take the match.  I cannot see not taking the match unless you don't have enough money to cover the bills. Every situation is different of course, and if the option is to missing minimum payments or other bills in order to get the match, make your payments.  But in all other circumstances, take the match. My reasoning is, it is hard enough to earn money so take every chance you can.  If you save for retirement in the process, all the better."}
{"id": "202799", "text": "Doesn't VIX win on volatility, not market direction? I.e. if the market is steady, or trending up or down predictably, vix should be low, but if it's jumping around in all different directions, vix would be high? Or am I not understanding what it's supposed to model?"}
{"id": "202805", "text": "I just read the article and I'm not sure if the calculation is flawed. When they look at the single stocks. Do they always reinvest the dividends to the same stock? That would be quite unusual behaviour I think.  An investor who uses the buy and hold strategy  might have a bunch of companies which won't exist anymore in 20 or 30 years e.g. coal plants.  While many stocks are a good investment now. Reinvesting all the dividends for decades is obviously a bad decision for a large portion of the stocks.  Maybe I misunderstood the article. But what do you guys think?"}
{"id": "202829", "text": "\"Pay to play? You mean they pay for beefier data feeds that other firms don't need, sure they do. But everyone can trade on the US exchanges now (NYSE, NASDAQ, BATS, etc) which was not true 20 years ago when NYSE had the specialist monopoly, so yes the markets are more democratic than they've ever been.  Side note, the exchanges do directly profit from increased trading volume because they take a small % of every trade, so I'm not sure what you mean they don't directly profit from it.  Also I get the feeling you don't understand the scope of HFT activity, HFT peak profits were on the order of 7 billion during the highest volume time of the last decade (2005-2010). They are now around 1B. Compared to the trillions of dollars that change hands in the exchange per year, this is chump change, hardly a \"\"free money faucet\"\".  Also Katsayuma opened yet another dark pool that caters to high volume clients (your goldmans and merrils). The only difference in IEX is it got a free marketing campaign to entice clients. Seriously, IEX is nothing more than the existing fixed cross dark pools, which btw screws over retail investors more than the lit exchanges like NASDAQ.   Katsayuma got steamrolled in his executions because he couldn't keep up with the time and then hit the lottery jackpot by getting Michael Lewis to paint him as a \"\"hero\"\", honestly I'm confounded at how lucky that dude got.  BTW broker dealers get preferential treatment in IEX, meaning they get to cut in front of the line in front of retail investors. Why are you so opinionated about this, did you make a few bad trades on eTrade and need a scapegoat?\""}
{"id": "202864", "text": "What do you mean by professional? Seems like you want to hire people to work and you to manage. This is fine but your costs will rise significantly. Seems like first you need more business to hire more people. Be careful that your market can support a larger buisness. Ive heard of many 2 bay car garage types going bankrupt after moving to a 4-6 bay because they couldnt keep the bays full 100% of the time"}
{"id": "202985", "text": "Two more esoteric differences, related to the same cause... When you have an outstanding debit balance in a margin the broker may lend out your securities to short sellers.  (They may well be able to lend them out even if there's no debit balance -- check your account agreement and relevant regulations).   You'll never know this (there's no indication in your account of it) unless you ask, and maybe not even then. If the securities pay out dividends while lent out, you don't get the dividends (directly).  The dividends go to the person who bought them from the short-seller.  The short-seller has to pay the dividend amount to his broker who pays them to your broker who pays them to you.  If the dividends that were paid out by the security were qualified dividends (15% max rate) the qualified-ness goes to the person who bought the security from the short-seller.  What you received weren't dividends at all, but a payment-in-lieu of dividends and qualified dividend treatment isn't available for them.   Some (many?  all?) brokers will pay you a gross-up payment to compensate you for the extra tax you had to pay due to your qualified dividends on that security not actually being qualified. A similar thing happens if there's a shareholder vote.  If the stock was lent out on the record date to establish voting eligibility, the person eligible to vote is the person who bought them from the short-seller, not you.  So if for some reason you really want/need to vote in a shareholder vote, call your broker and ask them to journal the shares in question over to the cash side of your account before the record date for determining voting eligibility."}
{"id": "203139", "text": "One major benefit to being able to buy discounted company stock is that you can sell in-the-money covered calls and potentially make more than you would selling at strike."}
{"id": "203173", "text": "Estimated tax payments should be a reasonable estimate of what you owe for that time period. If it seems reasonable to you, it is probably reasonable. Sure, you can adjust for varying-length periods. As long as, in the end, you can and do pay what you owe, and don't underpay the estimated/withholding by enough that you owe a penalty, the IRS isn't all that picky about how the money is actually distributed through the year."}
{"id": "203201", "text": "I spent some time comparing banks' interest rates until I realized that it didn't actually matter (to me). The only money I keep in checking and savings accounts is money that I'm going to spend shortly or is part of an emergency fund, and in both those cases convenience of liquidity is far more important than small differences in interest (I want to be able to go to a nearby branch, even if traveling, and pull out large sums of money). The majority of our money goes into investment accounts, where it's earning much more than even the best savings account. Most of your 100k would be much better served in a stock/bonds mix. Are standard taxable investment accounts one of those things you can't open? What about if you opened one in your home country?"}
{"id": "203380", "text": "My god man, where do you live that is too expensive to live on your own and  7K isn't enough for emergency cash? Anyway, with your age and income I would be more worried about a long-term sustainable lifestyle. In other words, a job that nets you more than $26K/year. Someday you may want to have a wife and kids and that income sure as hell wont pay for their college.   That was life advice, now for financial: I've always been a believer that if someone is not a savvy investor, their priorities before investments should be paying off debt. If you had a lot of capital or knew your way around investment vehicles and applicable returns then I would be telling you something different. But in your case, pay off that car first giving yourself more money to invest in the long-run."}
{"id": "203446", "text": "\"If you are using software like QuickBooks (or even just using spreadsheets or tracking this without software) use two Equity accounts, something like \"\"Capital Contributions\"\" and \"\"Capital Distributions\"\" When you write a personal check to the company, the money goes into the company's checking account and also increases the Capital Contribution account in accordance with double-entry accounting practices. When the company has enough retained earnings to pay you back, you use the Capital Distributions equity account and just write yourself a check. You can also make general journal entries every year to zero out or balance your two capital accounts with Retained Earnings, which (I think) is an automatically generated Equity account in QuickBooks. If this sounds too complex, you could also just use a single \"\"Capital Contributions and Distributions\"\" equity account for your contributions and distributions.\""}
{"id": "203503", "text": "I really wetand to write down a quick message in order to say thanks to you for these pleasant tips and hints you are placing on this site. My incredibly long internet look up has finally been paid with high-quality information to go over with my company."}
{"id": "203638", "text": "The only time I've bothered with stop orders is when I think the position is in a particularly volatile state and there is an earnings report pending.  In this situation it's an easily debatable thing to do.  If I'm so concerned that the earnings report will be enough to cause a wild downswing that I'd place a stop order, maybe I should just drop the position now.   I subscribe to the school of thought that you don't sell your MVPs.  I've bought a few things on a whim that really performed well over the few years to follow.  To me it doesn't make sense to pick a return at which I would turn off the spigot.  So generally it doesn't make sense to hold orders that would force a sale, either after some upside or downside occurs. Additionally, if I've chosen something as a long term hold.  I never spend all my cash opening up a position.  I've frequently opened positions that subsequently experienced a decline, when that happens I buy more. Meaningless side thought: With the election coming I've been seriously considering pulling some of my gains off the table.  My big apprehension with doing that is that I have no near-term alternative use for the money.  So what's the point of selling a position I'm otherwise comfortable with just to pay taxes on the gain then probably buy back in?"}
{"id": "203670", "text": "\"Using the fact that you'd save $160/mo by spending $7000, I'd look at it this way -  If I were to lend you the $7000 at 12%/yr, $160 would pay it off in 58 months. At 18%/yr, 72 months or just 6 years. You can run spreadsheets to get breakeven scenarios, and mhoran is on track with his answer, but breakeven is just one point to consider. Beyond that date, it's free money.  My approach is to look at it with a question - \"\"How much interest could I afford to pay to make that monthly savings worthwhile?\"\"\""}
{"id": "203873", "text": "Sell half. If it's as volatile as you say, sell it all and buy on another dip. No one can really offer targeted advice based on the amount of information you have provided."}
{"id": "203876", "text": "If you don't mind, sign the form and move on.  If you would rather make a point, go to another lender.  You lender had certain boxes they have to check off as they go through the paperwork process:  the two things your lender cares about are those boxes and getting paid. Take your money elsewhere and they don't get paid.  But seriously, just sign the agreement.  Focus your intelligence and productivity on something more worthwhile than your pride."}
{"id": "203992", "text": "Here's an easy 2 question test: (1) Is there anyone who relies on your income for their general welfare? (2) Is it worth the premium amount to you to make sure they aren't left out in the cold? If you can answer yes to both questions, buy (term) life insurance."}
{"id": "204202", "text": "They're exchange traded debt, basically, not funds. E.g. from the NYSE: An exchange-traded note (ETN) is a senior unsecured debt obligation designed to track the total return of an underlying market index or other benchmark, minus investor fees. Whereas an ETF, in some way or another, is an equity product - which doesn't mean that they can only expose you to equity, but that they themselves are a company that you buy shares in.  FCOR for example is a bond ETF, basically a company whose sole purpose is to own a basket of bonds.  Contrast that to DTYS, a bear Treasury ETN, which is described as  The ETNs are unsecured debt obligations of the issuer, Barclays Bank PLC, and are not, either directly or indirectly, an obligation of or guaranteed by any third party. Also from Barclays site: Because the iPath ETNs are debt securities, they do not have any voting rights. FCOR on the other hand is some sort of company owned/managed by a Fidelity trust, though my EDGAR skills are rusty. AGREEMENT made this 18th day of   September, 2014, by and between Fidelity Merrimack Street Trust, a Massachusetts business trust which may issue one or more series of shares of beneficial interest (hereinafter called the \u0093Trust\u0094), on behalf of Fidelity Corporate   Bond ETF (hereinafter called the \u0093Fund\u0094), and Fidelity Investments Money Management, Inc., a New Hampshire corporation (hereinafter called the \u0093Adviser\u0094) as set forth in its entirety below."}
{"id": "204478", "text": "\"I'm not a financial expert... In my opinion it might be best to have as much in savings (aka being liquid and the funds are insured by the FDIC) as possible for a couple of reasons. If you lose your job, your equity line could then get frozen if the bank finds out. What you want to avoid is only owing 20 grand on your home (because you paid a chunk off with your savings) but because you lost your job you can't take any money out of your home and suddenly you are equity rich, cash poor, and jobless, that is a potential for big trouble. I'm curious why you borrowed on the Heloc since you seem to have a significant amount in savings anyways. What you really might want to look into is lowering your mortgage interest rate to around 3.5%   I would use the credit card debt as a reality check. Make sure every month you are making at least a 10% to 15% of the total due payment. This dilutes the interest rate charge and lets you see the true \"\"drag\"\" credit card debt payments really have on your life.   I don't know this for sure but the higher amount credit card payments you make probably reflects well on your credit score, and of course, never be late with the credit card payments either.\""}
{"id": "204641", "text": "This is probably too much trouble for the employer. If they violate some rules, they can get fined by the government and lose a lot more money. Not to mention that they'd have to waste a lot of effort researching the question. If you are in a position to negotiate, ask for a higher raise instead."}
{"id": "204659", "text": "\"This style of budgeting is referred to as the 'Envelope' method. It could be done by withdrawing cash from the checking account and putting into envelopes (which I used to do for my Grocery & Clothing funds). I currently do this in GnuCash by creating sub-accounts of the actual bank accounts. The software rolls up the numbers so when I am looking at the \"\"real\"\" account I see the number that matches what the bank says. It is not, however, web-based. You should be able to do the same in other tools if they allow you to create sub-accounts, or have some budgeting feature built in.\""}
{"id": "205070", "text": "Thanks to this youtube video I think I understood the required calculation. Based on following notation: then the formula to find x is: I found afterwards an example on IB site (click on the link 'How to Determine the Last Stock Price Before We Begin to Liquidate the Position') that corroborate the formula above."}
{"id": "205280", "text": "\"According to what little information is available currently, this fund is most akin to an actively managed exchange traded fund rather than an investment trust. An investment trust is an actively managed, closed-end fund that is tradeable on the stock market.  \"\"Closed-end\"\" means that there are a fixed number of shares available for trading, so if you wish to buy or sell shares in a closed-end fund you need to find someone willing to sell or buy shares.  \"\"Actively managed\"\" means that the assets are selected by the fund managers in the belief that they will perform well.  This is in contrast to a \"\"passively managed\"\" fund which simply tracks an underlying index.   The closed-end nature of investment trusts means that the share price is not well correlated to the value of the underlying assets.  Indeed, almost all UK investment trusts trade at a significant discount to their net asset value.  This reflects their historic poor performance and relatively weak liquidity.  Of course there are some exceptions to this. Examples of open-end funds are unit trust (US = mutual funds) and ETFs (exchange traded funds).  They are \"\"open-end\"\" funds in the sense that the number of shares/units available will change according to demand.  Most importantly, the price of a share/unit will be strongly correlated to the net asset value of the underlying portfolio.  In general, for an open-end fund, if the net asset value of the fund is X and there are Y shares/units outstanding, then the price of a share/unit will be X/Y.  Historic data shows that passively managed funds (index trackers) \"\"always\"\" outperform actively managed funds in the long term.  One of the big issues with actively managed funds is they have relatively high management fees.  The Peoples Trust will be charging about 1% with a promise that this should come down over time.  Compare this to a fee of 0.05% on a large, major market index tracking ETF.  Further, the 1% headline fee being touted by Peoples Trust is a somewhat misleading, since they are paying their employees bonuses with shares in the fund.  This will cause dilution of the net asset value per share and can be read as addition management fees by proxy.  Since competent fund managers will demand high incomes, bonus shares could easily double the management fees, depending on the size of the fund. In summary, history has shown that the promises of active fund managers rarely (if ever) come to fruition. Personally, I would not consider this to be an attractive investment and would look more towards a passively managed major market index ETF with low management fees.\""}
{"id": "205515", "text": "To supplement existing answers: the appraised value does not necessarily represent the net amount the bank could actually recover with a foreclosure. Let's look at it from the point of view of the bank.  Suppose the property appraises at $200,000 and they do what you want: loan you $200,000 with the property as collateral.  Now suppose a short time later, you quit paying the mortgage and they have to foreclose.  Can the bank get their $200,000 back? An appraisal is only an estimate; nobody can predict perfectly how much a property will sell for.  Maybe the appraiser missed something significant, and the property will only fetch $180,000. Even if the appraisal was accurate when it was made, property values may have dropped in the meantime.  Maybe a sudden economic crisis is driving real estate prices down across the board.  Maybe interest rates have spiked.  Maybe the county has changed the zoning regulations to locate a toxic waste dump next door to the property.  In any of these cases, the property may again fetch well under $200,000. Maybe the condition of the property has changed.  Perhaps you trashed the place and it will take $30,000 to clean it up.  (People have a tendency to do things like that when they get foreclosed.) If the bank wants to get full market value for the property, they will incur the usual costs of selling a property: paying a real estate agent's commission, painting, renting furniture to stage the property, and so on.  This will eat into the net amount they actually get from the sale. It may take some time (perhaps months) for a property to sell at its full market value.  During this time, the bank is out $200,000.  That's money they would rather be loaning out at interest to someone else, so this represents lost income. Foreclosing a mortgage is a fairly complicated procedure.  The bank has to pay its staff, including lawyers, for a significant number of hours to get the foreclosure done.  There will be court filing fees and so on.  If you refuse to leave, they may have to get the sheriff to evict you; that has a fee as well.  If you fight the foreclosure, that racks up even more legal fees.  This too eats into the net proceeds from the sale. So if the bank loans you the full $200,000, they stand a pretty significant risk of not getting all of it back, after expenses.  You can understand that risk may not be worth the interest they would get from you on the extra $40,000. On the other hand, if they loan you only 80% of the property's appraised value ($160,000), they effectively shift that risk onto you.  Should you default on the loan, and they foreclose, all they have to do is sell the property for $160,000 or a little bit more.   That shouldn't be too hard, even if it is not freshly painted or a bit trashed.  They probably don't need to hire a real estate agent: just hold a quick auction, maybe first calling up a few investors who might be interested in flipping it.  If it happens to sell for more than the outstanding principal of the loan, plus the bank's costs, then they will pay you the difference; but they have no incentive to make that happen, and every incentive to just get it sold quick.  So any difference between the property's true value and the actual sale price now represents a loss to you first, not to the bank. So you can see why the bank would rather not loan you the full value of the property.  80% is a somewhat arbitrary figure but it cuts their risk by a lot."}
{"id": "205603", "text": "Yes same for me. But the company was complete shit, and offered debit cards for people who didn't have a bank account.   That does not mean they **can't** offer paper cheques, it means they **won't**. A very important distinction."}
{"id": "205783", "text": "\"Yes. I describe the Roth flavor as \"\"denser.\"\" For those with more money they wish to save this factor should be added to the mix. Of course you can save $16500 + 5000 (in an IRA) for $21500 total pretax if you wish (and are within the limits.)\""}
{"id": "205791", "text": "\"First, the balance sheet is where assets, liabilities, & equity live. Balance Sheet Identity: Assets = Liabilities (+ Equity) The income statement is where income and expenses live. General Income Statement Identity: Income = Revenue - Expenses If you want to model yourself correctly (like a business), change your \"\"income\"\" account to \"\"revenue\"\". Recognized & Realized If you haven't yet closed the position, your gain/loss is \"\"recognized\"\".  If you have closed the position, it's \"\"realized\"\". Recognized Capital Gains(Losses) Assuming no change in margin requirements: Margin interest should increase margin liabilities thus decrease equity and can be booked as an expense on the income statement. Margin requirements for shorts should not be booked under liabilities unless if you also book a contra-asset balancing out the equity.  Ask a new question for details on this. Realized Capital Gains(Losses) Balance Sheet Identity Concepts One of the most fundamental things to remember when it comes to the balance sheet identity is that \"\"equity\"\" is derived. If your assets increase/decrease while liabilities remain constant, your equity increases/decreases. Double Entry Accounting The most fundamental concept of double entry accounting is that debits always equal credits. Here's the beauty: if things don't add up, make a new debit/credit account to account for the imbalance.  This way, the imbalance is always accounted for and can help you chase it down later, the more specific the account label the better.\""}
{"id": "205865", "text": "Sorry for your loss. I am not a lawyer and this isn;t legal advice -- which I am not licensed to give. But I've had to deal with some debt situations of my own. I think the worst case scenario is the creditor can get a judgment, but that won't be against you unless you were a co-signor. The collectors are going to prey on your decency to make you feel like you should pay it, but you are under no legal obligation to do so.  If they file in court and then win a judgment, they may be able to collect on the assets of the estate. You mention no money but you mention a house. That is an asset with value, and putting it in your name isn't going to do much. You should see a lawyer on this, because it seems logical that they could collect on the value of the house at the time of the death, and even if it was willed to you it can still be attacked to pay the debt.  Here is a good write-up on NJ death and debt and whether it can be inherited by the adult children: https://www.atrbklaw.com/bankruptcy-resources/83-articles/103-can-you-inherit-your-dead-parent-s-debts"}
{"id": "205906", "text": "I am a real estate agent. I know you are in Canada, but will let you know that in the US, agents are not to supposed to offer this kind of advice. They can refer you to a bank or mortgage broker, but should not be giving this type of financial advice.  That said, it's a HELOC, it would be rare for your bank to be willing to just add to your mortgage at the current low rate. Still, ask the bank holding your loan.  Is the second home to rent out or a vacation/summer home for you to live in?"}
{"id": "206222", "text": "I was also going to mention people going through savings during unemployment.  And given the unemployment figures, 28% having no emergency savings even seems low.  Purely anecdotal but I cleared through my savings a few years ago during seven months of unemployment and have several friends who did the same and/or racked up thousands in debt."}
{"id": "206368", "text": ""}
{"id": "206431", "text": "I know an answer has been accepted, but you need an emergency fund, ideally enough to cover at least 3 months of after-tax basic living expenses. As a free-lancer, 6 months would be even better. This isn't a fun way to tie up your money, but it is a prudent way. What if you lose your job, or decide you want to change your line of work? What if you're told a close family member has only months to live and you want to take significant time off unpaid? What if your car breaks down and you need a new one? What if your freelance business hits a dry patch for a few months? What if you want to move but can't sell your next house quickly? I've known people who had these types of situations come up unexpectedly. Some were financially prepared and had the freedom to make the choices they wanted to make, others didn't and now have regrets. Once you have a basic emergency fund in place, then go for investing with the rest of the money. Best of luck!"}
{"id": "206442", "text": "\"It is important to remember that the stock price in principle reflects the value of the company, so the market cap should drop upon issuance of the the dividend. However, the above reasoning neglects to consider taxes, which make the question a bit more interesting. The key fact is that different investors are going to get taxed on the dividend to varying degrees, ranging from 20% for qualified dividends in the USA for a high-income individual in a taxable account (and even worse for non-qualified dividends) to 0% for tax-exempt nonprofits, retirement accounts, and low-income individuals. The high-tax investors are going to be a bit averse to paying tax on that dividend, whereas the tax-free investors are not. Hence in a tax-rational market the tax-free investors are going to be the ones buying right before a dividend and the tax-paying investors will be buying right afterwards. Tax-exempt investors could in principle make some amount of money buying dividends to keep them off the tax-paying investors' books.  (Of course, the strategy could backfire if too many people did it all at once.) That said, the tax-payers have the tax disincentive to prevent them from fully exploiting the opposite strategy of selling just before a dividend.  In particular, they are subject to capital gains tax when they sell at a profit (unless they have enough compensating capital losses), and it is to their after-tax profit to defer taxation by not trading. That said, the stock market has well-known irrationality when it comes to considering tax consequences, so logic based on assumed rationality of the market does not always apply to the extent one would expect.   The foremost example of tax-irrationality is the so-called \"\"dividend paradox\"\", which basically states that corporations should favor stock buybacks (or perhaps loan repayment) to the complete exclusion of dividends because capital gains are taxed less harshly than dividends in a variety of ways, some of which are subtle: 1) Historically (although not currently in the USA for qualified dividends) the tax rate was higher for dividends.  (In Canada, for example, dividends are taxed at twice the rate of capital gains.) 2) If you die holding appreciated stock then you (meaning your heirs) completely escape US the capital gains tax on the accrual during your lifetime. 3) Capital gains tax can be deferred by simply not selling.  In comparison to dividends, this is roughly equivalent to getting a tax-free loan from the government which is invested for profit and paid at a later date after inflation has eaten away at the real value of the loan.  For example, if all your stock investments increase by 10%/year but you sell every year, in a high-tax bracket situation you're total after-tax return will be only 8% per year.  In contrast, if you hold the same investments for many many years and then sell, your total return will be nearly 10% per year, because you only pay 20% once (at the end). 4) A capital gain can often be neutralized by a capital loss in another stock, so that no tax results.  If you loose money on a stock that is paying dividends, you're still going to have to pay tax on that dividend.  There are companies that borrow money to pay out that taxable-dividend each quarter, which seems like gross tax malpractice on the part of the CFO. (If the dividend paradox doesn't make sense, first consider the case that you owned ALL the shares of a company.  It wouldn't matter to you at all on a pre-tax basis whether you got a $1000 company buyback or a $1000 dividend, because after the buyback/dividend you'd still own the entire company and $1000.  The number of shares would be reduced, but objecting that you owned fewer shares after the buyback would be like saying you have become shorter if your height is measured in inches rather than centimeters.) [Of course, in the case of many shareholders you can get burned by failing to sell into the buyback when the share price is too high, but that is another matter.]\""}
{"id": "206449", "text": "At the moment, you are paying about $1,300 interest each month (\u00a3431k @ 3.625% / 12) on your mortgage and repaying capital at about $1,500 per month. Paying $11,000 off your mortgage would save you about $9,000 as it is reduces your balance by about seven monthly capital repayments: but you will only see this benefit at the end of the mortgage because you will pay it off seven months earlier. There is only about $1,000 interest remaining on your car loans. Paying the $11,000 off your interest free loan then paying extra agianst the interest bearing loan brings that down to $500 and paying it off your interest bearing loan brings it down to $200. Either way, both car loans would be finished by early 2018. In summary, if you use the $11,000 against your car loans, you will save $8,500-$8,800 less than paying it off the mortage, but you will have no car loans in one year rather than three. Google spreadsheet for calculations here."}
{"id": "206656", "text": "I'm a third-year PhD student in Finance at a state university in the Southeast.  Accordingly, I do not have time write a detailed answer for you, because I am studying for a test.  You can PM me sometime after Thursday, and I can give you my perspective."}
{"id": "206683", "text": "Here's a good link that can answer your question: How to take delivery of a futures contract The relevant part states: Prior to delivery day, they inform customers who have open long positions that they must either close out the position or prepare to take delivery and pay the full value of the underlying contract. By the same token traders with short positions are informed that they must close out their trades or prepare to deliver the underlying commodity. In this case, they must have the required quantity and quality of the deliverable commodity on hand.   On the few occasions that a buyer accepts delivery against his futures contract, he is usually not given the underlying commodity itself (except in the case of financials), but rather a receipt entitling him to fetch the hogs, wheat, or corn from warehouses or distribution points. I hope this helps. Good luck!"}
{"id": "206727", "text": "http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=EDV+Historical+Prices shows this which matches Vanguard: Mar 24, 2014  0.769 Dividend Your download link doesn't specify dates which makes me wonder if it is a cumulative distribution or something else as one can wonder how did you ensure that the URL is specifying to list only the most recent distribution and not something else. For example, try this URL which specifies date information in the a,b,c,d,e,f parameters: http://real-chart.finance.yahoo.com/table.csv?s=EDV&a=00&b=29&c=2014&d=05&e=16&f=2014&g=v&ignore=.csv"}
{"id": "206830", "text": "TL;DR: Only term is pure insurance and is the cheapest.  The rest are mixtures of insurance and savings/investment.  Typically the mixtures are not as efficient as doing it yourself, except that there can be tax advantages as well as the ability to borrow from your policy in some cases."}
{"id": "206876", "text": "Just saw the update: Here's some ETFs for Canada from Vanguard."}
{"id": "207191", "text": "Why do you think they're HOARDING? Cus they can just pay less tax on it in a foreign fucking country you imbecile. I'm done waisting my time trying to explain this to someone that just has everything go right over their head.  Keep drinking the mainstream media's Kool-Aid, I'll keep praying that one day you wake up and see the truth"}
{"id": "207285", "text": "You can set up a Self Managed Super Fund (SMSF) and use it to buy residential investment property, and as Justin has mentioned even borrow to acquire the investment property through the SMSF.  However, you cannot hold your home in the SMSF, as this would be classed as an in-house asset, and you are only allowed to hold a maximum of 5% of the total market value of SMSF as in-house assets. Furthermore, as you already own your house, you are not allowed to transfer residential property into a SMSF from a related party, even if done at current market value (you are allowed to transfer business real property from a related party at current market value). Regarding loans, you are not allowed to lend money from your SMSF to a related party as well."}
{"id": "207473", "text": ""}
{"id": "207531", "text": "There are just too many variables here... Will you legally be considered a permanent resident from the moment you move? Will you work from home as a contractor or as an employee? Those are not questions you can answer yourself, they really depend on your circumstances and how the tax authorities will look at them. I strongly encourage you to speak to an advisor. Very generally spoken, at your place of residence you pay taxes for your worldwide income, at the place of your work base (which is not clear if this really would be Turkey) you pay taxes on the income generated there. If it's one and the same country, it's simple. If not, then theoretically you pay twice. However, most countries have double taxation treaties to avoid just that. This usually works so that the taxes paid abroad (in Turkey) would be deducted from your tax debt at your place of residence.  But you might want to read the treaty to be sure how this would be in your specific case (all treaties are publicly available), and you should really consider speaking to a professional."}
{"id": "207779", "text": "tl,dr: I-bonds do not fit well into most personal finance plans. First the questions (succinct reference): I like your thought process weighing your liquidity and risk versus your return.  This is very important.  However, I think you might be sidetracked a bit by I-Bonds.  I-Bonds are not generally good for personal investment as they are not marketable when necessary, have redemption penalties and hold lower overall yields in general.  Finally, they are significantly harder to trade as you can buy and hold a TIPS ETF and get exposure to all maturities and get the current competitive rate all in one purchase. Inflation protection is in general an interesting problem.  While inflation-protected bonds sound like they are great for inflation protection (after all it is in the name), they may not be the best instruments for long/medium term protection.  It is really important to remember that inflation protected bonds have significantly lower returns and one form of inflation protection is to just have more money in the future.  TIPS really protect against large inflation changes as normal bonds have the future expected inflation already baked in their higher rates. Also, when you own a stock you own part of a company and inflation will increase the value of the company relative to the inflated currency.  Foreign stocks can give even more protection if you think inflation in your local currency is going to be higher then the foreign currency.  Stocks in the past have had significantly higher return overall than inflation protected bonds but have higher risk as well. As a medium term, low-risk portfolio, it is worth looking into some combination of TIPS, normal bonds and a small to medium allocation of local/foreign stocks all done through low-fee mutual funds or index ETFs."}
{"id": "207815", "text": "You will find Joe.E, that rents have increased considerably over the last 4 to 5 years in Australia. You can probably achieve rental yields of above 5% more than 20km from major Cities, however closer to cities you might get closer to 5% or under. In Western Sydney, we have been able to achieve rental yields close to 7%. We bought mainly in 2007 and 2008 when no one was buying and we were getting properties for 15% to 20% below market rates. As we bought cheap and rents were on the increase we were able to achieve higher rental yields. An example of one particular deal where we bought for $225K and rented for $300/wk giving us a yield of 6.9%. The rent is now $350/wk giving us a current yield of 8%, and with our interest rate at 6.3% and possibly heading down further, this property is positively geared and pays for itself plus provides us with some additional income. All our properties are yielding between 7.5% to 8.5% and are all positively geared. The capital gains might not be as high as with properties closer to the city, but even if we stopped working we wouldn't have to sell as they all provide us income after paying all expenses on associated with the properties. So in answer to your question I would be aiming for a property with a yield above 5% and preferably above 6%, as this will enable your property/ies to be positively geared at least after a couple of years if not straight away."}
{"id": "207929", "text": "I agree, one should not let the tax tail wag the investing dog.  The only question should be whether he'd buy the stock at today's price. If he wishes to own it long term, he keeps it. To take the loss this year, he'd have to sell soon, and can't buy it back for 30 days. If, for whatever reason, the stock comes back a bit, he's going to buy in higher.  To be clear, the story changes for ETFs or mutual funds. You can buy a fund to replace one you're selling, capture the loss, and easily not run afoul of wash sale rules."}
{"id": "208215", "text": "Normally, you don't pay capital gains tax until you actually realize a capital gain.  However, there are some exceptions. The exception that affected Eduardo Saverin is the expatriation tax, or exit tax.  If you leave a country and are no longer a tax resident, your former country taxes you on your unrealized capital gains from the period that you were a tax resident of that country.  There are several countries that have an expatriation tax, including the United States.  Saverin left the U.S. before the Facebook IPO. Saverin was perhaps already planning on leaving the U.S. (he is originally from Brazil and has investments in Asia), so leaving before the IPO limited the amount of capital gains tax he had to pay upon his exit.  (Source: Wall Street Journal: So How Much Did He Really Save?) Another situation that might be considered an exception and affects a lot of us is capital gain distributions inside a mutual fund.  When mutual fund managers sell investments inside the fund and realize gains, they have to distribute those gains among all the mutual fund investors.  This often takes the form of additional shares of the mutual fund that you are given, and you have to pay capital gains tax on these distributions.  As a result, you can invest in a mutual fund, leave your money there and not sell, but have to pay capital gains tax anyway.  In fact, you could owe capital gains tax on the distributions even if the value of your mutual fund investment has gone down."}
{"id": "208216", "text": "\"Hearing somewhere is a level or two worse than \"\"my friend told me.\"\"  You need to do some planning to forecast your full year income and tax bill. In general, you should be filing a quarterly form and tax payment. You'll still reconcile the year with an April filing, but if you are looking to save up to pay a huge bill next year, you are looking at the potential of a penalty for under-withholding.  The instructions and payment coupons are available at the IRS site.  At this point I'm required to offer the following advice - If you are making enough money that this even concerns you, you should consider starting to save for the future. A Solo-401(k) or IRA, or both. Read more on these two accounts and ask separate questions, if you'd like.\""}
{"id": "208437", "text": "You are undeniably wrong. You repeat over and over about taking gen Ed classes for the first two years. That advice, relevant and specific to This thread, greatly diminishes his ability to finish a CS degree on time. Yea he might be able to explore and do classes other than finance ones since he won't be getting into it. But the purpose of this thread is to make a decision between three specific majors. One of those majors requires you to be in classes early to graduate on time. Note: http://www.cs.uic.edu/Main/Courses"}
{"id": "208637", "text": "\"Pretty much every american \"\"borrows\"\". Credit cards are essential in building credit history and story. Debit cards got popular in the past few years, but most still borrow at least a little bit on credit and pay it off right away.\""}
{"id": "208860", "text": "\"When I was in high school, my mom got me a joint credit account with both of our names on it for exactly this reason. Well, that, and to have in case I found myself in some sort emergency, but it was mostly to build credit history. That account is still on my credit report (it's my oldest by a few years), and looking at the age of it, I was 17 at the time we opened it (and I think my younger sister got one around the same time).  In my case, I now have an \"\"excellent\"\" credit score and my weakest area is the age of my accounts, so having that old account definitely helps me. I don't think I've really taken advantage of it, and I'm not sure if I'd really be worse off if my mom hadn't done that, but it certainly hasn't hurt. And I plan on buying a house in the next year or so, so having anything to bump up the credit score seems like a good thing.\""}
{"id": "208909", "text": "5% cashback? Wow. No, this would not generally affect your credit rating. You aren't altering anything that is generally tracked by the credit rating agencies. You put a purchase on your credit card which temporarily increases your utilisation, but then immediately pay it off, leaving your utilisation practically unchanged."}
{"id": "208934", "text": "Unless stated otherwise, these terms apply to all bonds. The par value or face value of a bond refers to the value of the bond when it's redeemed at maturity. A bond with a par value of $10,000 simply means that if you purchase the bond and hold it until the maturity date specified in the contract, you receive $10,000.  The purchase price, however, is exactly that: it's what you paid for the bond. Bonds may sell below, at, or above par. Continuing the example from above, if you paid $9,800 for a bought a bond with a $10,000 par value, you bought the bond below par. A bond selling below par is said to be selling at a discount. For bonds selling above bar, they're selling at a premium. If the purchase price and the par value are the same, the bond is selling at par. These terms apply to callable bonds only, which are bond contracts that allow the issuer of the bond (in the case of municipal bonds, the institution or agency who created the contract) to buy back from bond holders at a given date (the call date) and at a given price (the call price) before the bond reaches maturity and pays the holder the full par value.  Yes, the coupon rate is essentially the interest paid. It's usually represented as a percent of the par value, so if the $10,000 in the example above had a 5% coupon rate, this means that it paid out 0.05 * 10,000 = $500 each year. Usually, this payment is made as two semi-annual payments of $250. Some bonds are zero-coupon bonds, which means exactly what you would think; they don't make any coupon payments. U.S. Treasury Bills are one example of a zero-coupon bond. All of these factors are linked, because the coupon rate, callable provisions, and par value, along with the overall economic environment, can affect the purchase price of a bond."}
{"id": "208989", "text": "\"It's not possible to determine whether you can \"\"expect a refund\"\" or whether you are claiming the right number of exemptions from the information given.   If your wife were not working and you did not do independent contracting, then the answer would be much simpler.  However, in this case, we must also factor in how much your contracting brings in (since you must pay income tax on that, as well as Medicare and, probably, Social Security), whether you are filing jointly or separately, and your wife's income from her business.   There are also other factors such as whether you'll be claiming certain child care expenses, and certain tax credits which may phase out depending on your income.   If you can accurately estimate your total household income for the year, and separate that into income from wages, contracting, and your wife's business, as well as your expenses for things like state and local income and property taxes, then you can make a very reasonable estimate about your total tax burden (including the self-employment taxes on your non-wage income) and then determine whether you are having enough tax withheld from your paycheck.  Some people may find that they should have additional tax withheld to compensate for these expenses (see IRS W-4 Line #6).\""}
{"id": "209065", "text": "It's technically correct to say BK will still pay taxes on all profits made here in the US, the problem here is that it's very easy to structure this whole thing so that there are no US profits.   Company A sells itself to Company B, which it also owns. Company A transfers all its' intellectual property to Company B which then charges Company A a fee to use it. The fee is structured so that Company A makes zero profit and Company B makes all the money."}
{"id": "209067", "text": "Over a period of time greater than 10 years (keep in mind, 2000-2009 ten year period fails, so I am talking longer) the market, as measured by the S&P 500, was positive. Long term, averaging more than 10%/yr.  At a 1 year horizon, the success is 67 or so percent. It's mostly for this reason that those asking about investing are told that if they need money in a year or two, to buy a house for instance, they are told to stay out of the market.  As the time approaches one day or less, the success rate drops to 50/50. The next trade being higher or lower is a random event.  Say you have a $5 commission. A $10,000 trade buy/sell is $10 for the day. 250 trading days costs you $2500 if you get in and out once per day. You need to be ahead 25% for the year to break even.  You can spin the numbers any way you wish, but in the end, time (long time spans) is on your side."}
{"id": "209456", "text": "Being the geek that I am, I actually developed a financial model of a few different career/salary scenarios when I graduated in 2000. While it may not matter from a financial POV, it's a nice thing to reference later on to help you stick with your financial goals. My recommendation would be to not factor in inflation upfront... build a model based on the current value of money. You course-correct things in the future when inflation starts kicking in. Also, your retirement income requirements will vary dramatically depending on other decisions that you make. (ie. kids, mortgage, college, etc) If achieving the lifestyle that you desire 10, 20, or 30 years down the road looks difficult because your salary isn't keeping up with your earnings/savings goals, you need to either re-evaluate your priorities or look for better compensation."}
{"id": "209492", "text": "The answer is that the trader is hoping to profit from a potential rise in Implied volatility. He is isolating his exposure to IV only and mitigating his risk to the directional move of the underlying by hedging with the underlying. Basically, his delta is neutral. His gamma is positive and a potential source of profit, and his theta is negative which is a potential source of loss. He hopes that the profits from long gamma will overcome the loss from the short theta. he achieves this by actively gamma scalping to remain delta neutral over the life of the option."}
{"id": "209499", "text": "Ten year auto loans. Think about that for a moment. I paid off my house in 13 years and people are having problems paying off a car in 6, 8 or 10 years.   I never buy new and then drive them until they fall apart. My sister buys new every four years. In the past twenty years, she has paid at least $100,000 in autos. I know it is actually a lot more since one of her SUVs cost $35k, but I was going for the easy math for illustrative purposes. I bought two used vehicles for a total of $14,000.   People ask how I was able to pay off my house and buy rental properties."}
{"id": "209716", "text": "Well, you can just say that 1 dollar contributed = one share and pay out dividends based on number of shares. That makes it pretty easy to make things fair based. There are pros and cons with this pooling approach."}
{"id": "209730", "text": "It is comparing apples to oranges. From govt or institution point of view defined contribution is better than defined benefits as they don't have to carry obligations. Although defined benefit sounds good, one can't guarantee it will be enough when you retire compared to inflation. It often becomes political issue. Defined contribution puts you in charge."}
{"id": "209804", "text": "This was answered wonderfully in a recent Planet Money podcast:  Why Gold?.  Here are some higlights of gold: If listening to podcasts isn't your thing, read this summary."}
{"id": "209849", "text": "Consolidation makes sense, if your friend has his act together and isn't going to run up more debt. Finding a lender will be tough. I'd suggest trying local credit unions, making sure first that there has been NO late or missed payments for 6-9 months. You need to talk to a human at a local lender who will give you informal guidance about what you need to approve, so you don't end up getting lots of declinations. If its more than $10k, it will be hard to get a loan like this from anyone. In that case, you need to focus on the smallest debts first, because your friend's cash flow is going to be pinched by making payments to multiple creditors. It's critical to pay all creditors on time for at least the minimum amount due.  The problem is, once you start paying things down, the creditors will start ratcheting down credit limits. When that happens, you're at greater risk for getting nabbed with fees and higher minimum payments, which may be considered a universal default by other lenders.  There isn't alot of detail here, but depending on income and the amount of debt, your friend should be prepared to file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy."}
{"id": "209859", "text": "\"If you find a credit card with 0% interest, let us know!  I guess I'll just be the one to tell you that this belongs in /r/personalfinance  No, a new credit card balance won't affect your existing mortgage. However opening that mortgage so recently definitely dinged your credit substantially and it almost definitely hasn't recovered yet so your credit score isn't as good as you think it is from the home purchase.  If you can magically finance $4k for 0% APR then obviously you should do that since you're house poor but be absolutely sure you're right about the terms of financing. I normally make purchases like that on a rewards credit card (airline miles) then pay it off immediately but that's just me.  Using the word \"\"adulting\"\" answers that question immediately.\""}
{"id": "209974", "text": "They believe that it reduces the risk that Revenue Canada will deem you to be an employee and make them pay a whole pile of tax, EI, CPP and so on that should have been paid if you had been hired as an employee. It's my recollection that the employer gets dinged for both the employee and employer share of those withholdings (and generally the employer's share is larger than yours) so they really want to prevent it. There's a Revenue Canada publication about whether you're an employee or not. There's nothing on it about being incorporated, but still employers feel more protected when their contracts are incorporated.  We did work as a sole proprietorship at the very beginning, so that we could deduct our losses against employment income earned earlier in the year, before we started the business. You can find clients who will take you on. We incorporated once the losses were over with (basically we had bought the equipment and office supplies we needed to get started.) It's a simple and relatively inexpensive thing to do, and gives clients a sense of protection. It won't protect you from your own poor decisions since you'll be a director of the firm."}
{"id": "210149", "text": "In response to one of the comments you might be interested in owning the new home as a rental property for a year.  You could flip this thinking and make the current home into a rental property for a period of time (1 year seems to be the consensus, consult an accountant familiar with real estate). This will potentially allow for a 1031 exchange into another property -- although I  believe that property can't then be a primary residence. All potentially not worth the complication for the tax savings, but figured I'd throw it out there. Also, the 1031 exchange defers taxes until some point in the future in which you finally sell the asset(s) for cash."}
{"id": "210163", "text": "\"The problem I have with this argument is exemplified by the following statement:  *\"\"Focusing on share-restricted hedge funds between 1999 and 2008, Sadka and Ozik found that funds with recent inflows on average earned an additional 5.6 percent annually compared to funds that experienced outflows.*\"\"  Funds that are doing well tend - on average - to see customer inflows.  Funds that are doing poorly tend - on average - to see customer outflows.  It's the concept of \"\"hot money.\"\"  The authors here imply that it's the fund inflows that prompt the outperformance, when - in reality - outperformance prompts fund inflows.\""}
{"id": "210175", "text": "The context actually was higher education and student debt load (which extends to cost). You can try to broaden it but the title of the thread, the linked article, the comment I replied to and my comments all reference higher education and costs. Once again, your comment is correct in a broader context, just not in the one we were in, at least not to all readers clearly.   You want to be right but what you need to accept is that you just flubbed your post (tbh I agree with you on most points here) and should likely add some more detail to your statements."}
{"id": "210236", "text": "\"I think you're on the right track with that strategy. If you want to learn more about this strategy, I'd recommend \"\"The Intelligent Asset Allocator\"\" by William Bernstein. As for the \u00dcber\u2013Tuber portfolio you linked to, my only concern would be that it is diversified in everything except for the short-term bond component, which is 40%. It might be worth looking at some portfolios that have more than one bond allocation -- possibly diversifying more across corporate vs government, and intermediate vs short term. Even the Cheapskate's portfolio located immediately above the \u00dcber\u2013Tuber has 20% Corporate and 20% Government. Also note that they mention: Because it includes so many funds, it would be expensive and unwieldy for an account less than $100,000. Regarding your question about the disadvantages of an index-fund-based asset allocation strategy:\""}
{"id": "210439", "text": "More infomation is needed for any meaningful discussion about this.  I just assume you want to buy in China mainland, not Hongkong or other places. That depends on where you want to buy the flat.  Which city, which district of the city, which community, which school district, how old is the building?  Furthermore, always bearing in mind that you don't own the land when you buy a flat in China mainland.  The land is always state-owned, you are renting the land. Someone will say that the real property market in China is always in a bubble, but because the ownership of the land is different from countries like US and other things like one-child policy, things are not that easy to tell.   But if you don't live in China now and you don't have clients ready to rent from you, I don't think it is a good choice right now to buy one just for investment."}
{"id": "210514", "text": "That is such a vague statement, I highly recommend disregarding it entirely, as it is impossible to know what they meant. Their goal is to convince you that index funds are the way to go, but depending on what they consider an 'active trader', they may be supporting their claim with irrelevant data Their definition of 'active trader' could mean any one or more of the following: 1) retail investor 2) day trader 3) mutual fund 4) professional investor 5) fund continuously changing its position 6) hedge fund. I will go through all of these. 1) Most retail traders lose money. There are many reasons for this. Some rely on technical strategies that are largely unproven. Some buy rumors on penny stocks in hopes of making a quick buck. Some follow scammers on twitter who sell newsletters full of bogus stock tips. Some cant get around the psychology of trading, and thus close out losing positions late and winning positions early (or never at all) [I myself use to do this!!]. I am certain 99% of retail traders cant beat the market, because most of them, to be frank, put less effort into deciding what to trade than in deciding what to have for lunch. Even though your pension funds presentation is correct with respect to retail traders, it is largely irrelevant as professionals managing your money should not fall into any of these traps. 2) I call day traders active traders, but its likely not what your pension fund was referring to. Day trading is an entirely different animal to long or medium term investing, and thus I also think the typical performance is irrelevant, as they are not going to manage your money like a day trader anyway. 3,4,5) So the important question becomes, do active funds lose 99% of the time compared to index funds. NO! No no no. According to the WSJ, actively managed funds outperformed passive funds in 2007, 2009, 2013, 2015. 2010 was basically a tie. So 5 out of 9 years. I dont have a calculator on me but I believe that is less than 99%!   Whats interesting is that this false belief that index funds are always better has become so pervasive that you can see active funds have huge outflows and passive have huge inflows. It is becoming a crowded trade. I will spare you the proverb about large crowds and small doors. Also, index funds are so heavily weighted towards a handful of stocks, that you end up becoming a stockpicker anyway. The S&P is almost indistinguishable from AAPL. Earlier this year, only 6 stocks were responsible for over 100% of gains in the NASDAQ index. Dont think FB has a good long term business model, or that Gilead and AMZN are a cheap buy? Well too bad if you bought QQQ, because those 3 stocks are your workhorses now. See here 6) That graphic is for mutual funds but your pension fund may have also been including hedge funds in their 99% figure. While many dont beat their own benchmark, its less than 99%. And there are reasons for it. Many have investors that are impatient. Fortress just had to close one of its funds, whose bets may actually pay off years from now, but too many people wanted their money out. Some hedge funds also have rules, eg long only, which can really limit your performance. While important to be aware of this, that placing your money with a hedge fund may not beat a benchmark, that does not automatically mean you should go with an index fund. So when are index funds useful? When you dont want to do any thinking. When you dont want to follow market news, at all. Then they are appropriate."}
{"id": "210713", "text": "No, you will not have to pay taxes on the corpus (principal) of the trust distribution.  If the trust tax forms were filed correctly, you might have as much as a $9000 loss that will flow to you on the trust's termination.  Previously, the trust was supposed to file a return each year, and either claim the dividends or realized cap gains each year, and pay taxes at trust's rate, or distribute them to the beneficiaries via K-1 form. This is the best way to handle this as the trust has a steep tax table (relative high rates) vs the kiddie tax which would let you get nearly $1K/yr tax free each year as a minor.  During that time, losses net again gains, but can't be 'distributed' to the beneficiary. They are carried forward year to year. In the year the trust is terminated, that loss is not lost, but it's then passed on to the beneficiary, still via K-1. See Schedule K-1 instructions and Schedule K-1 itself.  On a lighter note, the trustee failed you. In the 16 years (Jan 2000-Dec 2015), the market (S&P) grew by 88%, with a compound 4.02%/yr return. Instead of any gain, you got a loss with a -2.75%/yr return. If this were a paid professional, you'd have a potential claim for a lawsuit. This is a reason why amateurs should not be assigned the role of trustee.  To clearly answer the mix of questions you asked - Note - it's always a good idea to seek professional advice. But, the nature of this board is that if any of my answer isn't accurate, a high ranked member (top 20 or so on this list) will likely set me straight within 24 hours."}
{"id": "210751", "text": "&gt; This is directly the result of about 50 years of carefully applying the value investing philosophy.  I'm on my cell on vacation so don't have time to provide a full response here, but I disagree. The BNSF purchase alone represents a giant speculative bet, partly on oil by rail. It wasn't a value play, it was a growth play. Lots of the rest of the BRK portfolio is the same."}
{"id": "210821", "text": "TD Bank (Northeast US) has free change counting machines at its branches.  You don't have to have an account to use them."}
{"id": "210917", "text": "\"First of all, \"\"going risky\"\" doesn't mean driving to Las Vegas and playing roulette. The real meaning is that you can afford higher risk/return ratio compared to a person who will retire in the following ten years. Higher return is very important since time works for you and even several extra percent annually will make a big difference in the long run because of compound interest effect. The key is that this requires the investment to not be too risky - if you invest in a single venture and it fails you lose all the money and that's worse that some conservative investment that could yield minimum income. So you still need the investment to be relatively safe. Next, as user Chris W. Rea mentions in the comment funds and ETFs can be very risky - depending on the investment policy they can invest into some very risky ventures or into some specific industry and that poses more risk that investing into \"\"blue chips\"\" for example. So a fund or an ETF can be a good fit for you if you choose a right one.\""}
{"id": "211096", "text": "a bank doesn't lend you money if it hasn't made sure that you can repay your debt in full (plus interests). That's not entirely correct. The bank issues a lot of loans and expects almost all people will pay their debts. The few people who go bankrupt and cannot pay are (more than) compensated for by the people who do pay their debts. The same holds for brokers, e.g. here is an example of the rates they calculate when you trade on margin, effectively borrowing money from them."}
{"id": "211122", "text": "In addition to the expatriation case already mentioned by Ben Miller, traders/investors are required to use mark-to-market accounting on certain investments.  These go by Section 1256 contracts due to the part of the law  that defines them.  Mark-to-market is also required on straddles (combination of a long and and a short position in equities that are expected to vary inversely to each other). Mark-to-market means that you have to treat the positions as if you closed them at their end-of-year market value (even if you still have the position across the new year)."}
{"id": "211485", "text": "\"Being self-employed, your \"\"profit\"\" is calculated as all the bills you send out, minus all business-related cost that you have (you will need a receipt for everything, and there are different rules for things that last for long time, long tools, machinery).  You can file your taxes yourself - the HRS website will tell you how to, and you can do it online. It's close to the same as your normal online tax return. Only thing is that you must keep receipts for all the cost that you claim.  Your tax: Assuming your gross salary is \u00a325,000 and your profits are about \u00a310,000, you will be paying 8% for national insurance, and 20% income tax. If you go above \u00a343,000 or thereabouts, you pay 40% income tax on any income above that threshold, instead of 20%, but your national insurance payments stop.\""}
{"id": "211622", "text": "\"On reflection there are financial products that do what you want, whole-life insurance policies that guarantee an annual dividend calculation on some index with a ceiling and floor.  So you will have a return within a defined minimum and maximum range.   There are a lot of opinions on the internet on this.  This Consumer Reports article is balanced These have a reputation for being bad for the consumer compared to buying term life and investing in a mutual fund separately, but if you want the guarantee (or are a \"\"moral hazard\"\" for a life insurance policy, closer to death than you appear on paper) it may be a product for you.   If you're very wealthy, there is an estate tax exploit in insurance death benefits that can make this an exceptional shield on assets for your heirs, with the market return just the gravy.\""}
{"id": "211642", "text": "By in combination with fiat I mean we will continue to use sterling or dollars in society along with Bitcoin perhaps for online purchases exclusively, as an example. Many people here advocate for a society that would only use cryptocurrency as money.   Cryptocurrency, specifically Bitcoin, is unlike fiat currency firstly because it is not backed by a government, it's in the ether so to speak, it proves its own value intrinsically. No central authority decides on the actions to take in regard to the currency.   Other characteristics that separate Bitcoin from fiat are its inability to be inflated, it's finite nature, there will only ever be x amount of bitcoins - it is deflationary by nature of the algorithm. Central authorities can devalue their fiat currency through financial instruments like inflation and controlling the production (quantitative easing). This isn't true of all crypto currencies like dogecoin and maybe ETH"}
{"id": "211708", "text": "This is great! I'm not a CPA, but work in finance. As such, my course/professional work is focused more on the economic and profitability aspects of transfer pricing. As you might imagine, it tended to analyze corporate strategy decisions under various cost allocation models, which you thoroughly discuss.  I would agree with the statement that it is based on the matching principle but would like to add that transfer pricing is interesting as it falls under several fields: accounting, finance, and economics. Fundamentally it is based on the matching principal, but it's real world applications are based on all three (it's often used to determine divisional and even individual sales peoples profitability; as is the case with bank related funds transfer pricing on stuff like time deposits). In this case, the correct accounting principal allows you to, when done properly, better understand the economics, strategy, and operations of an organization.   In effect, when done correctly, it provides transparency for strategic decision making to executives. As I said, since my coursework tended to focus more on that aspect, I definitely have a natural tendency towards it.  This is an amazing explanation (esp. about interest on M&amp;A bridge loans, I get that) of the more detailed stuff! Truthfully, I'm not as familiar with it and was just trying to show more of the conceptual than nitty-gritty.   Thanks for the reply!"}
{"id": "211867", "text": "The 2 and 20 rule is a premium arrangement that hedge funds offer and venture capital funds offer, and they also offer different variations of it. The 2 is the management fee as percent of assets under management, the 20 is the profit cut, which they only get if they are profitable. There are 0/20, 1/15, and many variations. You're assuming that nobody offers this arrangement because it isn't offered to you, but that's because nobody offers it to people that aren't wealthy enough to legally qualify for their fund. When you park 6 or 7 figure amounts in bank accounts, they'll send your information out to the funds that operate the way you wish they operated."}
{"id": "211869", "text": "is it possible to file that single form aside from the rest of my return? Turbotax will generate all the forms necessary to file your return. I recommend you  access these forms and file them manually. According to the IRS in order to report capital gains and losses you need to fill out Form 8949 and summarize them on Form 1040 D. Add these two forms to the stack that turbotax generates. Add the total capital gains to line 13 of the Form 1040 which turbotax generated, and adjust the totals on the form accordingly."}
{"id": "212222", "text": "\"I would say people are generally talking about the prime lending rate. I have heard the prime lending rate defined as \"\"The rate that banks charge each other when they borrow money overnight.\"\" But it often defined as the rate at which banks lend their most creditworthy customers. That definition comes with the caveat that it is not always held to strictly. Either definition has the same idea: it's the lowest rate at which anyone could currently borrow money. The rate for many types of lending is based upon the prime rate. A variable rate loan might have an interest rate of (Prime + x). The prime rate is in turn based upon the Federal Funds Rate, which is the rate that the Fed sets manually. When the news breaks that \"\"the Fed is raising interest rates by a quarter of a point\"\"  (or similar) it is the Federal Funds Rate that they control. Lending institutions then \"\"fall in line\"\" and adjust the rates at which they lend money. So to summarize: When people refer to \"\"high\"\" or \"\"low\"\" or \"\"rising\"\" interest rates they are conceptually referring to the prime lending rate. When people talk about the Fed raising/lowering interest rates (In the U.S.) they are referring specifically to the Federal Funds Rate (which ultimately sets other lending rates).\""}
{"id": "212363", "text": "You should think of Required Rate of Return in your own terms.   Say a friend tells you that he will give you $ to stand in line and get him tickets to your schools football game. The line is on average two hours long and you DIDN'T plan on going to the game, so you are going out of your way for him. What is the minimum dollar value that you would charge him to stand in line for him? What price would make standing in line worth it?"}
{"id": "212661", "text": "Square is a company. They need to detail as part of their corporate taxes all of their expenses. The money they collected for you, and sent to you, is not income for themselves. Their tax form included the amount of money they sent you, along with either your Social Security Number of corporate tax id. The IRS computers match the information regarding expenses to the information regarding income. In this case the expense listed by Square didn't match-up with a line of your tax forms for that year. The IRS now sees that as unreported income. If you didn't tell them about other expenses you had, they can only assume your expenses were zero.  Congratulations you have a business. Unfortunately the Federal, state and local governments now will want to know about your business. You may have to fill out multiple years worth of tax forms and other required forms. Yes, you should getting professional accounting and tax help."}
{"id": "212673", "text": "\"the mortgage interest deduction alone couldn't make this work, but if you realize less income by living off the mortgage funds, then it could definitely reduce your taxes by much more than the cost of the mortgage interest.  particularly, if you are waiting for some future cut-off date (e.g. turning 59.5 and getting access to roth funds, turning 70 and getting social security, simply doing a roth conversion with strategic recharacterization at age 40 and waiting 5 years to get the money out penalty-free, etc.).  and that future date could be quite far off if you only use a small fraction of the total mortgage each year. plus, it is fairly reasonable to assume that equity market returns will outpace mortgage rates, especially if you are \"\"rich\"\" and don't need to worry about living on the street even if the market hits unprecedented lows.  while i find most financial advisers to be incompetent (most people really...), i wouldn't write this guy off, just because he left out the specific details that made the strategy work for one particular client.\""}
{"id": "212730", "text": "The way it actually works is that low-but-steady inflation (ie: printing of new dollars without any debt behind them) keeps the debts serviceable.  In real life, unfortunately, too little of the money supply is printed rather than lent into existence."}
{"id": "212767", "text": "True.  My wife is in banking, and typically it is the poorest of the poor that live in the negative and pay all the overdraft fees.  She has one guy that earns just enough to bring him back positive, and then he pulls out all his overdraft allowance and starts the cycle all over again."}
{"id": "212827", "text": "\"I expect that the loan documents show both you and your ex-partner as \"\"jointly and severally liable\"\" for the debt, and thus you're both responsible for it.  It doesn't really matter what other paperwork you have that says otherwise or what other promises might have been made.  Certainly, the other agreements give you legal ground to go after your ex-partner for the money, but they give you no leverage with the bank. If you end up paying this debt off to save your credit, you need to make sure that the account is closed.  Make sure you have paperwork showing it as closed, and showing that it was paid in full, and then keep that paperwork forever. Re #1: I think it will eventually show up on your credit report.  You could ask the bank for proof that you owe the money, if you like, but that will probably just delay the inevitable. Re #2: His bankruptcy filing really has no bearing on you and your obligation to repay the loan.  If he didn't list this debt, then he is still liable for it as well (and you can still go after him under your other agreements).  But either way, you're still on the debt.\""}
{"id": "212831", "text": "Read the game of numbers by nick Murray.  You have to find money to call yourself a money manager and most of the job is sales. You won't stay in business if you're bad at managing it, but step #1 is finding something to manage.  Hani"}
{"id": "212883", "text": "The negative effects of multiple hard inquiries in a short span of time don't stack, they're treated as a single inquiry (and inquiries aren't *that* bad anyway, the only ding you by a few points).  The bigger problem here is the **other** reason your bank gave you - Too many overdrawn accounts.  If you don't believe you currently have any overdrawn accounts, you need to pull your credit report *now* and make sure it's accurate.  Maybe there's a mistake on your credit, maybe you're a victim of identity theft.  That said, 1.5 years isn't really very long in credit terms for managing to keep your record clean, so maybe your credit just needs a few more years to heal.  But *definitely* pull your credit report to rule out the worst possibilities."}
{"id": "212988", "text": "\"One way to value companies is to use a Dividend discount model. In substance, it consists in estimating future dividends and calculating their present value. So it is a methodology which considers that an equity is similar to a bond and estimates its current value based on future cash flows. A company may not be paying dividends now, but because its future earnings prospects are good may pay some in the future. In that case the DDM model will give a non-zero value to that stock. If on the other hand you think a company won't ever make any profits and therefore never pay any dividends, then it's probably worth 0! Take Microsoft as an example - it currently pays ~3% dividend per annum. The stock has been listed since 1986 and yet it did not pay any dividends until 2003. But the stock has been rising regularly since the beginning because people had \"\"priced in\"\" the fact that there was a high chance that the company would become very profitable - which proved true in the long term (+60,000% including dividends since the IPO!).\""}
{"id": "213042", "text": "\"Hah!  In so far as the financial sector isn't making money off the government, then I would say it is truly \"\"financed through the financial sector\"\".  The financial sector doesn't operate at a loss, which is what you are suggesting here.  They aren't paying the government to have roads and power and plumbing and water, etc.    The financial sector is paying because they make more money back.  You want to admit who is paying to have roads and water and power and plumbing, etc?  Every person who gets a paycheck or owns a house is.  Not big money.  Ordinary people.  Taxes and Tariffs, and printing money pays for all of this.  We, the tax payer, aren't seeing a financial reimbursement for our expenses on these projects.  But Big Money is.  Our reimbursement is:  Roads, Power, plumbing, Police, Fire Departments.  Which means we are the consumers buying products.  Big Money is the middle man making bucks off the system.  Perhaps Big Money is necessary, but now it is out of control, and needs to be held accountable.\""}
{"id": "213066", "text": "Other answers here cover some of the basics, but this is also a great time to start establishing a credit history and developing good financial habits to carry throughout your life. In addition to opening a free checking account with the local credit union, establish an overdraft line of credit on that account. Never close this account or this line of credit as it will work to increase the average age of your accounts when you apply for credit later in life. If you are disciplined with your use of credit cards, you may also want to apply for a low limit credit card through the same credit union for the same purpose as above. Never carry a balance on this card, but make minor purchases with it each month, never more than 20% of the balance, maybe just buy gas with it. Start tracking all of your spending and make a monthly budget. There are a lot of online tools that make this very easy. Establishing the habit now will help you make informed financial decisions in the future. Open a Roth IRA and put at least 10% of your money away for retirement. In the future your income may increase enough to put you in the 25% tax bracket. If that ever happens, open a Regular IRA and put the money there instead. Also when you have employers that offer 401k matching do the same thing with a Roth 401k account. Keep your money invested in a low cost index fund."}
{"id": "213154", "text": "This is a really easy problem. If you're genuinely having trouble, maybe don't be a finance major? All you need to do is know the formulas for the ratios and plug in the variables. Simple and clean.  However, if you're lazy and trying to get free answers off of reddit, then you could have saved the time you took to post this question and actually do the problem. You probably would have gotten the answer all by yourself without much help."}
{"id": "213310", "text": "\"TLDR:  Yes you can. That is quite a steep price to pay for a trade.  I've used TradeKing previously, which would charge you $5 for that same trade.  Some other brokers are more or less expensive, and it is normally representative of the service one receives.  One option would be Scottrade.  While they are much more expensive than TradeKing, they offer a much higher level of service.  Even at $17 a trade, you'll save a lot of money over the Edward Jones trade. A big question here is who does your investing now?  Most people are pretty horrible at managing their own investments.  Some professional advice is probably in order.  For most they discover this when their investments are small, mitigating any mistakes made.  You don't have that luxury.  I would highly recommend making sure you have people that can help you make good decisions. The more I think about it the more I like the move to Scottrade (no affiliation) or one like that (Charles Schwab is another option).  With Scottrade you can go into a local branch and talk things over.  I think they offer some professional management as well.  Schwab will offer the latter but not the former.  However you can call them up and talk on the phone.  Another option is to go with Fidelity and have them manage at least part of your money.  Of course you can always just do a professional, independent money manager. Another option is to renegotiate with Edward Jones.  Something like:  \"\"Sorry but this is ridiculous, you need to do much better or I am moving all my money.\"\"  Its much cheaper to charge you $100 for that same trade than lose the whole account.\""}
{"id": "213859", "text": "I'm not a finance professional by any means, but my understanding of cashier's checks is that they're more in favour of the person receiving. They're essentially guaranteeing that you have the money in your account to provide payment to the recipient.   The advice I've always received is to treat cashier's checks and money orders as straight up cash, because that's essentially what they are.  Hopefully someone else can come in with a better background, but I figured I'd pitch in."}
{"id": "213991", "text": "There's gotta be categories, right? Like boutiques, or gas stations, clothing stores, etc...   Maybe not, I just thought with all the numbers out there, some website somewhere would have something to decipher what kind of store, and numbers in that category.   Thanks for taking the time to answer though."}
{"id": "214009", "text": "I have a very hard time believing you pay 60% of gross. Otherwise, I believe you're right in the way this works: Suppose you make $100k and pay 25% of that in taxes. 100,000 * .25 = 25,000 But if you spend $1,000 pretax, then it's as if you were paid $99,000 99,000 * .25 = $24,750 So the difference is $250.  Which is the same as that $1,000 * .25."}
{"id": "214082", "text": "It's very, very unlikely that you received a phone call at work with an incorrect birth date from an actual lending company that thinks it loaned you any money.  It's much more likely that you received a phone call at work from a collections agency that would have bought some loan from the aforementioned agency for pennies on the dollar.  They would have been hunting around trying to find someone with your name who was born thirteen years earlier.  It's even more likely that this is some sort of phishing scam.  If you're worried, you can check your credit rating, but it is likely that you can safely ignore the situation.  If they call back, ask for thorough details about the credit card.  If they're a real collections agency and for some reason they won't leave you alone, IIRC the most surefire course of action is to hire a lawyer to send them a cease-and-desist letter."}
{"id": "214281", "text": "NO. All the leveraged ETFs are designed to multiply the performance of the underlying asset FOR THAT DAY, read the prospectus. Their price is adjusted at the end of the day to reflect what is called a NAV unit. Basically, they know that their price is subject to fluctuations due to supply and demand throughout the day - simply because they trade in a quote driven system. But the price is automatically corrected at the end of the day regardless. In practice though, all sorts of crazy things happen with leveraged ETFs that will simply make them more and more unfavorable to hold long term, the longer you look at it."}
{"id": "214944", "text": "If it doesn't seem that important, why bother blacking the name out? For the effort, it might cost you less in your time to have the checks reprinted. There's no way to know what all banks would do with a check that has a name crossed out, but most would ignore it. Most checks are processed automatically. Signatures are not verified, post-dated checks can usually still be deposited. Occasionally you'll have a bank or merchant reject a check, but don't expect that to be the norm."}
{"id": "215049", "text": "Vanguard has a lot of mutual fund offerings.  (I have an account there.)  Within the members' section they give indications of the level of risk/reward for each fund."}
{"id": "215118", "text": "\"Bull means the investor is betting on a rising market. Puts are a type of stock option where the seller of a put option promises to buy 100 shares of stock from the buyer of the put option at a pre-agreed price called the strike price on any day before expiration day.  The buyer of the put option does not have to sell (it is optional, thats why it is called buying an option).  However, the seller of the put is required to make good on their promise to the buyer. The broker can require the seller of the put option to have a deposit, called margin, to help make sure that they can make good on the promise.   Profit... The buyer can profit from the put option if the stock price moves down substantially.   The buyer of the put option does not need to own the stock, he can sell the option to someone else.  If the buyer of the put option also owns the stock, the put option can be thought of like an insurance policy on the value of the stock.  The seller of the put option profits if the stock price stays the same or rises.  Basically, the seller comes out best if they can sell put options that no one ends up using by expiration day. A spread is an investment consisting of buying one option and selling another. Let's put bull and put and spread together with an example from Apple. So, if you believed Apple Inc. AAPL (currently 595.32) was going up or staying the same through JAN you could sell the 600 JAN put and buy the 550 put.  If the price rises beyond 600, your profit would be the difference in price of the puts.  Let's explore this a little deeper (prices from google finance 31 Oct 2012): Worst Case:  AAPL drops below 550.  The bull put spread investor owes (600-550)x100 shares = $5000 in JAN but received $2,035 for taking this risk. EDIT 2016: The \"\"worst case\"\" was the outcome in this example, the AAPL stock price on options expiry Jan 18, 2013 was about $500/share. Net profit = $2,035 - $5,000 = -$2965 = LOSS of $2965 Best Case:  AAPL stays above 600 on expiration day in JAN. Net Profit = $2,035 - 0 = $2035 Break Even:  If AAPL drops to 579.65, the value of the 600 JAN AAPL put sold will equal the $2,035 collected and the bull put spread investor will break even. Commissions have been ignored in this example.\""}
{"id": "215260", "text": "\"You can infer some of the answers to your questions from the BATS exchange's market data page and its associated help page.  (I'm pretty sure a page like this exists on each stock exchange's website; BATS just happens to be the one I'm used to looking at.) The Matched Volume section refers to all trades on a given date that took place on \"\"lit\"\" exchanges; that is, where a public protected US stock exchange's matching engine helped a buyer and a seller find each other.  Because there are exactly 11 such exchanges in existence, it's easy to show 100% of the matched volume broken down into 11 rows. The FINRA & TRF Volume section refers to all trades on a given date that took place on \"\"non-lit\"\" exchanges.  These types of trades include dark pool volume and any other trade that is not required to take place in public but is required to be reported (the R in TRF) to FINRA.  There are three venues via which these trades may be reported to FINRA -- NASDAQ's, NYSE's, and FINRA's own ADF.  They're all operated under the purview of FINRA, so the fact that they're \"\"located at\"\" NASDAQ or NYSE is a red herring.  (For example, from the volume data it's clear that the NASDAQ facility does not only handle NASDAQ-listed (Tape C) securities, nor does the NYSE facility only handle NYSE-listed (Tape A) securities or anything like that.) The number of institutions reporting to each of the TRFs is large -- many more than the 11 public exchanges -- so the TRF data is not broken down further.  (Also I think the whole point of the TRFs is to report in secret.)  I don't know enough details to say why the NASDTRF has always handled more reporting volume than the other two facilities.  Of course, since we can't see inside the TRF reporting anyway, it's sort of a moot point.\""}
{"id": "215620", "text": "The way this works, as I understand it, is that financial advisers come in two kinds. Some are free to recommend you any financial products they think fit, but many are restricted in what they can recommend. Most advisers who work for finance companies are the second kind, and will only offer you products that their company sells. I believe they should tell you up front if they are the second kind. They should certainly tell you that if you ask. So in essence, your Scotiabank advisor is not necessarily making bad decisions for you - but they are restricted in what they will offer, and will not tell you if there is a better product for you that Scotiabank doesn't sell. In most cases, 'management fees' means something you pay to the actual managers of the fund you buy, not to the person who sells you the fund. You can compare the funds you are invested in yourself, both for performance and for the fees charged. Making frequent unnecessary changes of investment is another way that an advisor can milk you for money, but that is not necessarily restricted to bank-employed advisors. if you think that is happening to you, ask question, and change advisors if you are not happy."}
{"id": "215635", "text": ""}
{"id": "216365", "text": "At 22 years old, you can afford to be invested 100% in the stock market. Like many others, I recommend that you consider low cost index funds if those are available in your 401(k) plan. Since your 401(k) contributions are usually made with each paycheck this gives you the added benefit of dollar cost averaging throughout your career.  There used to be a common rule that you should put 100 minus your age as the percentage invested in the stock market and the rest in bonds, but with interest rates being so low, bonds have underperformed, so many experts now recommend 110 or even 120 minus your age for stocks percentage. My recommendation is that you wait until you are 40 and then move 25% into bonds, then increase it to 40% at 55 years old. At 65 I would jump to a 50-50 stock/bonds mix and when you start taking distributions I would move to a stable-value income portfolio. I also recommend that you roll your funds into a Vanguard IRA when you change jobs so that you take advantage of their low management fee index mutual funds (that have no fees for trading).  You can pick whatever mix feels best for you, but at your age I would suggest a 50-50 mix between the S&P 500 (large cap) and the Russell 2000 (small cap). Those with quarterly rebalancing will put you a little ahead of the market with very little effort."}
{"id": "216391", "text": "The problem is aggregating information from so many sources, countries, and economies.  You are probably more aware of local laws, local tax changes, local economic performance, etc, so it makes sense that you'd be more in tune with your own country.  If your intent is to be fully diversified, then buy a total world fund. A lot of hedge funds do what you are suggesting, but I think it requires either some serious math or some serious research. Note: I'm invested in emerging markets (EEM) for exactly the reason you suggest... diversification."}
{"id": "216404", "text": "Generally stock trades will require an additional Capital Gains and Losses form included with a 1040, known as Schedule D (summary) and Schedule D-1 (itemized).  That year I believe the maximum declarable Capital loss was $3000--the rest could carry over to future years. The purchase date/year only matters insofar as to rank the lot as short term or long term(a position held 365 days or longer), short term typically but depends on actual asset taxed then at 25%, long term 15%.  The year a position was closed(eg. sold) tells you which year's filing it belongs in. The tiny $16.08 interest earned probably goes into Schedule B, typically a short form. The IRS actually has a hotline 800-829-1040 (Individuals)  for quick questions such as advising which previous-year filing forms they'd expect from you.  Be sure to explain the custodial situation and that it all recently came to your awareness etc. Disclaimer: I am no specialist. You'd need to verify everything I wrote; it was just from personal experience with the IRS and taxes."}
{"id": "216441", "text": "Assuming this will be a taxable account (since you want to pull income off of it, although this will lower wealth growth), you could open a brokerage account at some place like Vanguard (free on their ETFs) and look at tax efficient index fund ETFs (such as total stock market or their 500 fund), including  some international (foreign tax credit is nice in taxable) and muni funds for the (tax advantaged) income, although CDs are likely better for the income at this point."}
{"id": "216708", "text": "\"I have a slightly different take on this, compared to the other answers. In general, I think your emergency fund should always be at least 3K, especially if you own a used car that is out of warranty. Any number of unlucky auto repairs could easily cost over 2K. So, if you have 7K in savings, I would personally buy a car that is 4K or less or finance any amount of the car over 4K (if you can get a relatively low interest rate). Then I would pay down the financed portion of the car as quickly as possible while maintaining at least a 3K emergency fund. That being said, notice I mentioned \"\"In general\"\". Your situation may actually be quite different. If you don't have much debt, with your income you might be able to build up a couple of thousand in savings in a single month, and if so the above doesn't really apply. Even if you spent the entire 7K on a car, you'd likely have at least 3K in your emergency fund within 60-90 days. As for what's responsible, there are too many factors to dictate that. If you don't have many other expenses, you could possibly afford a $40K car, and I don't think anyone here could fairly call that \"\"irresponsible\"\" if you spent that much, though surely no one would call it \"\"responsible\"\" either. Perhaps the best advice is to buy the least expensive car you will be happy with. Many people regret overspending on a vehicle, but few regret underspending (unless they got a lemon that requires lots of repairs). Finally, you could also consider another option. You could get a very cheap car for 1K or less and drive it for a year. By then you may have closer to 20K saved up for a much nicer car than you can afford today.\""}
{"id": "217030", "text": "\"Speaking from personal experience: I have had a credit card canceled for exactly this reason. It's happened to me three times, with two different providers (NatWest and Nationwide). After the third instance I stopped bothering to even carry a credit card. It's worth noting that all three were \"\"free\"\" cards in the sense that I paid no flat fee or subscription to get the cards. The only way the issuer could make a profit on them was through interest. I was also not a frequent user, carrying the card for convenience more than anything else, although I did make purchases on all three. So it's certainly a possibility. But I live in the UK and I'm guessing most of your other respondents do not. It may be a practice that's more common here than in the US. That might even explain the origin of the rumour.\""}
{"id": "217124", "text": "\"Check how long you have to hold the stock after buying it. If you can sell reasonably soon and your company is reasonably stable, you're unlikely to lose and/or be taxed and/or pay enough in fees to lose more than the 30% \"\"free money\"\" they're giving you.  Whether you hold it longer than the minimum time depends partly on whether you think you can better invest the money elsewhere, and partly on how you feel about having both your salary and (part of) your investments tied to the company's success? The company would like you to \"\"double down\"\" that way, in the theory that it may make you mors motivated... but some investment councelors would advise keeping that a relatively small part of your total investments, basically for the same reasons you are always advised to diversify.\""}
{"id": "217427", "text": "\"Two typical responses to articles/surveys making such claims:  **1. People use other forms of asset for emergency savings because interest rates are low - clearly false.**  **2. People use other forms of saving than a saving account therefore such surveys as the X% can't handle a $500 emergency are wrong on their face - this is false the vast majority use a savings account.**  I've chosen a topic that absolutely annoys the shit out of me every time it comes up, how people save their money. Every time this topic comes up about X% of americans can't come up with $Y dollars in an emergency or have less than $Z in savings someone inevitably chimes in with the linked response. I have *never* seen anyone attempt to source their hand waving response beyond their own anecdote, which is usually a thinly veiled brag about how financially savvy they are with their wealth. Perhaps people who have no assets, or crippling debt don't go out of their way to brag about it...  I could link multiple reddit posts making a similar response, which I address with my own stock response about once every 1-2 months. Instead I've decided to expand with data from several other sources. This is the prototypical good/bad research problem. If you're asserting something, but qualify your statement with, \"\"I\"\"m sure we'd find...if we looked into...\"\" then you're doing it wrong. A good researcher or journalist doesn't put bullshit like that in their work because it's their job to actually look for sources of data; data which should exist with multiple government and independent groups. So let's get started (all data as recent as I could find, oldest source is for 2010):  * [Most americans don't invest in the stock market](https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2014/pdf/scf14.pdf)  About 48.8% of americans owned publicly traded stock directly or indirectly, with a much smaller percent (13.8%) owning stock directly -  pages 18 and 16 respectively. It's important to note the predominance of indirect ownership which suggests this is mostly retirement accounts. It's entirely possible people are irresponsible with their emergency savings, but I think it safe to say we should not expect people to *dip into their retirement accounts* for relatively minor emergency expenses. The reason is obvious, even if it covers the expense they now have to make up the shortfall for their retirement savings. This is further supported by the same source:  &gt;\"\"The value of assets held within IRAs and DC plans are among the most significant compo-nents of many families\u2019 balance sheets and are a significant determinant of their future retirement security.\"\"  Ibid (page 20, PDF page 20 of 41)  There is also a break down of holdings by asset type on page 16, PDF page 16 of 41.  * [This data is skewed by the top 10% who keep more of their wealth in different asset types.](http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html) For a breakdown between the 1st, 10th, and 90th percentiles see **table 3.**  So far it seems pretty hard to maintain a large percent of americans have their wealth stored outside of savings accounts, mattresses aside.  * [Here's my original reply as to the breakdown of americans assets by type and percent holding.](https://imgur.com/a/DsLxB) Note this assumes people *have* assets. [Source for images/data.](https://www.census.gov/people/wealth/data/dtables.html)  Most people use savings accounts, with runner up falling to checking accounts. This will segue into our next topic which is the problem of unbanked/underbanked households.  * [A large number of individuals have no assets; breaking down by asset types assumes people *have* assets in the first place.](https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/)  To quote the FDIC:  &gt;*\"\"Estimates from the 2015 survey indicate that 7.0 percent of households in the United States were unbanked in 2015. This proportion represents approximately 9.0 million households. An additional 19.9 percent of U.S. households (24.5 million) were underbanked, meaning that the household had a checking or savings account but also obtained financial products and services outside of the banking system.\"\"*  That's right there are millions of households *so finance savvy* they don't even have banks accounts! Obviously it's because of low interest rates. Also, most people have a checking account as well as savings account, the percent with \"\"checking and savings\"\" was 75.8% while those with \"\"checking only\"\" were 22.2% (page 25, PDF page 31 of 88). It's possible in some surveys people keep all their money in checking, but given other data sources, and the original claim this fails to hold up. If the concern was interest rates it makes no sense to keep money in checking which seldom pays interest.  This survey also directly addresses the issue of \"\"emergency savings\"\":  &gt; *\"\"Overall, 56.3 percent of households saved for unexpected  expenses or emergencies in the past 12 months.\"\"* (page 37, PDF page 43 of 88)  Furthermore:  &gt;*\"\"Figure 7.2 shows that among all households that saved for  unexpected expenses or emergencies, savings accounts  were the most used savings method followed by checking  accounts:* **more than four in five (84.9 percent) kept savings  in one of these accounts.** *About one in ten (10.5 percent)  households that saved maintained savings in the home, or  with family or friends.\"\"*   Emphasis added.  * [Why don't people have wealth in different asset classes? Well they don't save money.](http://cdn.financialsamurai.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/savings-rates-by-wealth-class.png)  This is further supported by the OECD data:  * [Americans \"\"currency and deposits\"\" are 13% vs 5.8% for \"\"securities and other shares\"\" as % of total financial assets.](https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-financial-assets.htm)  Additionally:  * [Interest earning checking accounts: 44.6% of american households (second image)](https://imgur.com/a/DsLxB)  * [\"\"Among all households that saved for unexpected expenses or emergencies, savings accounts were the most used  savings method followed by checking accounts...\"\" (page 7, PDF page 13 of 88)](https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2015/2015report.pdf)  * ~70% saved for an emergency with a savings account vs ~24% who used checking. *Ibid.*  In fairness the FDIC link does state *banked* americans were more likely to hold checking accounts than savings accounts (98% vs ~77% respectively) but that doesn't mean they're earning interest in their checking account. It's also worth noting median transaction account value was for 2013 (this is the federal reserve data) $4100.\""}
{"id": "217437", "text": "\"no way -- he suggests that if you don't have an edge, no one needs to play the game. He doesn't like the idea of a \"\"lesser bad\"\" way to invest (MPT).   If you do decide to get involved in investing, then it's about absolute performance, not relative. He believes that the whole relative performance thing -- beating some arbitrary benchmark -- is just an artificial construct.\""}
{"id": "217837", "text": "why sell?  Because the stock no longer fits your strategy.  Or you've lost faith in the company. In our case, it's because we're taking our principal out and buying something else.  Our strategy is, basically, to sell (or offer to sell) after the we can sell and get our principal out, after taxes.  That includes dividends -- we reduce the sell price a little with every dividend collected."}
{"id": "218064", "text": "\"You don't offer any specifics, so I'm guessing a little about what you're talking about, but here's a few thoughts: Remember that all tax-related transactions are reconciled when you file. All of your activity for the year is totaled up and (for the most part) when during the year things happen is irrelevant.   Your gross taxable income is calculated (which will exclude any \"\"pre-tax\"\" activity, deduction applied (which will any include and \"\"post-tax\"\" deductions), tax liability calculated, and withholdings subtracted to get your net tax due.  Whether you have \"\"pre-tax\"\" activity and less tax withheld or \"\"after-tax\"\" activity with a deduction and reduce your net tax, the net effect should be the same.\""}
{"id": "218261", "text": "Should you care? From Vanguard: The long-term impact of investment costs on portfolio balances   Assuming a starting balance of $100,000 and a yearly return of 6%, which is reinvested Check out this chart, reflecting the impact of relatively small expense ratios on your 30 year return:  All else being equal you should very much care about expense ratios. You end up with a significantly smaller amount if your pre-expense return is the same. A 0.75% difference in ER compounds to 20% over 30 years. If so, how should I take them into consideration when comparing funds? I'm in the U.S. if that matters. If they track the same index, cheaper is better. The cases where higher expense ratios might be better are if you believe that index will outperform the market by enough to recoup the cost of the ER.  There is significant research that most funds do not do this."}
{"id": "218360", "text": "I thought this was because credit card companies charge the retailer a fee to accept credit card payments. If you spend $100, the retailer pays $1 (or whatever percentage they have negotiated) to the credit card provider.  Handing over $100 cash and paying $1 fee to Visa means a loss to the retailer. The same transaction on $100 worth of product means the loss is accepted out of the profit margin which the retailer accepts to attract custom."}
{"id": "218460", "text": "\"This may be closed as not quite PF, but really \"\"startup\"\" as it's a business question.  In general, you should talk to a professional if you have this type of question, specifics like this regarding your tax code. I would expect that as a business, you will use a proper paper trail to show that money, say 1000 units of currency, came in and 900 went out. This is a service, no goods involved. The transaction nets you 100, and you track all of this. In the end you have the gross profit, and then business expenses. The gross amount, 1000, should not be the amount taxed, only the final profit.\""}
{"id": "218484", "text": "Pretty simple: When is Cash Value Life Insurance a good or bad idea? It is never a good idea. How can life insurance possibly work as investment? It can't.  Just as car, home, or health insurance is not an investment.  Note for counter example providers:  intent to commit insurance fraud is not an investment. Why not live your life so in 15 or 20 years you are debt free, have a nice emergency fund built and have a few 100 thousand in investments?  Then you can self-insure.  If you die with a paid off home, no debt, 20K in a money market, and 550,000 in retirement accounts would your spouse and children be taken care of?"}
{"id": "218501", "text": "It would be quite the trick for (a) the government to run all year and get all its revenue in April when taxes are due and (b) for people to actually save the right amount to be able to cut that check each year. W2 employers withhold the estimated federal and state taxes along with the payroll (social security) tax from each paycheck. Since the employer doesn't know how many kids you have, or how much mortgage interest, etc you will take deductions for, you can submit a W4 form to adjust withholdings.   The annual Form 1040 in April is to reconcile exact numbers, some people get a refund of some of what they paid in, others owe some money.  If one is self-employed, they are required to pay quarterly estimated taxes. And they, too, reconcile exact numbers in April."}
{"id": "218858", "text": "I believe moving reimbursement has to be counted as income no matter when you get it. I'd just put it under miscellaneous income with an explanation."}
{"id": "219033", "text": "It is possible to not use checks in the US. I personally use a credit card for almost everything and often have no cash in my wallet at all. I never carry checks with me. If we wanted to, we could pay all of our monthly bills without checks as well, and many people do this. 30 years ago, grocery stores didn't generally accept credit cards, so it was cash or check, though most other kinds of stores and restaurants did. Now, the only stores that I have encountered in years that do not accept credit cards are a local chicken restaurant, and the warehouse-shopping store Costco. (Costco accepts its own credit card, but not Mastercard or Visa.) Still, we do pay the majority of our monthly bills via check, and it would not be shocking to see someone paying for groceries with a check. I can't name the last time I saw someone write a check at a store exactly, but I've never seen any cashier or other patrons wonder what a check-writer was trying to do. Large transactions, like buying a car or house, would still use checks -- probably cashier's or certified checks and not personal checks, though."}
{"id": "219061", "text": "This is one of those too good to be true things that is actually true. Why? Because only you can do this. Only you can deduct for primary home mortgage interest, only you can get a low cost mortgage (others would have to get investor mortgages at a higher interest rate). So its only a great deal for you. More people would do it if they could, but they can't, thats why you can and should do this. I have a similar setup and it is terrific."}
{"id": "219091", "text": "Thanks for the extra info on the property tax. So it sounds like it's going to be $1500 for a $150k house. I'm sure even if it's sold for $150 the state might still value it at $15k and you'll end up with $150 in property taxes which is basically nothing."}
{"id": "219208", "text": "Many mutual fund companies (including Vanguard when I checked many years ago) require smaller minimum investments (often $1000) for IRA and 401k accounts.  Some also allow for smaller investments into their funds for  IRA accounts if you set up an automatic investment plan that contributes  a fixed amount of money each month or each quarter.  On the other hand,  many mutual fund companies charge an annual account maintenance fee ($10? $20? $25? more?) per fund for IRA investments unless the balance in the fund is above a certain amount (often $5K or $10K$).  This fee can be paid in cash or deducted from the IRA investment, and the former option is vastly better. So, diversification into multiple funds while starting out with an IRA is not that great an idea. It is far better to get diversification through investment in an S&P 500 Index fund (VFINX since you won't have access to @JoeTaxpayer's VIIIX) or a Total Market Index fund or, if you prefer, a Target Retirement Fund, and then branch out into other types of mutual funds as your investment grows through future contributions and dividends etc. To answer your question about fund minimums, the IRA account is separate from a taxable investment account, and the minimum rule applies to each separately. But, as noted above, there often are smaller minimums for tax-deferred accounts."}
{"id": "219335", "text": "If you throw up a 20 year chart on the 10 year you can see it isn't fluctuating around 2%.  It happens to be at 2% now but it has been relentlessly driving lower for at least 20 years.  My own personal biased opinion is that it is a market infested with ultra-wealthy people who aren't looking for returns.  They just basically want to maintain what they already sucked out of the system."}
{"id": "219345", "text": "How would you compute the earnings for governments that are some of the main issuers of bonds and debt? When governments run deficits they would have a negative earnings ratio that makes the calculation quite hard to evaluate."}
{"id": "219398", "text": "Bitcoin can facilitate this, despite the risks associated with using bitcoin exchanges and the price volatility at any given time. The speed of bitcoin can limit your exposure to the bitcoin network to one hour.  Cyprus has a more advanced infrastructure than most countries to support bitcoin transactions, with Neo & Bee opening as a regulated bank/financial entity in Cyprus just two months ago, and ATM/Vending Machines existing for that asset. Anyway, you acquire bitcoin from an individual locally (in exchange for cash) or an exchange that does not require the same level of reporting as a bank account in Cyprus or Russia. No matter how you acquire the bitcoin, you transfer it to the exchange, sell bitcoin on the exchange for your desired currency (USD, EURO, etc), you instruct the exchange to wire the EURO to your cyprus bank account using your cyprus account's SWIFT code. The end.  Depending on the combination of countries involved, the exchange may still encounter similar withdrawal limitations until certain regulatory requirements are resolved.  Also, I'm unsure of the attitude toward bitcoin related answers on this site, so I tried to add a disclaimer about bitcoin's risks at the top, but that doesn't make this answer incorrect."}
{"id": "219421", "text": "No tax consequences to you. Tax consequences to your sister. From your comment: My sister is single, but my wife and I have a son. So we can avail   $14000 x3 = $42000 without the need to report it. The remainder   ($70000-$42000) = $28000 will be reported against the lifetime   exclusion by my sister on her return. Per my understanding, the $28000   is also not subject to any gift tax It is subject to gift tax, and she must submit gift tax return (form 709) to the IRS. On that return she can choose to apply part of the lifetime exemption and reduce the lifetime limit, or pay the tax and keep the lifetime limit. If she applies the exemption, she needs to keep track of it, so that it could be properly applied next time, or when she passes away. The lifetime exemption is in fact intended for the estate tax. But people can chose and apply it to gifts during lifetime and reduce the exemption for estate. This is something of consequence to take into account. Yearly $14K cap is not related to the lifetime exemption and is for gifts per donor per donee. Breaking the gift into several occasions over several years helps reducing the tax burden on the donor without touching the lifetime exclusion and affecting the estate tax. But if you don't have the time..."}
{"id": "219425", "text": "I think it depends on who is being paid for your app.  Do you have a company the is being paid?  Or is it you personally? If you have a company then that income will disappear by offsetting it through expenses to get the software developed. If they are paying you personally then you can probably still get the income to disappear by file home-office expenses. I think either way you need to talk to an accountant. If you don't want to mess with it since the amount of income is small then I would think you can file it as additional income (maybe a 1099)."}
{"id": "220063", "text": "\"If you are talking about a home office, you don't \"\"charge\"\" the business anything. If the area is used exclusively as an office you pro-rate by square footage just the actual expenses.  TurboTax recent published an article \"\"Can I Take the Home Office Deduction?\"\" which is a must read if you don't understand the process. (Note: I authored said article.)\""}
{"id": "220147", "text": "Options granted by an employer to an employee are generally different that the standardized options that are traded on public stock option exchanges.  They may or may not have somewhat comparable terms, but generally the terms are fairly different. As a holder of an expiring employee option, you can only choose to exercise it by paying the specified price and receiving the shares, or not.  It is common that the exercise system will allow you to exercise all the shares and simultaneously sell enough of the acquired shares to cover the option cost of all the shares, thus leaving you owning some of the stock without having to spend any cash.  You will owe taxes on the gain on exercise, regardless of what you do with the stock. If you want to buy publicly-traded options, you should consider that completely separately from your employer options other than thinking about how much exposure you have to your company situation.  It is very common for employees to be imprudently overexposed to their company's stock (through direct ownership or options)."}
{"id": "220187", "text": "\"a lot of companies will \"\"class\"\" their shares and the founders will hold on to the A class shares so that they can distribute more than 50% but still retain the majority of control over company decisions. A lot of this stuff is set out in the underwriting.\""}
{"id": "220230", "text": "So let's talk about the nation scale which is what the equation savings = investments is referring to.  In that context, does an investment merely mean the purchase of a financial asset or an investment in some physical asset or productive capital? I like to think of investment as building a factory, developing land, or spending money on R&amp;D. But in the economic sense, merely transforming cash into a financial asset like treasuries is also considered investment, correct? As a matter of fact, just merely leaving cash in a deposit account can technically be counted towards investment?  Am I understanding this correctly or am I fundamentally missing something?"}
{"id": "220433", "text": "Your basic assumption is incorrect. You don't normally go to a bank to borrow money to invest, but brokerages do it all the time. It is called trading on margin."}
{"id": "220608", "text": "\"Selling as well as buying a stock are part science and part art form.  I remember once selling a stock at its 52 week high too. That particular stock \"\"quadrupled\"\" in value over the next 52 weeks.  Mind you I made 50% ROI on the stock but my point is that none of us have a crystal ball on whether a particular stock will ever stop or start going up or stop or start going down. If someone had those answers they wouldn't be telling you they would be practicing them to make more money! Make up your mind what you want to make and stick by your decisions.  Bulls make money when stocks go up and Bears make money when they go down but pigs don't make money. -RobF\""}
{"id": "220834", "text": "Any time you are optimizing a portfolio, the right horizon to use for computing the statistics you will use for optimization (expected return, covariance, etc.) will be the same as your rebalance/trading frequency.  If you expect your trading strategy to trade once a day, you should use daily data for optimization.  Ditto for monthly or quarterly.  If at all possible you should use statistics across the board that are computed at the same frequency as your trading. Regarding currency pricing, I see no reason you can't take the reported prices and convert them to whatever currency you want using that day's foriegn exchange rate.  Foreign exchange rates are available for free at the Fed and elsewhere.  Converting prices from one currency to another is not rocket science. Since you are contemplating putting actual money behind this, note that using data to compute statistics is less reliable for lower statistical moments.  The mean (expected return) is the first moment, so using historical returns is extremely unreliable at predicting future returns.  The variances and covariances are second moments, they are better.  Skewness and kurtosis, yet better.  The fact that the expected return can't reliably be estimated from past returns is the major downfall of the Markowitz method (resulting portfolios are often very crazy and will depend critically on the data period you use to set them up).   There are approaches to fixing this, such as Black-Litterman's (1992) method, but they get complicated fast."}
{"id": "221113", "text": "&gt;if I loan you $500 a night every night for 5 days and those loans allow you to earn $100 totally risk free how much have I loaned you? Does it even matter, because the end of result is I essentially gave you $100.  A bank lends me $10k to start a business.  I eventually make $5 million dollars with my business.  How much was my loan?  DOESN'T MATTER, THE BANK GAVE ME $5 MILLION."}
{"id": "221277", "text": "There are Patterns inside of Patterns. You will see short term patterns (flags / pennants) inside of long term patterns (trend lines, channels) and typically you want to trade those short term patterns in line with the direction of the long term pattern.  Take a look at the attached chart of GPN. I would like to recommend two excellent books on Chart Patterns. Richard W. Schabacker book he wrote in the 1930's. It is the basis for modern technical pattern analysis.  Technical Analysis and Stock Market Profits  Peter Brandt Diary of a Professional Commodity Trader. He takes you through analysis and trades."}
{"id": "221281", "text": "I've actually had the same problem several years running, and it's solved by filing my corporate taxes, then taking those schedules, and applying them to my 1040, along with a Schedule C  You'll want to work with an accountant on this, but basically you're going to take the total set of business expenses as 1 chunk, then write them off your income (as one chunk).  I always recommend an accountant for this, but that's the general idea that I've used, and for the last 10 years, it's worked great."}
{"id": "221293", "text": "Doesn't work as it would be inflationary.  Businesses would raise prices knowing they could get more revenue. This cycles throughout the supply chains which in turn cause prices of other products to increase etc.  And why on earth you wouldn't means test something like this beyond me."}
{"id": "221479", "text": "I can tell you the reason the people who are calling you think you ought to use life insurance as an investment. What they will tell you: It is a way to avoid taxes. What they are thinking: It is a way for me to sell an investment with a huge commission. Whole life insurance as an investment really doesn't make sense for all but a very small minority of investors. If you have people that depend on your income to survive, buy term life insurance. It is much more practical and affordable."}
{"id": "221747", "text": "One can have a self-directed IRA. This is not like a Schwab, eTrade, etc IRA. It has a special type of custodian that knows how to manage it.  I became aware of such an account as a way to purchase a rental property. There were two issues. The type of property I looked at wasn't anything a bank was willing to finance. And the rules regarding self dealing added a potential layer of expense as I technically could not perform the simplest of things for the property.  For you, the obstacle looks like self-dealing. Any IRA can only be funded with cash or transfer/conversion from another IRA/401(k). I don't know how you would get the intelligent property into the IRA in the first place. Once you own a patent, or anything else, you can't sell it into the IRA.  It's at times like this that member littleadv would suggest this is the time to talk to a pro before you do anything hazardous to your wealth."}
{"id": "221869", "text": "\"If the stock is below its purchase price, there is no way to exit the position immediately without taking losses. Since presumably you had Good Reasons for buying that stock that haven't changed overnight, what you should probably do is just hold it and wait for the stock to come back up. Otherwise you're putting yourself into an ongoing pattern of \"\"buy high, sell low\"\", which is precisely what you don't want to do. If you actually agree with the market that you made a mistake and believe that the stock will not recover any part of the loss quickly (and indeed will continue going down), you could sell immediately and take your losses rather than waiting and possibly taking more losses. Of course if the stock DOES recover you've made the wrong bet. There are conditions under which the pros will use futures to buffer a swing. But that's essentially a side bet, and what it saves you has to be balanced against what it costs you and how certain you are that you NOW can predict the stock's motion. This whole thing is one of many reasons individuals are encouraged to work with index funds, and to buy-and-hold, rather than playing with individual stocks. It is essentially impossible to reliably \"\"time the market\"\", so all you can do is research a stock to death before making a bet on it. Much easier, and safer, to have your money riding on the market as a whole so the behavior of any one stock doesn't throw you into a panic. If you can't deal with the fact that stocks go down as well as up, you probably shouldn't be in the market.\""}
{"id": "222030", "text": "Maryland is one of only two states (as of the writing of that article) that collects both inheritance tax and estate tax. These are two different issues, and it's important to differentiate between them sufficiently. I can't provide you a definitive answer, so consult a tax professional in Maryland for specific details to make sure you don't run afoul of tax authorities. This blog has a nice summary of the differences, as of 2012: The estate tax is assessable if more than one million dollars passes at death.  The total dollar value of the property determines whether there is an estate tax.  The inheritance tax is not dependent upon the value of the estate, as even very small estates can have inheritance tax imposed.  Inheritance tax is assessed on property given to a person who is further removed in relationship than a sibling.  Thus, for example, a 10% tax will be assessed on property passing to a cousin, niece, nephew or friend.  Another section of the page states, as an example: If you give someone $10,000 in cash, the inheritance tax will simply reduce the amount inherited \u2013 in this case to $9,000. There are several other exemptions to the inheritance tax in addition to the immediate family exception discussed above: Property that passes from a decedent to or for the use of a grandparent, parent, spouse, child or other lineal descendant, spouse of a child or other lineal descendant, stepparent, stepchild, brother or sister of the decedent, or a corporation if all of its stockholders consist of the surviving spouse, parents, stepparents, stepchildren, brothers, sisters, and lineal descendants of the decedent and spouses of the lineal descendants. Putting this information together makes me think that the inheritance wouldn't be taxable in your case because it's a cash inheritance from an immediate family member, so it qualifies for one of the exemptions. Since I'm not a tax professional, however, I can't say that for sure. Hopefully these pages will give you enough of a foundation for when you talk to a professional."}
{"id": "222082", "text": "There are a few things to consider. The answers others gave here are correct, but I'll offer some reasons you may not want to roll to an IRA:"}
{"id": "222372", "text": "David Schechtmann provide the best services are set this week for a US soldier from Tennessee who was unaccounted for after being killed by German troops during World War II.Media outlets reports a funeral for Pfc. Reece Gass will be held Saturday at Doughty-Stevens Funeral Home in Greeneville. He\u2019ll be buried with full military honors at a cemetery in Cross Anchor."}
{"id": "222444", "text": "If I were in your shoes, I would invest conservatively fully aware that for the next few years the stock market is going to be depressed, but then again, don't take that as advice.  Every situation is different, weigh the pros and cons carefully and if required, consult a qualified professional."}
{"id": "222505", "text": "A target date fund is NOT a world market index. There is no requirement that it be weighted based on the weights of the various world stock markets. If anything, historically (since the invention of target date funds), a 2:1 ratio is actually pretty low. 6:1 is, or was, probably more common. Just a token amount to non-US investments."}
{"id": "222522", "text": "\"You make a good point, it's practically another \"\"pump and dump\"\" scheme for them no matter what actually happens to Bitcoin.  And I find the overall increase in debt in US to be an ongoing concern for the US markets. Until Moody's gives us back are old credit rating I'm not going to hold out high-hopes for an improvement.\""}
{"id": "222577", "text": "The data for ES_F normally is joined on the contract expiry date, i.e. june is joined to the next month on the expiry date.  The discrepancy to the real thing in practice might be significant, as seasonal strategies (as we call these) are mined fairly often."}
{"id": "222639", "text": "\"For some studies on why investors make the decisions they do, check out  For a more readable, though less rigorous, look at it, also consider Kahneman's recent book, \"\"Thinking, Fast and Slow\"\", which includes the two companion papers written with Tversky on prospect theory. In certain segments (mostly trading) of the investing industry, it is true that something like 90% of investors lose money. But only in certain narrow segments (and most folks would rightly want traders to be counted as a separate beast than an 'investor').  In most segments, it's not true that most investors lose money, but it still is true that most investors exhibit consistent biases that allow for mispricing. I think that understanding the heuristics and biases approach to economics is critical, both because it helps you understand why there are inefficiencies, and also because it helps you understand that quantitative, principled investing is not voodoo black magic; it's simply applying mathematics for the normative part and experimental observations for the descriptive part to yield a business strategy, much like any other way of making money.\""}
{"id": "222646", "text": "thanks! hence the etf - I hoped to get an ETF of say 20-25 positions, out of which 12 will lose in value, 10 will stay flat or lose a bit, and 2-3 go AAPL, bringing the total ETF up by a solid 10% or so :) and then the divident game begins."}
{"id": "223170", "text": "Since your YouTube income is considered self-employment income and because you probably already made more than $400 in net income (after deducting expenses from the $4000 you've received so far), you will have to pay self-employment tax and file a return.  This is according to the IRS's Publication 17 (2016), Your Federal Income Tax, so assumes the same rules for 2016 will remain in effect for 2017: You are self-employed if you: Carry on a trade or business as a sole proprietor, Are an independent contractor, Are a member of a partnership, or Are in business for yourself in any other way. Self-employment can include work in addition to your regular full-time business activities, such as certain part-time work you do at home or in addition to your regular job. You must file a return if your gross income is at least as much as the filing requirement amount for your filing status and age (shown in Table 1-1). Also, you must file Form 1040 and Schedule SE (Form 1040), Self-Employment Tax, if: Your net earnings from self-employment (excluding church employee income) were $400 or more, or You had church employee income of $108.28 or more. (See Table 1-3.) Use Schedule SE (Form 1040) to figure your self-employment tax. Self-employment tax is comparable to the social security and Medicare tax withheld from an employee's wages. For more information about this tax, see Pub. 334, Tax Guide for Small Business. I'd also note that your predicted income is getting close to the level where you would need to pay Estimated Taxes, which for self-employed people work like the withholding taxes employers remove their employees paychecks and pay to the government. If you end up owing more than $1000 when you file your return you could be assessed penalties for not paying the Estimated Taxes. There is a grace period if you had to pay no taxes in the previous year (2016 in this case), that could let you escape those penalties."}
{"id": "223338", "text": "Since you only own half of the house, you would most likely need the cooperation of whoever owns the other half in order to use it as collateral for a loan, but if you can do that, there's no reason you couldn't do what you're talking about.  The complication is that if you default on the loan, the bank isn't going to seize half of the house.  They'll repossess the entire house, sell it, and take what they're owed out of the proceeds, leaving you and whoever owns the other 50% to fight over the remnants. Even if the owner of the other half is family, they may be hesitant to risk losing the house if you don't pay your mortgage, so this could be a dicey conversation."}
{"id": "223551", "text": "Lots of good advice on investing already. You may also want to think about two things: A Bausparvertrag. You can set this up for different monthly saving rates. You'll get a modest interest payment, and once you have saved up enough (the contract is zuteilungsreif), you will be eligible for a loan at a low rate. However, you can only use the loan for building, buying or renovating real estate. With interest rates as low as they are right now, this is not overly attractive. However, depending on your salary, you may qualify for subsidies, and these could indeed be rather attractive. This may be helpful (in German). A Riester-Rente. This is a subsidized saving scheme - you save something every year and again get subsidies at the end of the year. I think the salary thresholds where you qualify for a subsidy are a bit higher for the Riester-Rente than for a Bausparvertrag, and even if you don't qualify for a subsidy, your contributions will be deducted from your taxable income. I wouldn't invest all my leftover money in these, considering that you commit yourself for the medium to long term, but they might well be attractive options for at least part of your money, say 20-25% of what you aim at saving every month. Finally, as others have written: banks and insurance companies exist to make money, and they live off their provisions. Get an independent financial advisor you pay by the hour, who doesn't get provisions, and have him help you."}
{"id": "223624", "text": "Yes, you need to include income from your freelance work on your tax return.  In the eyes of the IRS, this is self-employment income from your sole-proprietorship business. The reason you don't see it mentioned in the 1040EZ instructions is that you can't use the 1040EZ form if you have self-employment income.  You'll need to use the full 1040 form.  Your business income and expenses will be reported on a Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ, and the result will end up on Line 12 of the 1040.  Take a look at the requirements at the top of the C-EZ form; you probably meet them and can use it instead of the more complicated C form. If you have any deductible business expenses related to your freelance business, this would be done on Schedule C or C-EZ. If your freelance income was more than $400, you'll also need to pay self-employment tax.  To do this, you file Schedule SE, and the tax from that schedule lands on form 1040 Line 57."}
{"id": "223870", "text": "Most of it is probably due to ignorance and disbelief. A few years ago, I started doing week-long trades with my IRA. For a while I would make money each time, and over the first year I had about a 20% rate of return. If you asked me if I thought I was smarter than other people in the market, I would've told you no - I just spent more time, and most people accepted a small financial penalty for not having to spend the time directly managing their portfolio. Then I made a few poor choices, and all my previous earnings disappeared quickly. In the short term, yeah, things were great, but that didn't extrapolate out. So now that I'm a few years into investing, I'm almost entirely in index funds."}
{"id": "224345", "text": "I would say that there is no real difference.  Asset management companies that is part of large banking groups usually seat in separate entities and operate independently from the rest of the bank. Assuming proper procedures (and regulators usually check that) are in place they will not share information with the rest of the bank and their assets are clearly segregated from the rest of the bank. They have the same fiduciary duties as an independent AM and are probably using the broker/dealer services of other banks as well as their parent. Reputation is a key issue for banks and conflict of interests are usually managed properly. Independence also comes and goes. The corporate history of Neuberger Berman is a good example. Neuberger Berman was once an independent asset manager. In 2003, it merged with Lehman Brothers, thus loosing its independence. When Lehman went bankrupt in 2008, NB did not join its parent company in bankruptcy and did not lose the assets of its clients. The company continued to operate until it was acquired by the management. Finally it is mostly a question of marketing and positioning."}
{"id": "224371", "text": "\"A couple of distinctions. First, if you were to \"\"invest in real estate\"\" were you planning to buy a home to live in, or buy a home to rent out to someone else?  Buying a home as a primary residence really isn't \"\"investing in real estate\"\" per se.  It's buying a place to live rather than renting one.  Unless you rent a room out or get a multi-family unit, your primary residence won't be income-producing.  It will be income-draining, for the most part.  I speak as a homeowner. Second, if you are buying to rent out to someone else, buying a single home is quite a bit different than buying an REIT.  The home is a lot less liquid, the transaction costs are higher, and all of your eggs are in one basket.  Having said that, though, if you buy one right and do your homework it can set you on the road for a very comfortable retirement.\""}
{"id": "224392", "text": "On what basis did you do your initial allocation of funds to each stock?   If you are 're-balancing' that implies returning things to their initial allocation.  You can do this without any research or recommendations. If you started out with say 10 stocks and 10% of the funds allocated to each stock, then re-balancing would simply be either buying/selling to return to that initial allocation.  If you are contributing to the portfolio you could adjust where the new money goes to re-balance without selling.  Or if you are drawing money from the portfolio, then you could adjust what you are selling. If on the other hand you are trying to decide if you want to alter the stocks the portfolio is HOLDING, then you have an entirely different question from 're-balancing'"}
{"id": "224438", "text": "for starters get a cheap easy accounting software pack like quickbooks and have the salesmen train you on it's use and set-up. the 50k you put into the company will count as paid up share capital. then any future withdrawal from company account will show as loan to director."}
{"id": "224530", "text": "\"Logic fail. The qty of shares is irrelevant. What matters is the value, which is, of course, quite high -- and, what's more, the P/E ratio, which is extremely favorable. Having worked in operations at Apple for 7 years, I can tell you that the company is very lean and efficient.  25% matching is extremely generous. 25% contribution rates are standard in corporate jobs (contribution rates are what maximum percentage of your pre-tax income you can opt to set aside into a 401K; this is different than matching). It absolutely is not bare bones to be given 25% matching. Although I no longer work at Apple, I still have my 401K, and the administration of it is good, as is the choice of funds. Back to the matching... It's free money. For every $1 you put in your 401K (pretax, btw), Apple puts in a quarter. Having worked in other corporations over my career, I can tell you that this level of matching is pretty much as good as it gets.   For a good part of the time I worked there I made around $30K (not in Retail, but in Operations, as mentioned before). I maxed out the Employee Stock Purchase Program contribution and mostly maxed out my 401K contribution. Now, 12 years later, my stock appreciated beyond my wildest expectations. I have made well over six figures on it over the years. If I never sold any, it would be worth over $500,000 by now. All that from 10% contributions on a salary that ranged from about $26K when I started out to about $46K when I left 7 years later. My 401K holdings are worth about $60K, I think, invested extremely conservatively. I have had it in money market funds since right before the 2008/2009 crash, which I anticipated.  So the investment benefits at Apple served me extremely well. My stock appreciation paid for my car, and it will soon cover the down payment on a house. I was essentially able to \"\"retire\"\" to be a stay-at-home-mom when my son was born, thanks to the safety net I have from my Apple stock.  Regarding health benefits...  I think you meant to say copays, not deductibles. When I was there, there were no copays. I forgot what the deductibles were, but for most routine visits, you wouldn't need to pay out of pocket. Annual physicals are included in the health plan, up to $250. The health plan works with various local providers to ensure that the $250 allotment will cover all expenses needed for an annual physical. This physical is separate and in addition to a women's health annual exam (pap smear/pelvic exam/etc) that is also included without copay. I'm pretty sure annual mammograms are covered. All prenatal visits are covered with zero copay. All child well checks, including immunizations, covered with zero copay. Two dental checks a year. Dental Xrays at regular intervals included. Annual vision exams and, I think $300 annually towards glasses or contacts included, IIRC.   Time off was pretty standard and accrued by the hour worked, which was nice. There was no \"\"you have to be with the company for X length of time\"\" before time off benefits began to accrue, or before any benefits kicked in, for that matter. By about Year 5, I had easily racked up enough vacation days to take 3 weeks off at a time. The longer you have been with the company, the faster your time off accrues. And each summer they'd offer a cash-out program, where you could double up on time off, where if you took off a week, you could opt to deplete your accrued vacation time by two weeks and get double pay for it. A lot of people liked this option.  The points for absenteeism thing seemed a bit silly -- and seemed to only have been implemented in one store and then only for a brief time. From what I gathered in the article, it was an experiment that failed miserably.  The other corporation I have spent a significant amount of time working at is Whole Foods Market, in their corporate office. While both Apple and Whole Foods always are selected as two of the top companies to work for by Forbes in their annual report, as far as benefits went, Apple's were far superior in most aspects. With respect to company culture, I personally found Whole Foods to be better, but that was sort of a personal preference. Both were dream jobs, and I consider myself very fortunate to have had the opportunity to work for two outstanding companies that both treated me very well.  Oh- and incidentally, Ron Johnson, who was VP of Retail at Apple from the inception of the stores until like a year ago, now is CEO of JC Penny, and, I suspect, is fully behind JCP's ad campaigns which include images of families with same-sex parents. JCP has stepped deliberately and full-on into what is, unfortunately, still a controversial topic and has taken a firm stand in support of all types of loving families. I have to wonder if part of this might have been inspired by the fact that Apple's new CEO, Tim Cook, is gay. Ron Johnson would have worked closely alongside Cook during his tenure. I met Ron once and found him to be a great guy, and I worked with the Retail operations folks from the time the stores launched. They were a great team that worked hard and were very sincere and dedicated. You could see his leadership reflecting in each member of the team.\""}
{"id": "224816", "text": "Littleadv has given you excellent general advice, but to my mind, the most important part of it all and the path which I will strongly recommend you follow, is the suggestion to look into a mutual fund. I would add even more strongly,  go to a mutual fund company directly    and make an investment with them directly instead of making the    investment through a brokerage account.  Pick an index fund with low expenses, e.g. there are S&P 500 index funds available with  expenses that are a fraction of 1%. (However, many also require minimum investments on the order of $2500 or $3000 except for IRA accounts).  At this time, your goal should be to reduce expenses as much as possible because expenses, whether they be in brokerage fees which may be directly visible to you or mutual fund expenses which are invisible to you, are what will eat away at your return far more than the difference between the returns of various investments."}
{"id": "225106", "text": "\"NORMALLY, you don't want to buy in a bad neighborhood. The one exception is \"\"gentrification,\"\" that is middle class people are moving in because of a good location (which you seem to have). The other important thing to do is to cover your mortgage. Four \"\"guys\"\" at $500 a month will do for an $1800 mortgage. The nice thing is that you are your own tenant for two years and can watch the place. The downside of the neighborhood may be that you can't rent the place to four \"\"girls\"\" or two girls and two guys even after you leave; it will always have to be \"\"guys.\"\"  I'd advise most people to pass. With your financial standing and entrepreneurial background, you might just be able to take this risk, and learn from it for your future dealings if it doesn't pan out. (Donald Trump \"\"cut his teeth\"\" on a slum complex in Cincinnati.) Hear what I (and others) have to say, then do what \"\"feels right,\"\" based on your best judgment, of which you probably have plenty.\""}
{"id": "225120", "text": "She filed for 0 withholdings in her W4, so my (unprofessional) guess   was that she'd be owed money, and therefore the IRS wouldn't care much   if she didn't file her taxes.\u2020 Maybe, but doesn't she want that money back? Is she at as much risk as any other individual of being audited and   penalized to the same degree if she skips filing her taxes? Audited and penalized are not the same. She's at the same risk of being audited, and even slightly higher since the IRS got reports of her wages, but didn't get the matching report from her. They may want to ask why. But it doesn't mean she's going to be penalized for anything. Being audited doesn't mean you did something wrong. Or does the IRS tend to overlook such individuals. The IRS might want to overlook because they're the ones owning money. She cannot get a refund without filing a tax return. She'd file her taxes today if she could, but the worry is that time's   running out Filing an extension is free and it postpones the deadline to file till OCTOBER!"}
{"id": "225162", "text": "Assuming a USA taxable account: Withdrawing funds from a brokerage account has nothing to do with taxes. Taxes are owed on the profit when you sell a stock, no matter what you do with the funds. Taxes are owed on any dividends the stock produces, no matter what you do with the dividend. The brokerage sends you a form 1099 each year that shows the amounts of dividends and profits. You have to figure out the taxes from that."}
{"id": "225292", "text": "Lobby lobby lobby, Don't invest in renewable the returns are god awful.   Renewable's are so rational and logical as a future energy source that I can't see it being any other way. Producing energy that replenishes over time seems like a no brainer"}
{"id": "225395", "text": "\"Yep, most 401k options suck. You'll have access to a couple dozen funds that have been blessed by the organization that manages your account. I recently rolled my 401k over into a self-directed IRA at Fidelity, and I have access to the entire mutual fund market, and can trade stocks/bonds if I wish.  As for a practical solution for your situation: the options you've given us are worryingly vague -- hopefully you're able to do research on what positions these funds hold and make your own determination. Quick overview: Energy / Utilities: Doing good right now because they are low-risk, generally high dividends. These will underperform in the short-term as the market recovers. Health Care: riskier, and many firms are facing a sizable patent cliff. I am avoiding this sector. Emerging Markets: I'm also avoiding this due to the volatility and accounting issues, but it's up to you. Most large US companies have \"\"emerging markets\"\" exposure, so not necessary for to invest in a dedicated fund in my unprofessional opinion. Bonds: Avoid. Bonds are at their highest levels in decades. Short-term they might be ok; but medium-term, the only place to go is down. All of this depends on your age, and your own particular investment objectives. Don't listen to me or anyone else without doing your own research.\""}
{"id": "225536", "text": "You should definitely favor holding bonds in tax-advantaged accounts, because bonds are not tax-efficient. The reason is that more of their value comes in the form of regular, periodic distributions, rather than an increase in value as is the case with stocks or stock funds. With stocks, you can choose to realize all that appreciation when it is most advantageous for you from a tax perspective. Additionally, stock dividends often receive lower tax rates. For much more detail, see Tax-efficient fund placement."}
{"id": "225593", "text": "Well this is not the best situation.  Sorry to your friend. First off ROTHs are out, you need earned income.  Secondly, I don't think the focus should be on retirement planning until there is again an earned income.  Thirdly, this person is just in a bad spot. Lets assume that you can find some really good mutual funds, that consistently return 10% per year.  At best this person can only pull out 10K per year without touching principle.  At that income level, taxes are not much of a concern; not as much as surviving.  If this person knows anything about investing, they know funds don't work like this.  They could be down 5%, down 5%, up ~40% in three years to give an average of 10% return.  Which of course further complicates matters.     This person (IMO) should seek to start a different career.  One that can cater to any long term issues this person has with pain/disability.  The money could be used toward training/education in order to get money flowing again.  That is not to say the full amount should be used for a BA in Russian Folk Literature, but some minimum training to get a career that starts earning real money."}
{"id": "225718", "text": "There is no fixed formulae, its more of how much you can negotiate Vs how many others are willing to work at a lower cost. Typically in software industry the rates for part time work would be roughly in the range of 1.5 to 2 times that of the full time work for the same job. With the above premise roughly the company would be willing to pay $100,000 for 2000 hrs of Part time work(1), translating into around $50 per hour. How much you actually get would depend on if there is someone else who can work for less say at $30 at hour. (1) The company does not have 2000 hrs of work and hence its engaging part time worker instead of full time at lesser cost."}
{"id": "225925", "text": "Cutting 25% from pensions is a big deal. This is why I'm going to get out of the company pension. If the money isn't mine, what is it? Are they giving me more return on my interest than normal to make up for the fact they can decide to back out of the agreement at any point? No."}
{"id": "226053", "text": "Basically the first thing you should do before you invest your money is to learn about investing and learn about what you want to invest in. Another thing to think about is that usually low risk can also mean low returns. As you are quite young and have some savings put aside you should generally aim for higher risk higher return investments and then when you start to reach retirement age aim for less risky lower return investments. In saying that, just because an investment is considered high risk does not mean you have to be exposed to the full risk of that investment. You do this by managing your risk to an acceptable level which will allow you to sleep at night. To do this you need to learn about what you are investing in. As an example about managing your risk in an investment, say you want to invest $50,000 in shares. If you put the full $50,000 into one share and that share price drops dramatically you will lose a large portion of your money straight away. If instead you spent a maximum of $10,000 on 5 different shares, even if one of them falls dramatically, you still have another 4 which may be doing a lot better thus minimising your losses. To take it one step further you might say if anyone of the shares you bought falls by 20% then you will sell those shares and limit your losses to $2000 per share. If the worst case scenario occurred and all 5 of your shares fell during a stock market crash you would limit your total losses to $10,000 instead of $50,000. Most successful investors put just as much if not more emphasis on managing the risk on their investments and limiting their losses as they do in selecting the investments. As I am not in the US, I cannot really comment whether it is the right time to buy property over there, especially as the market conditions would be different in different states and in different areas of each state. However, a good indication of when to buy properties is when prices have dropped and are starting to stabilise. As you are renting at the moment one option you might want to look at is buying a place to live in so you don't need to rent any more. You can compare your current rent payment with the mortgage payment if you were to buy a house to live in. If your mortgage payments are lower than your rent payments then this could be a good option. But whatever you do make sure you learn about it first. Make sure you spend the time looking at for sale properties for a few months in the area you want to buy before you do buy. This will give you an indication of how much properties in that area are really worth and if prices are stable, still falling or starting to go up. Good luck, and remember, research, research and more research. Even if you are to take someone elses advice and recommendations, you should learn enough yourself to be able to tell if their advice and recommendations make sense and are right for your current situation."}
{"id": "226248", "text": "\"VaR is statistical, so you can set the confidence interval to 5%, 1%, 0.01%, etc. VaR is the same thing as standard deviation applied over a specific time frame, its just a matter how you come up with it. For example the 95% VaR is something like 1.65 standard deviations of the returns. as you increase the number of std dev (Z score), you're confidence interval widens and you capture more of the outliers. if you set it to 99.99%, you can envision the return distributions for all but the .01%. choose between the 2? VaR is more practical on a day to day, but shortfall is better for extreme events, like 2008 when lehman collapsed or the russian debt crisis when yields blew out.  VaR has a lot of caveats about it, in that it considers everything \"\"under normal market conditions\"\". reality is, under normal market conditions, you're less concerned about risk. you want to know expectations when things go really wrong. VaR is best used as part of a risk management package, in conjunction with stress tests, duration/ DV01, liquidity analysis, etc, but its sort of leaves a lot of holes as a standalone. from a reporting and regulatory standpoint, VaR is generally accepted, and many firms reporting one day VaR in their financials (JPM, Goldman).  tracking error tends to be company specific. from what i've seen, its mostly funds who have to manage to a benchmark, like a pension or FoF with a specific mandate, so they can't have too much deviation from that. you'll see this with beta too, but its the same idea.   capital adequacy is slightly different from market risk. your PB or whoever will asses your portfolio holdings and apply a haircut to them based on risk and liquidity. for example you'll get close to 100% margin credit for stocks, but only a fraction of that applied to your account for a CDO^2 since liquidity is non-existent.\""}
{"id": "226287", "text": "\"According to communication expert and author of Small Message, Big Impact: The Elevator Speech Effect, Terri Sjodin defines an elevator speech this way:  &gt;\"\"An elevator speech is a brief presentation that introduces a product, service, philosophy, or an idea. The name suggests the notion that the message should be delivered in the time span of an elevator ride, up to about three minutes. Its general purpose is to intrigue and inspire the listener to want to hear more of the presenter's complete proposition in the near future.\"\"\""}
{"id": "226496", "text": "It's actually quite simple. You're actually confusing two concept. Which are taking a short position and short selling itself. Basically when taking a short position is by believing that the stock is going to drop and you sell it. You can or not buy it back later depending on the believe it grows again or not. So basically you didn't make any profit with the drop in the price's value but you didn't lose money either.  Ok but what if you believe the market or specific company is going to drop and you want to profit on it while it's dropping. You can't do this by buying stock because you would be going long right? So back to the basics. To obtain any type of profit I need to buy low and sell high, right? This is natural for use in long positions. Well, now knowing that you can sell high at the current moment and buy low in the future what do you do? You can't sell what you don't have. So acquire it. Ask someone to lend it to you for some time and sell it. So selling high, check.  Now buying low? You promised the person you would return him his stock, as it's intangible he won't even notice it's a different unit, so you buy low and return the lender his stock. Thus you bought low and sold high, meaning having a profit. So technically short selling is a type of short position. If you have multiple portfolios and lend yourself (i.e. maintaining a long-term long position while making some money with a short term short-term strategy) you're actually short selling with your own stock. This happens often in hedge funds where multiple strategies are used and to optimise the transaction costs and borrowing fees, they have algorithms that clear (match) long and short coming in from different traders, algorithms, etc. Keep in mind that you while have a opportunities risk associated.  So basically, yes, you need to always 'borrow' a product to be able to short sell it. What can happen is that you lend yourself but this only makes sense if:"}
{"id": "226519", "text": "I would take each of these items and any others and consider how you would count it as an expense in the other direction. If you have an account for parking expenses or general transportation funds, credit that account for a refund on your parking. If you have an account for expenses on technology purchases, you would credit that account if you sell a piece of equipment as you replace it with an upgrade. If you lost money (perhaps in a jacket) how would you account for the cash that is lost? Whatever account would would subtract from put a credit for cash found."}
{"id": "226628", "text": "Hey Sheehan, I believe Schwab provides this info.  None of the online free portfolio managers I know of gives you this info.  The now defunct MS Money used to have this. The best thing to do is to use a spreadsheet.  Or you could use the one I use.  http://www.moneycone.com/did-you-beat-the-market-mr-investor/ . (disclaimer: that's my blog)"}
{"id": "226864", "text": "I fail to see how that changes the point. And no I'm not suggesting that an economics education is (completely) worthless but it's meant to be used as a framework for good public policy. Increasingly it has not served that goal very well but has done an excellent job of increasing wealth disparity."}
{"id": "226962", "text": "While it is true that if the Federal reserve bank makes a change in their rate there is not an immediate change in the other rates that impact consumers; there is some linkage between the federal rate, and the costs of banks and other lenders regarding borrowing money. Of course the cost of borrowing money does impact the costs for businesses looking to expand, which does impact their ability to hire more workers and expand capacity. A change in business expansion does impact employment and unemployment... Then changes in employment can cause a change in raises, which can cause changes in prices which is inflation... Plus the lenders that lend to business see the flow of new loans change as the employment outlook change.  If the costs of doing business for the bank changes or the flow of loans change, they do adjust the rates they pay depositors and the rates they charge borrowers... How long it will take to change the cost of an auto loan? No way to tell.  Keep in mind that in complex systems, change can be delayed, and won't move in lock step. For example the price of gas\\s doesn't always move the same way a price of a barrel of oil does."}
{"id": "226970", "text": "IMHO these people need to understand finance.  I think Dave Ramsey is the best for this kind of situation.  They need their butts kicked.  What kind of parent spends money on playing cards when they have a child and not a place of their own?  Answer:  Parents that needs to grow up.   Most of all they probably have an income problem.  I would assume that the husband stays at home because he does not earn enough to justify quality child care.  Okay how about he cares for a few other kids and turns watching one kid into an income stream?  Duh? Giving them money will only hurt them in the long run.  They are holding onto childhood, avoiding becoming adults.  No amount of money you can give them will dig them out of their rut, in fact it may only prolong it.   MTG is an intellectual game.  If he spent half as much brain power on earning a living, the could probably be well off, and earn enough to have a tidy budget for gaming.   Sorry Yamikuronue, but I disagree with your first comment."}
{"id": "227064", "text": "You don't. When you sell them - your cost basis would be the price of the stock at which you sold the stocks to cover the taxes, and the difference is your regular capital gain."}
{"id": "227079", "text": "\"You can make estimated tax payments on Form 1040-ES.  Most people who make such payments need to do it quarterly because the typical reasons for making estimated payments is something like self-employment income that a person will get throughout the year.  If you have a one-time event like a single, large sale of stock, however, there's nothing wrong with doing it just one quarter out of the year. When it comes time to file your taxes, part of the calculate is whether you were timely quarter-by-quarter not just for the entire year, so if you do have a big \"\"one-time\"\" event mid-year, don't wait until the end of the year to file an estimated payment.  Of course, if the event is at the end of the year, then you can make it a 4th quarter estimated payment.\""}
{"id": "227173", "text": "I hate when the volume during a show is reasonable and the volume in the commercials hurts my ears. But, this has been tried before and it will not work.  We need television receivers with a smart volume feature that normalizes the volume continuously."}
{"id": "227232", "text": "Gold is traded on the London stock exchange (LSE) and the New York stock exchange (NYSE) under various separate asset tickers, mainly denominated in sterling and US dollars respectively.  These stocks will reflect FX changes very quickly.  If you sold LSE gold and foreign exchanged your sterling to dollars to buy NYSE gold you would almost certainly lose on the spreads upon selling, FX'ing and re-buying. In short, the same asset doesn't exist in multiple currencies.  It may have the same International Securities Identification Number (ISIN), but it can trade with different Stock Exchange Daily Official List (SEDOL) identifiers, reflecting different currencies and/or exchanges, each carrying a different price at any one time."}
{"id": "227334", "text": "If your landlord is OK with you subletting your apartment - then that's all that the landlord has to do with that. It doesn't really matter if the landlord is a private person or a publicly trade corporation/fund. No relevance at all. As to your own reporting - you're receiving rent. That is income to you. You can deduct the portion of your expenses (including rent) attributable to the area you rent out. All this goes to your Schedule E. Any positive remainder becomes your taxable income. Any deduction must be substantiated (i.e.: you'll have to keep all the receipts for all the expenses you used for the deduction for as long as the tax year is open, which is at least the next 3 years after filing)."}
{"id": "227364", "text": "The bucket concept. What ever works. Some people literally use envelopes, putting cash into each category for there upcoming bills. I prefer not to mix my long term investments. My daughter's college fund is in a series of separate accounts from our retirement money. I won't criticize your CFP's comments, because advice is individual, her approach probably works well for her clients. The important thing isn't the focus on the words, but the end result. Spend less than you earn, save for each of your goals.  I removed any IRA/US reference and comment on bucket concept."}
{"id": "227399", "text": "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."}
{"id": "227485", "text": "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."}
{"id": "227601", "text": "&gt; 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."}
{"id": "227653", "text": "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."}
{"id": "227955", "text": "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."}
{"id": "228198", "text": "Usually payments are applied towards:"}
{"id": "228308", "text": "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."}
{"id": "228315", "text": "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."}
{"id": "228485", "text": "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."}
{"id": "228548", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "228792", "text": "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."}
{"id": "228992", "text": "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."}
{"id": "228997", "text": "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"}
{"id": "229242", "text": "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."}
{"id": "229572", "text": "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."}
{"id": "229707", "text": "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."}
{"id": "230215", "text": "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."}
{"id": "230343", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "230380", "text": "\"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\""}
{"id": "230589", "text": "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?"}
{"id": "230888", "text": "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."}
{"id": "231243", "text": "\"&gt; 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.\""}
{"id": "231259", "text": "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."}
{"id": "231268", "text": "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"}
{"id": "231306", "text": "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:"}
{"id": "231449", "text": "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."}
{"id": "231500", "text": "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."}
{"id": "231521", "text": "My 0,02\u20ac - I probably live in the same country as you. Stop worrying. The Euro zone has a 100.000\u20ac 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\u20ac 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."}
{"id": "231680", "text": "&gt; 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."}
{"id": "231796", "text": "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."}
{"id": "231863", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "231947", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "231972", "text": "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."}
{"id": "231985", "text": "Get a lawyer.  If you're having legal issues - get a lawyer. If you're having contract issues - get a lawyer."}
{"id": "231990", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "231999", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "232207", "text": "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."}
{"id": "232262", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "232282", "text": "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, \u00a7 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."}
{"id": "232286", "text": "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."}
{"id": "232394", "text": "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?"}
{"id": "232410", "text": "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"}
{"id": "232983", "text": "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."}
{"id": "233248", "text": "(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."}
{"id": "233294", "text": "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."}
{"id": "233394", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "233413", "text": "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.."}
{"id": "233635", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "233795", "text": "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\u2019s 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\u2019ll 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\u2019re often slightly higher than your first loan\u2019s rate."}
{"id": "234361", "text": "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.)"}
{"id": "234615", "text": "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."}
{"id": "234950", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "234979", "text": "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)."}
{"id": "235029", "text": "Margin accounts do not have the problem you are imagining, which is unique to cash accounts"}
{"id": "235263", "text": "~~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 &lt;$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."}
{"id": "235271", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "235438", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "235470", "text": "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."}
{"id": "235646", "text": "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."}
{"id": "235779", "text": "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."}
{"id": "236114", "text": "There are ways to avoid having federal income taxes withheld:  In order to avoid withholding altogether, you\u2019ll 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\u2019re 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 \u201cexempt\u201d 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."}
{"id": "236176", "text": "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."}
{"id": "236507", "text": "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."}
{"id": "236778", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "237043", "text": "\"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.]\""}
{"id": "237234", "text": "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."}
{"id": "237251", "text": "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 :)"}
{"id": "237273", "text": "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..."}
{"id": "237316", "text": "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."}
{"id": "237392", "text": ""}
{"id": "237450", "text": "From an article I wrote a while back: \u201cDalbar Inc., a Boston-based financial services research firm, has been measuring the effects of investors\u2019 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\u2019s 500 index.)\u201d 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."}
{"id": "237483", "text": "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."}
{"id": "237635", "text": "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."}
{"id": "237718", "text": "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 \u00a32000 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."}
{"id": "237738", "text": "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."}
{"id": "237826", "text": "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&amp;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?"}
{"id": "237907", "text": "\"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 :)\""}
{"id": "237956", "text": "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."}
{"id": "238517", "text": "The U.S. treasury sells Treasury Bonds directly to consumers at: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/"}
{"id": "238629", "text": "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,"}
{"id": "238682", "text": "\"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 \u201cExercise Period\u201d) (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 \u201cBusiness Combination\u201d), 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\u2019s 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 \u201cExpiration Date\u201d); 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\""}
{"id": "238702", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "238743", "text": "http://www.scottrade.com/online-brokerage/interest-margin-rates.html  Rates fluctuate based upon the federal funds rate."}
{"id": "238903", "text": "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."}
{"id": "239030", "text": "\"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.).\""}
{"id": "239052", "text": "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."}
{"id": "239061", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "239064", "text": "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:"}
{"id": "239214", "text": "\"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\"\".\""}
{"id": "239341", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "239574", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240021", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240023", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240038", "text": "\"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\u2026\"\", but unfortunately in this case\u2026 past performance really has been shown to be a pretty reliable indicator of future behavior. So\u2026\""}
{"id": "240259", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240373", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "240435", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240519", "text": "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/"}
{"id": "240628", "text": "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 &amp; 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."}
{"id": "240651", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240796", "text": "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."}
{"id": "240809", "text": "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?"}
{"id": "240844", "text": "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."}
{"id": "241070", "text": "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."}
{"id": "241101", "text": "\"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\""}
{"id": "241161", "text": "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."}
{"id": "241189", "text": "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."}
{"id": "241297", "text": "&gt;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.  &gt;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.   &gt;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."}
{"id": "241433", "text": "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."}
{"id": "241599", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "241807", "text": "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."}
{"id": "241920", "text": "&gt; 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?"}
{"id": "242023", "text": "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..."}
{"id": "242478", "text": "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."}
{"id": "242849", "text": "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."}
{"id": "243855", "text": "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."}
{"id": "244061", "text": "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"}
{"id": "244278", "text": "\"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.\""}
{"id": "244303", "text": "\"I made an investing mistake many (eight?) years ago. Specifically, I invested a very large sum of money in a certain triple leveraged ETF (the asset has not yet been sold, but the value has decreased to maybe one 8th or 5th of the original amount). I thought the risk involved was the volatility--I didn't realize that due to the nature of the asset the value would be constantly decreasing towards zero! Anyhow, my question is what to do next?  I would advise you to sell it ASAP. You didn't mention what ETF it is, but chances are you will continue to lose money. The complicating factor is that I have since moved out of the United States and am living abroad (i.e. Japan). I am permanent resident of my host country, I have a steady salary that is paid by a company incorporated in my host country, and pay taxes to the host government. I file a tax return to the U.S. Government each year, but all my income is excluded so I do not pay any taxes. In this way, I do not think that I can write anything off on my U.S. tax return. Also, I have absolutely no idea if I would be able to write off any losses on my Japanese tax return (I've entrusted all the family tax issues to my wife). Would this be possible?  I can't answer this question but you seem to be looking for information on \"\"cross-border tax harvesting\"\". If Google doesn't yield useful results, I'd suggest you talk to an accountant who is familiar with the relevant tax codes. Are there any other available options (that would not involve having to tell my wife about the loss, which would be inevitable if I were to go the tax write-off route in Japan)? This is off topic but you should probably have an honest conversation with your wife regardless. If I continue to hold onto this asset the value will decrease lower and lower. Any suggestions as to what to do? See above: close your position ASAP For more information on the pitfalls of leveraged ETFs (FINRA) What happens if I hold longer than one trading day?  While there may be trading and hedging strategies that justify holding these investments longer than a day, buy-and-hold investors with an intermediate or long-term time horizon should carefully consider whether these ETFs are appropriate for their portfolio. As discussed above, because leveraged and inverse ETFs reset each day, their performance can quickly diverge from the performance of the underlying index or benchmark. In other words, it is possible that you could suffer significant losses even if the long-term performance of the index showed a gain.\""}
{"id": "244749", "text": "Is selling Vested RSU is the same as selling a regular stock? Yes. Your basis (to calculate the gain) is what you've been taxed on when the RSUs vested. Check your payslips/W2 for that period, and the employer should probably have sent you detailed information about that. I'm not a US citizen, my account is in ETrade and my stocks are of a   US company, what pre arrangements I need to take to avoid tax issues? You will pay capital gains taxes on the sale in Israel. Depending on where you were when you earned the stocks and what taxes you paid then - it may open additional issues with the Israeli tax authority. Check with an Israeli tax adviser/accountant."}
{"id": "244986", "text": "\"I support the strategy to buy a less expensive car at the outset and then save for that more expensive car. You mentioned that you would be able to save $9000 by the time you had to start making payments. That sounds like a great budget for car shopping. For $9k you can get a dependable used car.  If you find the right high-yield savings account you can get around 2% on your $500/month direct deposit. That's a difference of about 5% when you add in the 2.9% interest that you would have been paying on the loan. (You can't find such a low risk investment that would yield 5% these days.)  Also, at that rate (2%) you would have $27k saved up in less than 52 months, or over $31k in 60 months. Then you could buy a BMW with cash! And I'm sure they would give you a cash discount. Alternatively you could be just finishing paying off the loan and might already be looking at the next car you'll take a loan out for. The point is not that you have to completely deprive yourself for the rest of your life. But by not taking out a loan you were certainly come out ahead in 5-10 years time.  Also, one common mistake that new grads make is thinking that they are rich right out of college. Yes, you definitely have a nice salary and \"\"could afford it\"\" by most people's standards.  I have a coworker that graduated and started work a year ago. He first bought a brand new Subaru. Why Subaru I do not know, but that is what he thought he wanted. After driving the car for a few months he decided for a few reasons that it was not what he wanted. So he sold the car (for a loss) and bought a slightly used Nissan Z. He has since decided that he needs a more practical car for day to day driving to minimize the abuse that his Z takes. So he has bought another car. This time a low budget Honda. Had he started with a low budget car he could be driving the same car to work right now, but have a good chunk of savings for a new car instead of a loan and a car that he drives only occasionally.\""}
{"id": "245122", "text": "Talk to a tax professional. The IRS really doesn't like the deduction, and it's a concept (like independent contractors) that is often not done properly. You need to, at a minimum, have records, including timestamped photographs, proving that: Remember, documentation is key, and must be filed and accessible for a number of years. Poor record keeping will cost you dearly, and the cost of keeping those records is something that you need to weigh against the benefit."}
{"id": "245228", "text": "In my mind you would get all the money. You owned 100% when that transaction occurred. S/He gets 10% then on everything after. I usually go to an extreme case to figure out the answer.  So... If S/He bought 100% of the company it wouldn't go to the company it would go to you. I would be open to criticism on this answer I am answering from common sense not because I really know the answer."}
{"id": "245447", "text": "\"For simplicity, let's start by just considering cash back. In general, cash back from credit cards for personal use is not taxable, but for business use it is taxable (sort of, I'll explain later). The reason is most personal purchases are made with after tax dollars; you typically aren't deducting the cost of what you purchased from your personal income, so if you purchase something that costs $100 and you receive $2 back from the CC company, effectively you have paid $98 for that item but that wouldn't affect your tax bill. However, since businesses typically deduct most expenses, that same $100 deduction would have only been a $98 deduction for business tax purposes, so in this case the $2 should be accounted for. Note, you should not consider that $2 as income though; that would artificially inflate your revenue. It should be treated as a negative expense, similar to how you would handle returning an item you purchased and receiving a CC refund. Now for your specific questions: Part 1: As a small business owner, I wish to attend an annual seminar to improve my business. I have enough credit card reward points to cover the airfare, hotel, and rental car. Will those expenses still be deductible at the value displayed on the receipt? Effectively no, these expenses are not deductible. If you deduct them they will be completely counter-acted by the \"\"refund\"\" you receive for the payments. Part 2: Does it matter if those points are accrued on my personal credit card, rather than a business credit card? This is where it gets hairy. Suppose your company policy is that employees make purchases with their own personal credit cards and submit receipts for reimbursement. In this case the employer can simply reimburse and would not know or care if the employee is racking up rewards/points/cashback. The trick is, as the employee, you must always purchase business related items normally so you have receipts to show, and if you receive cashback on the side there seems to be a \"\"don't ask, don't tell\"\" rule that the IRS is OK with. It works the same way with heavy business travelers and airline miles- the free vacations those users get as perks are not treated as taxable income. However, I would not go out of my way to abuse this \"\"loophole\"\". Typically, things like travel (airfare, hotel, car rental, meals) are expected. But I wouldn't go purchase 100 company laptops on your personal card and ask the company to reimburse you. The company should purchase those 100 laptops on a company card and effectively reduce the sale price by the cashback received. (Or more realistically, negotiate a better discount with your account rep and just cut them a check.) Part 3: Would there be any difference between credit card points and brand-loyalty points? If the rental car were paid for with points earned directly on the rental car company's loyalty system (not a CC), would that yield a different result? There is no difference. Perhaps the simplest way to think about this is you can only deduct an expense that you actually incur. In other words, the expense should show up on a bank or CC statement. This is why when you volunteer and work 10 hours for a charity, you can't call that a \"\"donation\"\" of any amount of money because there is no actual payment made that would show up on a bank statement. Instead you could have billed the charity for your 10 hours of work, and then turned around and donated that same amount back to them, but it ends up being a wash.\""}
{"id": "245484", "text": "I've not gotten an answer so far. Since I've started my search for a new financial planner here are the criteria I am using:"}
{"id": "245532", "text": "China is in the middle of a residential housing bubble, and now is probably a horrible time to invest in real estate in China.  Even if China wasn't near the peak of its bubble it would probably still be a bad idea because owning real estate in a foreign country is expensive and risky. There are real currency risks, think what would happen if the yuan declined significantly against the dollar. There is also the risk of the government seizing foreign held investments (not extremely likely but plausible). Another consideration is that it would be next to impossible for you to get a loan to purchase a property US banks wouldn't touch it with a 10 ft pole and I doubt Chinese banks would be very interested in lending to foreigners."}
{"id": "245616", "text": "\"First off, the answer to your question is something EVERYONE would like to know. There are fund managers at Fidelity who will a pay $100 million fee to someone who can tell them a \"\"safe\"\" way to earn interest. The first thing to decide, is do you want to save money, or invest money. If you just want to save your money, you can keep it in cash, certificates of deposit or gold. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. For example, gold tends to hold its value over time and will always have value. Even if Russia invades Switzerland and the Swiss Franc becomes worthless, your gold will still be useful and spendable. As Alan Greenspan famously wrote long ago, \"\"Gold is always accepted.\"\" If you want to invest money and make it grow, yet still have the money \"\"fluent\"\" which I assume means liquid, your main option is a major equity, since those can be readily bought and sold. I know in your question you are reluctant to put your money at the \"\"mercy\"\" of one stock, but the criteria you have listed match up with an equity investment, so if you want to meet your goals, you are going to have to come to terms with your fears and buy a stock. Find a good blue chip stock that is in an industry with positive prospects. Stay away from stuff that is sexy or hyped. Focus on just one stock--that way you can research it to death. The better you understand what you are buying, the greater the chance of success. Zurich Financial Services is a very solid company right now in a nice, boring, highly profitable business. Might fit your needs perfectly. They were founded in 1872, one of the safest equities you will find. Nestle is another option. Roche is another. If you want something a little more risky consider Georg Fischer. Anyway, what I can tell you, is that your goals match up with a blue chip equity as the logical type of investment. Note on Diversification Many financial advisors will advise you to \"\"diversify\"\", for example, by investing in many stocks instead of just one, or even by buying funds that are invested in hundreds of stocks, or indexes that are invested in the whole market. I disagree with this philosophy. Would you go into a casino and divide your money, putting a small portion on each game? No, it is a bad idea because most of the games have poor returns. Yet, that is exactly what you do when you diversify. It is a false sense of safety. The proper thing to do is exactly what you would do if forced to bet in casino: find the game with the best return, get as good as you can at that game, and play just that one game. That is the proper and smart thing to do.\""}
{"id": "245702", "text": "\"It appears that there's a confusion between the different types of average. Saying \"\"the average investor\"\" generally means the most common type of small-scale unsophisticated investor - the mode (or possibly median) investor. However, while this class of investors is numerous, each of them has assets that are quite small compared to some other types of investors; and the market average performance is determined proportionally to the amount of assets held, not to the number of holders; so the performance of large investors \"\"counts\"\" that much more. For any measure, the mode of performance can be (and often is) different from the mean performance - in this case, Dalbar is saying that the most common results are lower than the (weighed) average results.\""}
{"id": "245746", "text": "Read the terms and conditions very carefully. Many zero percent deals have a requirement that you pay back at a certain date, and if you don't, you'll have to pay some enormous percentage. Nobody will remind you of the date, because the lender has the secret hope that you will forget."}
{"id": "245753", "text": "Yes, You will have to pay the taxes at least initially but you'll most probably get a refund when you will file returns depending upon the amount and tax brackets in the UK."}
{"id": "245786", "text": "Don't frett to much about your retirement savings just put something towards it each year. You could be dead in ten years. You should always try to clear out debt when you can. But don't wipe yourself out! Expedite the repayment process."}
{"id": "245867", "text": "I strongly suggest you go to www.investor.gov as it has excellent information regarding these types of questions. A mutual fund is a company that pools money from many investors and invests the money in securities such as stocks, bonds, and short-term debt. The combined holdings of the mutual fund are known as its portfolio. Investors buy shares in mutual funds. Each share represents an investor\u2019s part ownership in the fund and the income it generates. When you buy shares of a mutual fund you're buying it at NAV, or net asset value.  The NAV is the value of the fund\u2019s assets minus its liabilities. SEC rules require funds to calculate the NAV at least once daily. Different funds may own thousands of different stocks.  In order to calculate the NAV, the fund company must value every security it owns.  Since each security's valuation is changing throughout the day it's difficult to determine the valuation of the mutual fund except for when the market is closed.  Once the market has closed (4pm eastern) and securities are no longer trading, the company must get accurate valuations for every security and perform the valuation calculations and distribute the results to the pricing vendors.  This has to be done by 6pm eastern.  This is a difficult and, more importantly, a time consuming process to get it done right once per day.  Having worked for several fund companies I can tell you there are many days where companies are getting this done at the very last minute. When you place a buy or sell order for a mutual fund it doesn't matter what time you placed it as long as you entered it before 4pm ET.  Cutoff times may be earlier depending on who you're placing the order with.  If companies had to price their funds more frequently, they would undoubtedly raise their fees."}
{"id": "245917", "text": "&gt;wasn't told he still needed to pay back the difference in the loan once he did   Ouch. Even though sometimes you dont have to pay the difference if the collateral wasnt sold in a commercially reasonable manner. Its been a while since ive read title 9, but there are a lot if rules about selling collateral after repossession. It sounds like the collection company really screwed him over by selling way under market."}
{"id": "245926", "text": "Well, premium is the least of my worries. I would rather worry about that than have to worry about a margin call. I hate debt, and so this is the draw for me. I will check on that. I have a few books on options and derivatives, and I find it quite fascinating! I would really like a specific book on future options, but I will take a look through the books I have. Thanks!"}
{"id": "245975", "text": "What is the interest rate on the balance you'll be carrying? Even at a modest interest rate of only 10% (many cards can be double that) means you'll pay $500 in interest if you carry the $5000 balance for a year.  At 20% you'll pay $500 interest in just six months. You also mentioned this would be $5000 MORE than you usually spend in this time, so I imagine your balance could be higher."}
{"id": "246058", "text": "Hey, no worries at all. Like any business practice there are proper uses and abuses. First and foremost, companies should engage in allocation of capital that best serves their uses given prospects of 'returns' in a broad sense (this could very well include employee remuneration). After that, all excess funds should be distributed (through buybacks or dividends).   There is without a doubt overincentivizing going on (i.e. buybacks preceding prudent capex or other investments) to boost C-suite pay. In other cases it is actually used to hide declining performance altogether (declining earnings compensated by decreasing outstanding shares). This is simply poor management using these tools. They would have most likely used others were these not made available to them (e.g underpaying/understaffing).   It's an investors job to allocate capital that rewards good management practice. The problem is that this is an ideal made harder by obfuscation on the part of management, lack of governance and even the rise of passive management among others.   I'm in private equity myself (with a strong focus on prudence and longevity of companies), so these are considerations that go without saying. I'm sometimes quite astonished what public companies get away with, but you can't blame tools for being used poorly or being available."}
{"id": "246221", "text": "ESPP tax treatment is complicated.  If you received a discount on the purchase of your stock, that discount is taxable as ordinary income when you sell the stock.  Any profit about the market value when the stock was purchased is taxed based upon the holding period of the stock. If you have held the stock less than a year, the profit is taxed at your marginal tax rate (ie taxed as ordinary income). If the stock is held for more than a year, it is taxed at a special capital gains tax rate, which ranges from 0-20% depending on your marginal tax rate (most people pay 15%)."}
{"id": "246453", "text": "\"J - Approaching the answer from the W4 perspective (for calculation purposes) may be more trouble that it's worth. I'd strongly suggest you use tax software, whether it's the 2016 SW or a current year one, on line, to get an estimate of your total tax bill for the year. You can then look at your current run rate of tax paid in to see if you are on track. If you have a large shortfall, you can easily adjust your withholdings. If you are on track to get a large refund, make the adjustment so next year will track better. Note, a withholding allowance is equal to a personal exemption. Some think that \"\"4\"\" means 4 people in the house, but it actually means \"\"don't tax 4 x $4050\"\" as I have $16200 in combined people or tax deductions.\""}
{"id": "246461", "text": "In the US, you can only take a tax deduction on expenses to the extent that they offset income. For an S corp or LLC, if the business had no income, there's no deduction to take. If you have a sole proprietorship, these expenses can offset other income. You can also carry-forward net operating losses to future years when you have more income. See the article How to Carry Over Business Expenses"}
{"id": "246522", "text": "The idea is great but US securities laws impose a huge burden on these businesses.  Specifically [Rule 502(c)](http://taft.law.uc.edu/CCL/33ActRls/rule502.html) of Reg D prohibits 'general solicitation and advertising' - such as using the internet.  There is currently pending legislation to amend the [US Securities act of 1933 sec. 4(2)](http://taft.law.uc.edu/CCL/33Act/sec4.html) regarding public offerings to help reduce such barriers, but as it stands there are significant barriers to entry in the market.  SEC filing and reporting requirements, especially after Dodd-Frank, are onerous to say the least, and running direct lending services are at the moment largely cost prohibitive due to these requirements."}
{"id": "246529", "text": "Basically isn't this like if they loaned a bank 400b with 401b due tomorrow, and then the bank took the same loan the next day? Gross exaggeration I know, but I just want to make sure that is the way this works."}
{"id": "246586", "text": "Brokerage firms are required to report the number of shares being shorted.  This information is reported to the exchange (NYSE of NASDAQ) and is made public.  Most financial sites indicate the number of shares being shorted for a particular stock.  The image below from Yahoo finance shows 3.29 million shares of CMG were being shorted at the close of 9-28-2012.  This is over 12% of the total outstanding shares of CMG.  For naked short selling additional information is tracked.  If the brokerage is unable to borrow shares to deliver before the settlement date of a short sale then the transaction is recorded as fails-to-deliver.  No money or shares are exchanged since the brokerage is unable to deliver the shares that were agreed upon.  A large amount of fails-to-deliver transactions for a stock usually indicates an excessive amount of naked shorting.  When investors and brokerage firms start to aggressively short a stock they will do so without having borrowed the shares to sell.  This will result in a large amount of naked short selling.  When there are a large number of naked short sellers not all the sellers will be able to borrow the necessary shares before the settlement date and many fails-to-deliver transactions will be recorded. The SEC records the number of fails-to-deliver transactions. The table below summarizes the fails-to-deliver transactions from 1-1-2012 through 9-14-2012 (data obtained from here). The \u201cExt Amount\u201d column shows the total dollar value of the transactions that failed ( i.e. Fail Qty * Share price ).  The \u201cVolume\u201d column is the total number of shares traded in the same time period.  The \u201c% Volume\u201d shows the percentage of shares that failed to deliver as a percentage of the total market volume. The table orders the data in descending order by the quantity of shares that were not delivered.  Most of the companies at the top of the list no longer exist.  For many of these companies, the quantity of shares that failed to deliver where many multiples of the number of shares traded during the same time period.  This indicates massive naked short selling as many brokerages where unable to find shares to borrow before the settlement date. More information here."}
{"id": "246791", "text": "Thank you for responding. This all happened Friday night and I've been doing the job alone this weekend to offset the cost. I do very itemized invoices and planned on showing the difference there but, honestly, wasn't wanting to verbalize it to the client out of embarrassment. I knew it would have been an unprofessional move not to say anything and, admittedly, hoped I could find a way around it. But, you're right and I'll go ahead and do both.  Note: 10 years I've been doing this and I feel like my 12 year old self putting my terrible report card on the dining table for my mom to see and sign as I head out the door for school:("}
{"id": "246882", "text": "I would say generally, the answer is No.   There might be some short term relief to people in certain situations, but generally speaking you sign a contract to borrow money and you are responsible to pay.  This is why home loans offer better terms then auto loans, and auto loans better than credit cards or things like furniture.  The better terms offer less risk to the lender because there are assets that can be repossessed.  Homes retain values better than autos, autos better than furniture, and credit cards are not secured at all. People are not as helpless as your question suggests.  Sure a person might lose their high paying job, but could they still make a mortgage payment if they worked really hard at it?  This might mean taking several part time jobs.  Now if a person buys a home that has a very large mortgage payment this might not be possible.  However, wise people don't buy every bit of house they can afford.   People should also be wise about the kinds of mortgages they use to buy a home.  Many people lost their homes due to missing a payment on their interest only loan.  Penalty rates and fees jacked up their payment, that was way beyond their means.  If they had a fixed rate loan the chance to catch up would have not been impossible. Perhaps an injury might prevent a person from working.  This is why long term disability insurance is a must for most people.  You can buy quite a bit of coverage for not very much money. Typical US households have quite a bit of debt.  Car payments, phone payments, and either a mortgage or rent, and of course credit cards.  If income is drastically reduced making all of those payments becomes next to impossible.  Which one gets paid first.  Just this last week, I attempted to help a client in just this situation.  They foolishly chose to pay the credit card first, and were going to pay the house payment last (if there was anything left over).  There wasn't, and they are risking eviction (renters).     People finding themselves in crisis, generally do a poor job of paying the most important things first.  Basic food first, housing and utilities second, etc...  Let the credit card slip if need be no matter how often one is threatened by creditors.  They do this to maintain their credit score, how foolish. I feel like you have a sense of bondage associated with debt.  It is there and real despite many people noticing it.  There is also the fact that compounding interest is working against you and with your labor you are enriching the bank.  This is a great reason to have the goal of living a debt free life.  I can tell you it is quite liberating."}
{"id": "247085", "text": "\"People who rent an apartment will typically pay by check. Probably 90% of the checks I have written are for rent. To some extent this falls under the previously mentioned \"\"payments to another person\"\" rule.\""}
{"id": "247486", "text": "This means that if your capital under my management ends up turning a profit, I will keep half of those profits, but if I lose you money, I will cover half those losses. The bold part is where you lose me. This absolutely exists with the exception of the loss insurance.  It just requires a lot more than the general retail consumer investor has to contribute.  Nobody wants to take on the responsibility of your money then split 50% of the gross proceeds of your $10,000 (or whatever nominal amount of money you're dealing with) investment and return it all to you after a year.  And NO money manager will insure that the market won't decline. Hedge funds, PE Firms, VC Firms, Investment Partnerships, etc all basically run the way you're describing (again without your loss insurance).  Everyone's money is pooled and investments are made.  Everyone shares the spoils and everyone shares the losses.  And to top it off, the people making investment decisions have their money invested in the fund.  All of them have to pay rent and accountants and other costs associated with running the fund and that will eat in to the proceeds to some degree; because returns are calculated on net proceeds. With enough money you can buy yourself in to a hedge fund, for the rest of us there are ETFs and other extremely fee-reasonable investment options.  And if you don't think the performance and preservation of assets under management is not an incentive to treat the money with care you're kidding yourself (your first bullet point). I'll add that aside from skewing the manager's risk tolerance toward guaranteed returns I doubt you would fair favorably over the long term compared to simply paying even an egregious 1% expense ratio on an ETF.  If you look at the S&P performance for 10 or 20 or however many years, I'd venture that a couple good years of giving up half of your gains would have you screaming for your money back.  The bad years would put the money manager out of business and the good years would squander your gains."}
{"id": "247709", "text": "\"Short answer:  No. Longer answer:  The only reason to move would be to get out of the condo and into a SFR of equal cost because condos can be quite difficult to sell and you don't really want that potential burden later on.  Moving is expensive though and you can't afford to spend more when you are already living on the financial edge. Speaking of living on the edge, that's a recipe for disaster.  I make, ratio-wise, a similar sort of income.  Even accounting for the generous college tuition, you should be able to save at least $20K per year...at a bare minimum.  And if you were careful, I figure you should be able to save $40K/year.  You need to figure out where you are dumping all of your money and cut WAY back on spending and focus entirely on saving money. 1)  Stop eating out.  Make your own meals.  I average about $2 per meal per person - no junk food.  Eating out is 6 to 30 times as expensive as making meals at home.  Do the math:  $10 * 2 people * number of times you eat out per week * 52 ($1,040 per year for each time/week!) vs $2 * 2 people * 21 (3 meals per day) * 52 ($4,368 per year for both of you...maximum).  Now I know some meals are more expensive to prepare, but the math is not unrealistic - I spend about $140 per month on groceries and make the bulk of my own food.  Eating out is sticker shock for me.  The food I prepare is nutritionally balanced and complete.  Now I'm not a complete health-nut.  I love the occasional deep-fried treat or hamburger, but those are \"\"once every couple of months\"\" sort of things, which makes them special. 2)  Stop going to Starbucks or wherever you habitually go.  It takes fuel to get there.  It's also expensive when you get there.  Bring your own drink if you are hanging out with friends. 3)  Drop golf.  Or whatever expensive sport you are sinking money into.  Invest in some cheap running clothes and focus on cardio-based workouts.  Heart health is more important than anything else.  If you can't live without your sport, then find an alternate sport that is \"\"equal\"\"-ish in challenge but a ton cheaper to play.  For example, if you like playing golf, play discgolf instead (most cities have courses) - there's no cost beyond a couple of discs and the challenge is still there. 4)  Drop entertainment.  Movies at the theater are expensive.  Drop your cable subscription (you are getting financially raped for $1,500/year).  Get a Netflix subscription and find shows via free online streaming services.  Buy some dominoes, card games, and a couple of classic board games.  Keep entertainment simple and cheap. 5)  Drop your cell phone's data plan.  Republic Wireless is the only decent cellular provider and even their $12/month plan is living a luxury lifestyle.  If you spend more than $10/month/person for phone service, you are spending too much. 6)  Stop driving everywhere.  Gas is expensive.  Cars are expensive.  If you have more than two cars, sell the extras.  If your car is worth more than $20,000, sell it and get something cheaper. 7)  Stop drinking alcohol.  Alcohol impairs mental functions, is addictive, smells terrible, and is ridiculously expensive.  There's no actual need to consume it either. By the way, don't go and make major financial changes without the wife's sign-off.  Finances are the #1 reason for divorce.  So get her \"\"OK\"\" on this stuff.  Hopefully you already knew that.  The above are just some common financial pitfalls where people sink thousands and thousand of dollars and gain nothing.  You can still have a full and complete life with just a minimum of the above. There is no excuse for living on the edge financially.  Your story is one I'm going to share with those who give me the same excuse because they are \"\"poor\"\".  You are \"\"I want to punch you in the face\"\" wealthy and you spend every last penny because you think that's how money works.  You are wrong. One final piece of advice:  Find a financial adviser.  It is clear to me that you've been managing money wrong your whole life.  A financial adviser will look at your situation and help you far more than someone on the Internet ever can.  If you attend a church, many churches have the excellent Crown Financial Ministries program available which teaches sound financial management principles.  The education system doesn't show people how to manage money, but that's not an excuse either.  Once you dig yourself out of the financial hole you've dug for yourself, you can pass the knowledge on how to correctly manage money onto other people.\""}
{"id": "247778", "text": "It's sad.  My mother lost her job after a brutal divorce.  BOA bought up Countrywide, then when my mother pleaded for assistance BOA said they could not help her unless she was behind/in default of her mortgage.  She tried to do a deed-in-lieu with a lawyer and BOA refused to accept the deed-in-lieu many times.  Then BOA sold her mortgage to Green Tree (?) and they refused her deed-in-lieu as well.   This went on for over 2 years and they foreclosed on the house.  I told my mother to sue because they should have accepted her deed-in-lieu because it was approved by the court in her bankruptcy but she was tired of trying to save her house that she just walked away.  6 months after she left and moved in with my sister Green Tree called her offering a refinance at a lower rate and a mortgage payment that was less than a typical car payment.  Now 5 years later my mom is just going to pay cash for her house and never do a mortgage again."}
{"id": "247870", "text": "No, if you are trading options to profit solely off the option and not own the underlying, you should trade it away because it costs more to exercise:"}
{"id": "247902", "text": "If you buy puts, there are no guaranteed proceeds though.  If you short against the box, you've got immediate proceeds with a nice capital loss if it doesn't work out.  Conversely, you could write a covered call, take the contract proceeds, and write off the long position losses.  Nobody ever factors tax consequences into the equation here."}
{"id": "247952", "text": "You should actually contact the company, not just try to. There are ways to do this. For example, show up in person, send registered mail. All other advice is moot until you actually contact the company."}
{"id": "248108", "text": "You need to see that prospectus.  I just met with some potential new clients today that wanted me to take a look at their investments.  Turns out they had two separate annuities.  One was a variable annuity with Allianz.  The other was with some company named Midland Insurance (can't remember the whole name). Turns out the Allianz VA has a 10 year surrender contract and the Midland has a 14 year contract.   14 years!!!   They are currently in year 7 and if they need any money (I'm hoping they at least have a 10% free withdrawal) they will pay 6% surrender on the Allianz and a 15% surrender on the other. Ironically enough, they guy who sold this to them is now in jail.   No joke."}
{"id": "248269", "text": "It really depends.  If it is offered as compensation (ie in leiu of, or in addition to salary or cash bonus) then it would be reportable income, and if sold later for a profit then that would be taxable as gains.  If this share is purchased as an investment at current value then it would be treated like other securities most likely gains realized at sale.  Any discount could be considered income but there are some goofy rules surrounding this enacted to prevent tax evasion and some to spur growth.  That is the answer in a nut shell.  It is far more complicated in reality as there are somewhere around 2000 pages of regulations deal with different exceptions and scenerios."}
{"id": "248615", "text": "\"As Mr. Money Money Mustache once said: IF YOU HAVE CREDIT CARD DEBT, YOU SHOULD FEEL LIKE YOUR HAIR IS ON   FIRE Student loan debt is different than credit card debt.  Rather than having spent the money on just about anything, it was invested in improving yourself and probably your financial future.  This was probably a good decision. However, unlike most credit card debt, if you ever have to file for bankruptcy, your student loans will not be erased.  They will follow you forever. Pay your debts off as quickly as you can.  While it may be true that \"\"long-term return on the stock market is about 7%\"\", you cannot assume that this will always be the case, especially in the short term.  What if you had made this assumption in 2007? To assume that your stocks will beat a 6.4% guaranteed return over the next few years is not really investing.  It's gambling.\""}
{"id": "248629", "text": "If you have no net income or loss, you can usually get away without filing a tax return.  In Illinois, the standard is: Filing Requirements   You must file Form IL-1120 if you are a corporation that   has net income or loss as defined under the IITA; or   is qualified to do business in the state of Illinois and is required to file a federal income tax return (regardless of net income or loss).   http://tax.illinois.gov/Businesses/TaxInformation/Income/corporate.htm Just keep your filing fee and any business licenses up to date, paying those fees personally and not out of business money (that would make for a net loss and trigger needing a tax return).  Frankly, with how easy it is to register a new corp, especially an LLC which has many simplicity advantages from an S-corp in certain cases, you might still be better off shutting it down until that time."}
{"id": "248677", "text": "Speculation means putting your money on a hunch that some event may occur, depending on current circumstances and some future circumstances. So either you win huge or lose a lot. Investment is a conscious decision made on well defined research and grounded on good reasons i.e. economy, industry, company reports etc.  Here is a link on wikipedia with more details on  Speculation."}
{"id": "248761", "text": "You can claim a deduction only if all of your business is conducted from the home, i.e. your home is your principal place of business - not just if you work from home sometimes. The CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) has pretty strict guidelines listed here, but once you're sure you qualify for a deduction, the next step would be to determine what portion of your home qualifies.   You cannot attempt to deduct your entire mortgage simply because you run your business out of your home.  The portion of your mortgage and other related & allowable home expense deductions has to be pro-rated to be equal to or less than the portion of your home you use for business.  Simply put, if your business is operated out of a 120 sq-ft self-contained space, and your home's total square-footage is 2400 sq-ft, you can deduct 5% of your expenses (120/2,400 = 0.05). Hope this helps!"}
{"id": "248853", "text": "The trend in ETFs is total return: where the ETF automatically reinvests dividends.  This philosophy is undoubtedly influenced by that trend. The rich and retired receive nearly all income from interest, dividends, and capital gains; therefore, one who receives income exclusively from dividends and capital gains must fund by withdrawing dividends and/or liquidating holdings. For a total return ETF, the situation is even more limiting: income can only be funded by liquidation. The expected profit is lost for the dividend as well as liquidating since the dividend can merely be converted back into securities new or pre-existing.  In this regard, dividends and investments are equal. One who withdraws dividends and liquidates holdings should be careful not to liquidate faster than the rate of growth."}
{"id": "248935", "text": "Organize your expenses in order of the rate of return, and pay them in that order.  By far the highest rate of return on your list is: Nowhere else are you going to see an immediate 100% return (or 50%, depending on the company's matching policy) on every dollar you allocate to this pot. Second would probably be: Money that you do not allocate here will usually incur a 15%-29% penalty.  Outside of large expenses like a home, education, or a reasonable car, you never want to pay to use your own money (and borrowed money is still yours, remember that someday you have to pay all of it back).  Avoiding a negative rate of return (interest) can be just as beneficial as finding a high positive rate of return on an investment. Continue down the list determining what must be paid first, and what the highest rates are in the immediate future and the long run.  Meanwhile, live within your means, and set aside a portion of your monthly income towards things like a rainy day fund (up to a level which is not touched when reached).  Additional savings through work or your personal investments should not be neglected (money saved early and compounded is worth many times what a dollar saved down the road will gain) especially if you are young in your career."}
{"id": "249063", "text": "I'd take the match, but I wouldn't contribute beyond your match, for two reasons:"}
{"id": "249158", "text": "Realize that not everyone has the ability to save like that.  If someone can save money, that means they are being paid (slightly) more than they need to survive.  Many employers (too many) take that as a sign that they are over paying their workforce, and can easily replace them with people who get paid less, since they can also make it work by not setting anything significant aside.  A lot of these people are only making it work by relying on credit too.  It's easier than you might think to get trapped in a debt spiral, and a lot harder to get out when you cant take classes or even re-education courses to help you move up."}
{"id": "249228", "text": "You can use it for medical expenses even if you don't have a high deductible policy. It can cover prescriptions, copays, deductibles, co-insurance, dentist, orthodontics... As long as it is being used for an approved medical expense there is no tax or penalty.  Yes it doesn't save you on the monthly service charges but it does allow you to cut your medical expenses for a while."}
{"id": "249320", "text": "While there are many very good and detailed answers to this question, there is one key term from finance that none of them used and that is Net Present Value. While this is a term generally associate with debt and assets, it also can be applied to the valuation models of a company's share price. The price of the share of a stock in a company represents the Net Present Value of all future cash flows of that company divided by the total number of shares outstanding. This is also the reason behind why the payment of dividends will cause the share price valuation to be less than its valuation if the company did not pay a dividend. That/those future outflows are factored into the NPV calculation, actually performed or implied, and results in a current valuation that is less than it would have been had that capital been retained. Unlike with a fixed income security, or even a variable rate debenture, it is difficult to predict what the future cashflows of a company will be, and how investors chose to value things as intangible as brand recognition, market penetration, and executive competence are often far more subjective that using 10 year libor rates to plug into a present value calculation for a floating rate bond of similar tenor. Opinion enters into the calculus and this is why you end up having a greater degree of price variance than you see in the fixed income markets. You have had situations where companies such as Amazon.com, Google, and Facebook had highly valued shares before they they ever posted a profit. That is because the analysis of the value of their intellectual properties or business models would, overtime provide a future value that was equivalent to their stock price at that time."}
{"id": "249587", "text": "That's true the system does effectively give HFT a right of first refusal to everything it sees. If HFT is willing to take all comers at your price for longer than you are willing to wait then you are indeed out of luck.  OK it's cheating :)"}
{"id": "249604", "text": "Note: that the New Zealand CPI in 2014 Q2 is 1.6% Year on Year, that is it is the inflation rate from 2013 Q2 to 2014 Q2. The quarterly change from 2014 Q1 to 2014 Q2 is 0.3%. Check out this Inflation Calculator. At the same time the Official Interest Rate in New Zealand was just raised on 24th July 2014 by 25 basis points to 3.5%. So your savings in the bank at a rate of 4.5% is beating inflation, but once you deduct any tax from the interest earned, you are just beating the current inflation rate, which is not really a good long term investment choice."}
{"id": "249628", "text": "\"The homeowner gets all the profit from the price rise, because it's their asset. The bank will charge early repayment fees, but these are often a small fraction of the profits. This is why homeownership in rising markets is so popular: it offers the benefits of \"\"gearing\"\" a financial investment so that you can make profits that are a very large fraction of your principal (initial equity).\""}
{"id": "250007", "text": "An overvalued blue chip is  likely to retain some value if things go the wrong way.. Derivatives are a different game altogether. He said the average investor, which is accurate.. a slightly more inclined amateur will go for strategies such as value/growth.. but amateurs don't usually touch complex CDS/swaps/collars/etc.   I get where you're coming from, and I agree, being an institution in itself doesn't guarantee better results.. but you're fooling yourself if you think they don't have advantages over retail investors."}
{"id": "250038", "text": "My go-to response whenever anyone asks me this is the Monevator table of platform fees. It looks a little complicated at first, but scroll past the table for a couple of paragraphs of useful info to help narrow down your search. The general tone of the page is geared more towards investors in index funds, but the fees on share-dealing are right there in the table too. There are also special notes if there are discounts for frequent traders and that sort of thing, so not too much passive-investor elitism on show!"}
{"id": "250294", "text": "\"You should certainly look into investments. If you don't expect to need the money until retirement, then I'd put it in an IRA so you get the tax advantages. It makes sense to keep some money handy \"\"just in case\"\", but $23k is a very large amount of money for an emergency fund. Of course much depends on your life situation, but I'm hard pressed to think of an unexpected emergency that would come up that would require $23k. If you're seriously planning to go back to school, then you might want to put the money in a non-retirement fund investment. As I write this -- September 2015 -- the stock market is falling, so if you expect to need the money within the next few months, putting it in the stock market may be a mistake. But long term, the stock market has always gone up, so it will almost certainly recover sooner or later. The question is just when. Investing versus paying off debts is a difficult decision. What is the interest rate on the debt? If it's more than you're likely to make on an investment, then you should pay off the debt first. (My broker recently told me that over the last few decades, the stock market has averaged 7% annual growth, so I'm using that as my working number.) If the interest rate is low, some people still prefer to pay off the debt because the interest is certain while the return on an investment is uncertain, and they're unwilling to take the risk.\""}
{"id": "250500", "text": "I can make that election to pay taxes now (even though they aren't vested) based on the dollar value at the time they are granted? That is correct. You must file the election with the IRS within 30 days after the grant (and then attach a copy to that year's tax return). would I not pay any taxes on the gains because I already claimed them as income? No, you claim income based on the grant value, the gains after that are your taxable capital gains. The difference is that if you don't use 83(b) election - that would not be capital gains, but rather ordinary salary income. what happens if I quit / get terminated after paying taxes on un-vested shares? Do I lose those taxes, or do I get it back in a refund next year? Or would it be a deduction next year? You lose these taxes. That's the risk you're taking. Generally 83(b) election is not very useful for RSUs of established public companies. You take a large risk of forfeited taxes to save the difference between capital gains and ordinary gains, which is not all that much. It is very useful when you're in a startup with valuations growing rapidly but stocks not yet publicly trading, which means that if you pay tax on vest you'll pay much more and won't have stocks to sell to cover for that, while the amounts you put at risk are relatively small."}
{"id": "250503", "text": "\"I'm not sure if they're required to do so, but I have been neglecting to sign my cards for some time now.  If they do check, that triggers an ID check, where they'll find my signature.  I know of at least one person that writes \"\"see ID\"\" instead of signing their cards.  He began that practice over 10 years ago.\""}
{"id": "250623", "text": "Assuming you purchased shares that were granted at a discount under the ESPP the 50% exemption would not apply. It's pretty unusual to see a US parent company ESPP qualify for the 110(1)(d) exemption, as most US plans provide for a discount"}
{"id": "250640", "text": "With a limited company, you'll have to pay yourself a salary through PAYE. With income from your other job taking you over the higher-rate threshold, you should inform HMRC of this and get a tax code of DO for the second job, meaning 40% tax (and also both employer's and employee's National Insurance) will be deducted from the whole amount of the salary. See here.  Dividends should be like any other dividend -- you won't pay extra tax when you receive them, but will have to declare them on your tax return and pay the tax later. See the official information here. You'll get a \u00a35,000 tax allowance for dividends, but they'll still count as income for purposes of hitting the higher-rate threshold. I think in practice this means the first \u00a35,000 will be tax-free, and the rest will be taxed at 32.5%. But note that you have to pay yourself at least the minimum wage as salary, not as dividend.  I can't see IR35 being an issue.  However, I'm not a professional, and this situation is complicated enough to need professional advice. Talk to an accountant or a tax advisor."}
{"id": "250761", "text": "\"Stock prices are set by bidding. In principle, a seller will say, \"\"I want $80.\"\" If he can't find anyone willing to buy at that price, he'll either decide not to sell after all, or he'll lower his price. Likewise, a buyer will say, \"\"I'll pay $70.\"\" If he can't find anyone willing to pay that price, he'll either decide not to buy or he'll increase his price. For most stocks there are many buyers and many sellers all the time, so there's a constant interplay. The typical small investor has VERY little control of the price. You say, \"\"I want to buy 10 shares of XYZ Corporation and my maximum price is $20.\"\" If the current trending price is below $20, your broker will buy it for you. If not, he won't. You normally have some time limit on the order, so if the price falls within your range within that time period, your broker will buy. That is, your choice is basically to buy or not buy, or sell or not sell, at the current price. You have little opportunity to really negotiate a better price. If you have a significant percentage of a company's total stock, different story. In real life, most stocks are being traded constantly, so buyers and sellers both have a pretty good idea of the current price. If the last sale was ten minutes ago for $20, it's unlikely anyone's going to now bid $100. They're going to bid $20.50 or $19.25 or some such. If the last sale was for $20 and your broker really came to the floor and offered to buy for $100, I suppose someone would sell to him very quickly before he realized what an outrageous price this was. I use TD Ameritrade, and on their web site, if I give a price limit on a buy that's more than a small percentage above the last sale, they reject it as an error. I forget the exact number but they won't even accept a bid of $80 if the stock is going for $40. They might accept $41 or $42, something like that.\""}
{"id": "250798", "text": "(I am making the assumption that this is a US based question). Keep in mind that the alternative is to amend your tax forms from 2010, and 2011. The IRS and the State will want their money, they might not to wait for 78 paychecks. That is 3 years.  Ask for lots of documentation, so you understand what they are doing."}
{"id": "250844", "text": "There are some nuances with HCE definition. To answer your questions. It's compensation as defined by the plan. Usually it's gross comp, but it can exclude things like fringe benefits, overtime pay, commissions, bonuses, etc. The compensation test is also a look-back test, meaning that an EE is determined to be an HCE in the current year if their compensation in the previous year was over the limit. I'm not sure how stock options affect this, but I expect they would be counted. Probably have an ESOP plan at that point too which is a whole other can-o-woms. The 5% owner test applies to the current year and also has a one-year look-back period. If at ANY point, even for a day, an employee was more than 5% owner, they are HCE for that year and next. Yes there is a limit. A company may limit the amount of HCE's to the top 20% of employees by pay like Aganju said. They can also disregard employees that may otherwise have been excluded under the plan using statutory exclusions. Example, they can disregard employees under 21 years and with less than 1 year of service. Hahaha, the IRS does not like to concisely define things. You can look here, that's probably as concise as you'll get. Hope this helps!"}
{"id": "250873", "text": "The best thing to do to avoid this is not to sell as you've described. What purpose does it solve? If you're speculating, set a price at which you want to cash out and put a limit order. If you're a long term investor, then unless something fundamental has changed - why would you sell?"}
{"id": "251265", "text": "so you and your friend are trying to make a federal case over the fact that he's going to have to pay $1-3 in a month's time?   [they had this rather popular series of self-help books a while back.](http://www.amazon.com/Sweat-Small-Stuff---small-Series/dp/0786881852/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1339809567&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=don%27t+sweat+the+small+stuff) perhaps the two of you should explore it."}
{"id": "251466", "text": "For what its worth, I recently closed on a 30 year refinance mortage with an agent I found through Zillow.  The lender has a perfect 5/5 reputation score, whose office was located within 5 miles of my house, and as suggested by justkt on MrChrister's response, I checked out the business on the better business bureau and its online presence prior to going forward with the bank. The process was relatively painless, and the APR and closing costs were less than my previous loan with a federal credit union which I've used in the past.  I can't say if the bank I'll be using going forward is as good as the one I've used in the past, but overall I'm quite happy with it. I never met the individual in person but this saved both of us a fair amount of time honestly."}
{"id": "251642", "text": "Paying down your mortgage saves lots of interest. With a long term mortgage you end up paying twice us much to the bank than the sales price of the house. Even low mortgage interests are higher than short term bonds. The saving of those interest are as much an investment as the interest you get from a bond. However, before paying off a mortgage other higher interest loans should be paid off. Also it should be considered if the mortgage interest create a tax reduction in the comparison with any other options."}
{"id": "251649", "text": "\"The Form 1040 (U.S. tax return form) Instructions has a section called \"\"Do You Have To File?\"\".  Below a certain income, you are not required to file a tax return and pay any tax.  This amount of income at which you are required to file depends on several things, including your dependency status (you are a dependent of your parents), your marital status, and other factors.  The instructions have charts that show what these numbers are.  You would fall under Chart B. Assuming that you are under age 65, unmarried, and not blind, you only have to file when you reach the following conditions: Your unearned income was over $1,050. Your earned income was over $6,300. Your gross income was more than the larger of\u2014 $1,050, or Your earned income (up to $5,950) plus $350. (Note: Income from YouTube would count as \"\"earned income\"\" for the purposes above.) However, if you are producing your own videos and receiving revenue from them, you are technically self-employed.  This means that the conditions from Chart C also apply, which state: You must file a return if any of the five conditions below apply for 2015. As a self-employed person, you can deduct business expenses (expenses that you incur in producing your product, which is this case is your videos).  Once your revenue minus your expenses reach $400, you will need to file an income tax return.\""}
{"id": "251704", "text": "Ignoring brokerage fees and the wash-sale rule (both of which are hazardous to your health), and since the 15% LTCG tax is only on the gain, the stock would have to drop 15% of the gain in price since you originally purchased it."}
{"id": "251837", "text": "It's OK if he has good reasons not to invest. This has happened before and this will happen again.   What's not cool in my book is saying stuff like 'people who are bullish on India haven't been to India'. Really? I mean have you been to Russia? Try to venture outside Moscow during late hours Or try to drive a rental vehicle."}
{"id": "251846", "text": "I am only familiar with American banks, but generally speaking, they will work with you if you can demonstrate that you have an adequate average income over a period of time. It is likely they will want a record of your income for at least the last 24 months (more would be better). The terms of the individual contracts (i.e. termination clauses, etc.) shouldn't be important as long as you have a demonstrated history of making a good income. I'd recommend finding a bank that performs manual underwriting, i.e. they actually have someone on staff that will look at your credit history, income, debt ratios, as opposed to them just generating an offer based on a computer model. Lending standards can vary quite a bit from bank to bank, and you have not listed your average annual income, so it is difficult to say whether they will offer you a mortgage, or for what amount, but you have a significant down payment. However, assuming that your numbers are good and that you can find someone intelligent to work with, it's unlikely that they will deny you simply because your income is uneven. Best of luck!"}
{"id": "252097", "text": "\"If you wish to lend them the money, make the check payable to the order of  \"\"loan\"\", not directly to your son or daughter.\""}
{"id": "252417", "text": "Thank you for the links I definitely appreciate the help. It looks like there won't be anything free that will be too helpful I just don't want to spend all that money when it's going to be provided to me anyways. I even tried the library and there's a single book in my state that has three holds before me."}
{"id": "252496", "text": "This is of course using 'new math'.  Namely, if I lend you $100 and you keep it for a month, I've lent you $100.  In fact, if I loan you $100 for a year I've loaned you $100.  But if I lend you $100 overnight, you pay me back in the morning, I lend you $100 overnight, you pay me back in the morning and we repeat that for a month, I've supposedly lent you $3,000.    That's some interesting math for sure."}
{"id": "252737", "text": "Does this plan make sense mathematically? - No not really.  The housing market can be fairly volatile (depending on your location), and it is really a good market for buying right now.  You're going to make 1 or 2% on your money over the next year and risk paying 10% more for the house (or more).  Even if you had a loan at 5% - that would be 5% of what you still owe, not the full value of the house. Does it make sense in terms of the common rules about paying a mortgage off early? - Yes, though make sure you have at least 80% of the house value so you don't get nailed with PMI (which may have a fixed duration). Is there a better strategy that I am overlooking? - Yes, investigate buying a house now.  I'm not saying rush into it - shop around and find a really good deal.  Get a 15-year mortgage (or less) and put what you're able to down (maybe 80% down).  You can then payoff the mortgage over the next year or two and not have the risk of the volatility of the market raising the prices on houses and you getting less for your money."}
{"id": "252843", "text": "FICA taxes are separate from federal and state income taxes. As a sole proprietor you owe all of those.  Additionally, there is a difference with FICA when you are employed vs. self employed.  Typically FICA taxes are actually split between the employer and the employee, so you pay half, they pay half. But when you're self employed, you pay both halves. This is what is commonly referred to as the self employment tax. If you are both employed and self employed as I am, your employer pays their portion of FICA on the income you earn there, and you pay both halves on the income you earn in your business. Edit: As @JoeTaxpayer added in his comment, you can specify an extra amount to be withheld from your pay when you fill out your W-4 form. This is separate from the calculation of how much to withhold based on dependents and such; see line 6 on the linked form. This could allow you to avoid making quarterly estimated payments for your self-employment income. I think this is much easier when your side income is predictable. Personally, I find it easier to come up with a percentage I must keep aside from my side income (for me this is about 35%), and then I immediately set that aside when I get paid. I make my quarterly estimated payments out of that money set aside.  My side income can vary quite a bit though; if I could predict it better I would probably do the extra withholding. Yes, you need to pay taxes for FICA and federal income tax.  I can't say exactly how much you should withhold though. If you have predictable deductions and such, it could be lower than you expect. I'm not a tax professional, and when it comes doing business taxes I go to someone who is. You don't have to do that, but I'm not comfortable offering any detailed advice on how you should proceed there. I mentioned what I do personally as an illustration of how I handle withholding, but I can't say that that's what someone else should do."}
{"id": "252914", "text": "A few things: time in trade, price maximum move against you during that time, price maximum move for you during that time, Where you got out in relation to maximum of the move (how much of the move did you capture in that trade -- from lowest to highest), what was your risk to return (R) -- return / risk."}
{"id": "252918", "text": "\"Target Date Funds automatically change their diversification balance over time, rebalancing and reassigning new contributions to become progressively more protective of what you've already earned. (As opposed to other funds which continue to maintain the same balance of investments until you explicitly move the money around.) You can certainly make that same evolution manually; we all used to do that before target funds were made available, and many of us still do so. I'm still handling the relative allocations by hand. But I'm also close to my retirement target, so a target fund wouldn't be changing that much more anyway, and since I'm already tracking the curve... Note that if you feel a bit braver, or a bit more cautious, than the \"\"average investor\"\" the target fund was designed for, you can tweak the risk/benefit curve of a Target Date Fund by selecting a fund with a target date a bit later or earlier, respectively, than the date at which you intend to start pulling money back out of the fund.\""}
{"id": "252978", "text": "Capital One 360. No minimums balance, no fees. Everything's online. Make deposits using an app or an image of the check. ATMs are free almost everywhere."}
{"id": "253045", "text": "Obviously you don't know the full extent of our company, but I'd be forgoing my salary for a year. Is that worth it to get 10%? I mean assuming it becomes a 1 Million Dollar Idea, I'd get 100k while he gets 700k, working the same amount of time. Then i'd get put on salary."}
{"id": "253210", "text": "This may not exactly answer your question but, as a small business owner, I would highly recommend having a professional handle your taxes. It is worth the money to have it done correctly rather than doing something wrong and getting audited or worse having penalties assessed and owing more than you thought would be possible. I would recommend this especially if this is how you make your primary income, you can always write it off as a business expense."}
{"id": "253369", "text": "\"The key phrase in your post is that the options are \"\"in a good position now\"\".  They may be worthless in three months or a year.   If I was you I would cash in the options and pay off the debt.  Cash in enough to also cover taxes.  You may want to cash them all in.\""}
{"id": "253373", "text": "What is my best course of action, trying to minimize future debt? Minimizing expenses is the best thing you can do. The first step to financial independence is making do with less. Assuming I receive this $3500, am I better off using the bulk to pay off my credit cards, or should I keep as much cash available as I can? This would depend on the interest rate that is associated with the credit cards and the $3500. If the $3500 has a higher interest rate than your credit cards, then do not use any of it to pay your credit cards. Paying back the money you borrow hurts but it's the interest rate that does you in. If the interest rate for the $3500 is lower than the credit card interest, then placing some of it on the credit cards may be a wise course of action. But this depends on how long you are out of work. If you could be out of work for an extended period of time, I would recommend holding on to all of the funds. Note on saving I know this goes against the grain, but I would actually not recommend saving several months worth of funds (maybe one month though). Most employers offer some type of retirement savings account (401(k), Thrift Savings Plan, etc.). I contribute 5% to this fund instead of putting the money in savings. This is an especially effective strategy if your employer offers matching contributions such as mine. Because the divedends for a savings account are so low, it is not a wise place to store your money in the long run. If I had placed my Thrift Savings Plan contributions in a standard savings account, I would now be $12,000 poorer. In addition to this, most long term investment accounts allow you to withdraw the money early in case of emergency, such as being without work. (I also find it too temping to have huge amounts of funds on hand)."}
{"id": "253391", "text": "401(k) contributions are pre-tax dollars, but at the cost of locking the money up.  So you wouldn't have to pay taxes on it, but the funds wouldn't be available either."}
{"id": "253563", "text": "\"In addition to all the points made in other answers, in some jurisdictions (including the UK where I live) the consumer credit laws require the lender to allow the borrower to pay off the loan at any time. If the lender charges interest and the borrower pays off the loan early then the lender loses the interest that would have been paid during the rest of the loan period. However if the actual interest is baked into the sale price of an item and the loan to pay for it is nominally \"\"0%\"\" then the borrower still pays all the interest even if they pay off the loan immediately. If you think this game is being played then you can ask for a \"\"cash discount\"\" (or similar wording: I once had problems with a car salesman who thought I meant a suitcase full of used \u00a320s), meaning you want to avoid paying the interest as you are not taking a loan.\""}
{"id": "253791", "text": "Okay but still three people at $12/hr is $16 more per hour than one person at $20/hr. And if anything paying taxes and benefits for one employee is cheaper than doing so for three. I still don't see how u/NEVERDOUBTED asserts that the three at $12/hr cost less. Where's the math, man???"}
{"id": "253970", "text": "Getting the right diversity of investments helps buffer you from some of the short term market swings. If you need advice it's worth spending a small part of that money on a consultation with a financial adviser, who can talk to you about your goals, your time horizon, and your risk tolerance and recommend a good starting distribution. (Free advice from brokers risks being biased by their commissions.) Once you have that plan, uou need to decide how to execute it. Low-fee index funds are a good way to get started until you learn more, and for many of us that's all we ever need. Then you need to decide whether to invest it all at once or dollar-cost average. I've heard arguments both ways; DCA does mean you risk missing some immmediate gains, but also reduces your risk of buying at a temporary high and taking some immediate losses. For me DCA seemed to make sense, but that's another decision for you to make."}
{"id": "254106", "text": "If you earn money while in the US or from renting your US house - you have to pay taxes to the US on that income. If you become US tax resident - you have to pay US taxes on your worldwide income. Whether or not you're in the US illegally or receiving income while breaking any other law - doesn't matter at all."}
{"id": "254151", "text": "\"If you receive a 1099-MISC from YouTube, that tells you what they stated to the IRS and leads into most tax preparation software guided interviews or wizards as a topic for you to enter.  Whether or not you have a 1099-MISC, this discussion from the IRS is pertinent to your question. You could probably elect to report the income as a royalty on your copyrighted work of art on Schedule E, but see this note: \"\"In most cases you report royalties in Part I of Schedule E (Form 1040). However, if you ... are in business as a self-employed writer, inventor, artist, etc., report your income and expenses on Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ (Form 1040).\"\" Whether reporting on Schedule E or C is more correct or better for your specific circumstances is beyond the advice you should take from strangers on the internet based on a general question - however, know that there are potentially several paths for you.   Note that this is revenue from a business, so if you paid for equipment or services that are 100% dedicated to your YouTubing (PC, webcam, upgraded broadband, video editing software, vehicle miles to a shoot, props, etc.) then these are a combination of depreciable capital investments and expenses you can report against the income, reducing the taxes you may owe.  If the equipment/services are used for business and personal use, there are further guidelines from the IRS as to estimating the split. These apply whether you report on Sch. E, Sch. C, or Sch C-EZ.    Quote: \"\"Self-Employment Income It is a common misconception that if a taxpayer does not receive a Form 1099-MISC or if the income is under $600 per payer, the income is not taxable. There is no minimum amount that a taxpayer may exclude from gross income. All income earned through the taxpayer\u2019s business, as an independent contractor or from informal side jobs is self-employment income, which is fully taxable and must be reported on Form 1040. Use Form 1040, Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business, or Form 1040, Schedule C-EZ, Net Profit from Business (Sole Proprietorship) to report income and expenses. Taxpayers will also need to prepare Form 1040 Schedule SE for self-employment taxes if the net profit exceeds $400 for a year. Do not report this income on Form 1040 Line 21 as Other Income. Independent contractors must report all income as taxable, even if it is less than $600. Even if the client does not issue a Form 1099-MISC, the income, whatever the amount, is still reportable by the taxpayer. Fees received for babysitting, housecleaning and lawn cutting are all examples of taxable income, even if each client paid less than $600 for the year. Someone who repairs computers in his or her spare time needs to report all monies earned as self-employment income even if no one person paid more than $600 for repairs.\"\"\""}
{"id": "254245", "text": "What's the present value of using the payment plan? In all common sense the present value of a loan is the value that you can pay in the present to avoid taking a loan, which in this case is the lump sum payment of $2495.  That rather supposes the question is a trick, providing irrelevant information about the stock market. However, if some strange interpretation is required which ignores the lump sum and wants to know how much you need in the present to pay the loan while being able to make 8% on the stock market that can be done. I will initially assume that since the lender's APR works out about 9.6% per month that the 8% from the stock market is also per month, but will also calculate for 8% annual effective and an 8% annual nominal rate. The calculation If you have $x in hand (present value) and it is exactly enough to take the loan while investing in the stock market, the value in successive months is $x plus the market return less the loan payment.  In the third month the loan is paid down so the balance is zero. I.e. So the present value of using the payment plan while investing is $2569.37. You would need $2569.37 to cover the loan while investing, which is more than the $2495 lump sum payment requires.  Therefore, it would be advisable to make the lump sum payment because it is less expensive: If you have $2569.37 in hand it would be best to pay the lump sum and invest the remaining $74.37 in the stock market.  Otherwise you invest $2569.37 (initially), pay the loan and end up with $0 in three months. One might ask, what rate of return would the stock market need to yield to make it worth taking the loan? The APR proposed by the loan can be calculated.   The present value of a loan is equal to the sum of the payments discounted to present value.  I.e. with  \u2234 by induction  So by comparing the $2495 lump sum payment with $997 over 3 x monthly instalments the interest rate implied by the loan can be found. Solving for r If you could obtain 9.64431% per month on the stock market the $x cash in hand required would be calculated by This is equal to the lump sum payment, so the calculated interest is comparable to the stock market rate of return.  If you could gain more than 9.64431% per month on the stock market it would be better to invest and take the loan. Recurrence Form Solving the recurrence form shows the calculation is equivalent to the loan formula, e.g. becomes v[m + 1] = (1 + y) v[m] - p where v[0] = pv where In the final month v[final] = 0, i.e. when m = 3 Compare with the earlier loan formula: s = (d - d (1 + r)^-n) / r They are exactly equivalent, which is quite interesting, (because it wasn't immediately obvious to me that what the lender charges is the mirror opposite of what you gain by investing). The present value can be now be calculated using the formula. Still assuming the 8% stock market return is per month. If the stock market yield is 8% per annum effective rate and if it is given as a nominal annual yield, 8% compounded monthly"}
{"id": "254280", "text": "\"The instructions do specifically mention them, but not as exclusive plans.  Pension and annuity payments include distributions from 401(k),   403(b), and governmental 457(b) plans. The instructions also mention this: An eligible retirement plan is a governmental plan that is a qualified   trust or a section 403(a), 403(b), or 457(b) plan. 414(h) plans are \"\"qualified\"\" plans. Employee contribution to a 414(h) plan is qualified under 403(b). Report it there and mark it as \"\"Rollover\"\". Talk to a licensed (EA/CPA licensed in your state) professional when in doubt.\""}
{"id": "254308", "text": "With $18,000,000, I'm pretty sure credit isn't an issue.   This is what I'd do:  1) Buy everything I ever wanted.  2) Go on every vacation I ever dreamed of.  3) Sit on top of the remaining $15,000,000 and look at all the little people."}
{"id": "254375", "text": "So your complaining taxing stocks, hurt stock holders who make more money because they hold stock that gets paid from people's payouts? How about that stock holder stop being a whiny bitch because the pennies a stock he lost because other people's stock was taxed, created thousands of jobs that put 50k a year into their bank."}
{"id": "254474", "text": "\"I think the question, as worded, has some incorrect assumptions built into it, but let me try to hit the key answers that I think might help: Your broker can't really do anything here.   Your broker doesn't own the calls you sold, and can't elect to exercise someone else's calls. Your broker can take action to liquidate positions when you are in margin calls, but the scenario you describe wouldn't generate them:  If you are long stock, and short calls, the calls are covered, and have no margin requirement.  The stock is the only collateral you need, and you can have the position on in a cash (non-margin) account.   So, assuming you haven't bought other things on margin that have gone south and are generating calls, your broker has no right to do anything to you. If you're wondering about the \"\"other guy\"\", meaning the person who is long the calls that you are short, they are the one who can impact you, by exercising their right to buy the stock from you.  In that scenario, you make $21, your maximum possible return (since you bought the stock at $100, collected $1 premium, and sold it for $120.  But they usually won't do that before expiration, and they pretty definitely won't here.  The reason they usually won't is that most options trade above their intrinsic value (the amount that they're in the money).    In your example, the options aren't in the money at all.   The stock is trading at 120, and the option gives the owner the right to buy at 120.* Put another way, exercising the option lets the owner buy the stock for the exact same price anyone with no options can in the market.  So, if the call has any value whatsoever, exercising it is irrational; the owner would be better off selling the call and buying the stock in the market.\""}
{"id": "254514", "text": "Your phrasing of the question isn't very clear, but I believe you're asking: Does our total household income classify us as tax exempt? Or, can we avoid filing taxes if we make $22,500 or less per year? The answer is no. Your tax liability will be very low, and if you have dependents or other deductible expenses (mortgage interest, 401K contributions, etc.), you're likely looking at a close to $0 liability. You still have to file your taxes, and you can't claim exempt on your W-4. Even if you did qualify to be tax exempt, you still have to file taxes."}
{"id": "254538", "text": "It is not only merchants that charge for credit card purchases but also service providers. Have you looked at your phone bill lately and even your Council Rates. Most of them charge a small %, usually about 1% on Matercard and Visa, and closer to 2% on Diners, Amex and American Express cards. However, the merchants and service providers that do charge a fee for credit card use, must also provide alternative ways of paying to their customers, so that the customer has the choice to either pay or avoid paying this fee."}
{"id": "254541", "text": ""}
{"id": "254840", "text": "&gt;marginal 2% extra in taxes  This is gibberish.  You aren't even using the term 'marginal' in the correct context.  That aside, 2% extra tax solves what exactly? 2% extra of which tax?  Be honest, you pulled that number from absolutely nowhere.  Am I wrong? Let's see that source that shows '2% extra' of some unknown tax is going to solve an unstated problem. All without toooooootally screwing over the teachers pensions, mom and pops and the rest of the lenders that expect you to pay back the money they lent to you.  You are doing nothing more than trying to justify theft of someone's money because you don't want to pay them back. Your debt is someone else's problem, right?"}
{"id": "254874", "text": "Correct. The developers know that and the Fed will still willingly back all these mortgages and the Government is backing all the private insurers who also know their risk is too great in these areas. Private insurers would never insure these homes without the Government backing them.  It is moral hazard gone wild."}
{"id": "254910", "text": "Note, the main trade off here is the costs of holding cash rather than being invested for a few months vs trading costs from trading every month.  Let's start by understanding investing every month vs every three months.  First compare holding cash for two months (at ~0% for most Canadians right now) and then investing on the third month vs being invested in a single stock etf (~5% annually?).  At those rates she is forgoing equity returns of around  These costs and the $10 for one big trade give total costs of $16+$8+$10=$34 dollars.   If you were to trade every month instead there would be no cost for not being invested and the trading costs over three months would just be 3*$10=$30.  So in this case it would be better to trade monthly instead of every three months. However, I'm guessing you don't trade all $2000 into a single etf.  The more etfs you trade the more trading more infrequently would be an advantage.  You can redo the above calculations spliting the amount across more etfs and including the added trading costs to get a feel for what is best.  You can also rotate as @Jason suggests but that can leave you unbalanced temporarily if not done carefully.  A second option would be to find a discount broker that allows you to trade the etfs you are interested in for free.  This is not always possible but often will be for those investing in index funds.  For instance I trade every month and have no brokerage costs. Dollar cost averaging and value averaging are for people investing a single large amount instead of regular monthly amounts.  Unless the initial amount is much much larger than the monthly amounts this is probably not worth considering. Edit: Hopefully the above edits will clarify that I was comparing the costs (including the forgone returns) of trading every 3 months vs trading every month."}
{"id": "254958", "text": "Yes, you get a refund but only in a couple of states. If you are visiting Louisiana (e.g. New Orleans), there is sales tax refund on tangible items purchased at tax-free stores and permanently removed from the United States (http://www.louisianataxfree.com) . Clothes, shoes, makeup.. these are all items you can claim a tax refund for. Alas, I believe only Louisiana and Texas (http://taxfreetexas.com/) have this, it might be good to know if you are going there. In some states (Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon I believe) there is no sales tax at all.  You do not pay anything at customs for gifts purchased when you leave the United States."}
{"id": "255101", "text": "\"(Disclaimer: I am not an accountant nor a tax pro, etc., etc.) Yes, a Canadian corporation can function as a partial income tax shelter.  This is possible since a corporation can retain earnings (profits) indefinitely, and corporate income tax rates are generally less than personal income tax rates.  Details: If you own and run your business through a corporation, you can choose to take income from your corporation in one of two ways:  as salary, or as dividends. Salary constitutes an expense of the corporation, i.e. it gets deducted from revenue in calculating corporate taxable income.  No corporate income tax is due on money paid out as salary.  However, personal income taxes and other deductions (e.g. CPP) would apply to salary at regular rates, the same as for a regular employee. Dividends are paid by the corporation to shareholders out of after-tax profits.  i.e. the corporation first pays income tax on taxable income for the fiscal year, and resulting net income could be used to pay dividends (or not). At the personal level, dividends are taxed less than salary to account for tax the corporation paid.  The net effect of corporate + personal tax is about the same as for salary (leaving out deductions like CPP.) The key point: Dividends don't have to be paid out in the year the money was earned.  The corporation can carry profits forward (retained earnings) as long as it wants and choose to issue dividends (or not) in later years. Given that, here's how would the partial income tax shelter works: At some point, for you to personally realize income from the corporation, you can have the corporation declare a dividend. You'll then have to pay personal income taxes on the income, at the dividend rates.  But for as long as the money was invested inside the corporation, it was subject only to lesser corporate tax rates, not higher personal income tax rates.  Hence the \"\"partial\"\" aspect of this kind of tax shelter. Or, if you're lucky enough to find a buyer for your corporation, you could qualify for the Lifetime Capital Gains Exemption on proceeds up to $750,000 when you sell a qualified small business corporation.  This is the best exit strategy; unfortunately, not an easy one where the business has no valuable assets (e.g. a client base, or intellectual property.) * The major sticking-point:  You need to have real business revenue!  A regular employee (of another company) can't funnel his personally-earned employment income into a corporation just to take advantage of this mechanism.  Sorry. :-/\""}
{"id": "255252", "text": "Here are my re-run figures.  Not counting capital gains taxes, I calculate you need to be making 1.875% per annum or 0.155% per month on your $8,000 investment to break-even on the loan.  It's interesting that the return you need to gain to break-even is less than the interest you're paying, even with commission.  It happens because the investment is gaining a return on an increasing amount while the load is accruing interest on a decreasing amount.    Ref. r, logarithmic return"}
{"id": "255393", "text": "Sorry. As far as I know, a person's SS is the only way to establish credit. This is the first thing they ask whenever you apply for any service in the US."}
{"id": "256261", "text": "And directly from IRS notice 2014-21 FAQ: Q-1: How is virtual currency treated for federal tax purposes? A-1: For federal tax purposes, virtual currency is treated as property. General tax principles applicable to property transactions apply to transactions using virtual currency. Q-6: Does a taxpayer have gain or loss upon an exchange of virtual currency for other property? A-6: Yes. If the fair market value of property received in exchange for virtual currency exceeds the taxpayer\u2019s adjusted basis of the virtual currency, the taxpayer has taxable gain. The taxpayer has a loss if the fair market value of the property received is less than the adjusted basis of the virtual currency.\u2026 Q-8: Does a taxpayer who \u201cmines\u201d virtual currency (for example, uses computer resources to validate Bitcoin transactions and maintain the public Bitcoin transaction ledger) realize gross income upon receipt of the virtual currency resulting from those activities? A-8: Yes, when a taxpayer successfully \u201cmines\u201d virtual currency, the fair market value of the virtual currency as of the date of receipt is includible in gross income. See Publication 525, Taxable and Nontaxable Income, for more information on taxable income."}
{"id": "256505", "text": "E*Trade offers banking services, and will provide you with a security token free if you have sufficient assets there ($50,000). Otherwise they'll charge you a $25 fee."}
{"id": "256735", "text": "*sigh* So I guess you don't understand why they would care about no risk....  If the sub company fails, but had no debt, then the parent company only loses whatever money they invested in the sub company  If the sub company fails and had debt:    The parent company is responsible for those debts and must pay them if in the agreement with the bank the parent company is responsible.    The parent company is not responsible for those debts if in the agreement with the banks, they did not agree to be collateral if the sub company went bankrupt. Not likely that a bank would agree to this though. They might even try to sue the parent company so they could get some reimbursement."}
{"id": "256857", "text": "Buying this car would be a good idea because you will quickly learn why you feel you need a BMW (that you cannot afford).  This is not an investment, but a financing decision, beyond your means of living. As a future MBA you will regret not investing this money now."}
{"id": "257168", "text": "\"A tax return is a document you sign and file with the government to self-report your tax obligations. A tax refund is the payment you receive from the government if your payments into the tax system exceeded your obligations.  As others have mentioned, if an extra $2K in income generated $5K in taxes, chances are your return was prepared incorrectly. The selection of an appropriate entity type for your business depends a lot on what you expect to see over the next several years in terms of income and expenses, and the extent to which you want or need to pay for fringe benefits or make pretax retirement contributions from your business income. There are four basic flavors of entity which are available to you: Sole proprietorship. This is the simplest option in terms of tax reporting and paperwork required for ongoing operations. Your net (gross minus expenses) income is added to your wage income and you'll pay tax on the total. If your wage income is less than approximately $100K, you'll also owe self-employment tax of approximately 15% in addition to income tax on your business income. If your business runs at a loss, you can deduct the loss from your other income in calculating your taxable income, though you won't be able to run at a loss indefinitely. You are liable for all of the debts and obligations of the business to the extent of all of your personal assets. Partnership. You will need at least two participants (humans or entities) to form a partnership. Individual items of income and expense are identified on a partnership tax return, and each partner's proportionate share is then reported on the individual partners' tax returns. General partners (who actively participate in the business) also must pay self-employment tax on their earnings below approximately $100K. Each general partner is responsible for all of the debts and obligations of the business to the extent of their personal assets. A general partnership can be created informally or with an oral agreement although that's not a good idea. Corporation. Business entities can be taxed as \"\"S\"\" or \"\"C\"\" corporations. Either way, the corporation is created by filing articles of incorporation with a state government (doesn't have to be the state where you live) and corporations are typically required to file yearly entity statements with the state where they were formed as well as all states where they do business. Shareholders are only liable for the debts and obligations of the corporation to the extent of their investment in the corporation. An \"\"S\"\" corporation files an information-only return similar to a partnership which reports items of income and expense, but those items are actually taken into account on the individual tax returns of the shareholders. If an \"\"S\"\" corporation runs at a loss, the losses are deductible against the shareholders' other income.  A \"\"C\"\" corporation files a tax return more similar to an individual's. A C corporation calculates and pays its own tax at the corporate level. Payments from the C corporation to individuals are typically taxable as wages (from a tax point of view, it's the same as having a second job) or as dividends, depending on how and why the payments are made. (If they're in exchange for effort and work, they're probably wages - if they're payments of business profits to the business owners, they're probably dividends.) If a C corporation runs at a loss, the loss is not deductible against the shareholders' other income.  Fringe benefits such as health insurance for business owners are not deductible as business expenses on the business returns for S corps, partnerships, or sole proprietorships. C corporations can deduct expenses for providing fringe benefits.  LLCs don't have a predefined tax treatment - the members or managers of the LLC choose, when the LLC is formed, if they would like to be taxed as a partnership, an S corporation, or as a C corporation. If an LLC is owned by a single person, it can be considered a \"\"disregarded entity\"\" and treated for tax purposes as a sole proprietorship. This option is not available if the LLC has multiple owners.  The asset protection provided by the use of an entity depends quite a bit on the source of the claim. If a creditor/plaintiff has a claim based on a contract signed on behalf of the entity, then they likely will not be able to \"\"pierce the veil\"\" and collect the entity's debts from the individual owners. On the other hand, if a creditor/plaintiff has a claim based on negligence or another tort-like action (such as sexual harassment), then it's very likely that the individual(s) involved will also be sued as individuals, which takes away a lot of the effectiveness of the purported asset protection. The entity-based asset protection is also often unavailable even for contract claims because sophisticated creditors (like banks and landlords) will often insist the the business owners sign a personal guarantee putting their own assets at risk in the event that the business fails to honor its obligations.  There's no particular type of entity which will allow you to entirely avoid tax. Most tax planning revolves around characterizing income and expense items in the most favorable ways possible, or around controlling the timing of the appearance of those items on the tax return.\""}
{"id": "257249", "text": "It is definitely legal and will be accounted by the IRS as earned income."}
{"id": "257274", "text": "\"There are ways to mitigate, but since you're not protected by a tax-deferred/advantaged account, the realized income will be taxed. But you can do any of the followings to reduce the burden: Prefer selling either short positions that are at loss or long positions that are at gain. Do not invest in stocks, but rather in index funds that do the rebalancing for you without (significant) tax impact on you. If you are rebalancing portfolio that includes assets that are not stocks (real-estate, mainly) consider performing 1031 exchanges instead of plain sale and re-purchase. Maximize your IRA contributions, even if non-deductible, and convert them to Roth IRA. Hold your more volatile investments and individual stocks there - you will not be taxed when rebalancing. Maximize your 401K, HSA, SEP-IRA and any other tax-advantaged account you may be eligible for. On some accounts you'll pay taxes when withdrawing, on others - you won't. For example - Roth IRA/401k accounts are not taxed at all when withdrawing qualified distributions, while traditional IRA/401k are taxed as ordinary income. During the \"\"low income\"\" years, consider converting portions of traditional accounts to Roth.\""}
{"id": "257415", "text": "I don't see how it makes a difference?    Setup a futures contract for 33 times more than you have the capital to support and write it as confirmed income, slot it into your balance sheet and then borrow against it.  It's fundamentally no different to the example from the OP, it's just a different way of reaching it."}
{"id": "257443", "text": "I assume the OP is the US and that he is, like most people, a cash-basis tax payer and not an accrual basis tax payer. Suppose the value of the rental of the unit the OP is occupying  was reported  as income on the OP's 2010 and 2011 W-2 forms but the corresponding income  tax was not withheld.  If the OP correctly transcribed these income numbers onto his tax returns, correctly computed the tax on the income reported on his 2010 and 2011 1040 forms, and paid the amount due in timely fashion,  then there is no tax or penalty due for 2010 and 2011. Nor is the company entitled to withhold tax on this income for 2010 and 2011 at this time; the tax on that income has already been paid by the OP directly to the IRS and the company has nothing to do with the matter anymore. Suppose the value of the rental of the unit the OP is occupying  was NOT reported as income on the OP's 2010 and 2011 W-2 forms.  If the OP correctly transcribed these income numbers onto his tax returns, correctly computed the tax on the income reported on his 2010 and 2011 1040 forms, and paid the amount due in timely fashion,  then there is no tax or penalty due for 2010 and 2011. Should the OP have declared the value of the rental of the unit as additional income from his employer that was not reported on the W-2 form, and paid taxes  on that money? Possibly, but it would be reasonable to argue that the OP did nothing wrong other than not checking his W-2 form carefully: he simply assumed the income numbers included the value of the rental and copied whatever the company-issued W-2 form said onto his 1040 form. At least as  of now, there is no reason for the IRS to question his 2010 and 2011 returns because the numbers reported to the IRS on Copy A of the W-2 forms match the numbers reported by the OP on his tax returns.    My guess is that the company discovered that it had not actually declared the value of the rental payments on the OP's W-2 forms for 2010 and 2011 and now wants to include this amount as income on subsequent W-2 forms. Now, reporting a lump-sum benefit of $38K (but no actual cash)  would have caused a huge amount of income tax to need to be withheld, and the OP's next couple of paychecks might well have had zero take-home pay as all the money was going towards this tax withholding. Instead, the company is saying that it will report the $38K as income in 78 equal installments (weekly paychecks over 18 months?)  and withhold $150 as the tax due on each installment. If it does not already do so, it will likely also include the value of the current rent as a benefit and withhold tax on that too. So the OP's take-home pay will reduce by $150 (at least) and maybe more if the current rental payments also start appearing on the paychecks and tax is withheld from them too. I will not express an opinion on the legality of the company withholding an additional $150 as tax from the OP's paycheck, but will suggest that the solution proposed by the company (have the money appear as taxable benefits over a 78-week period, have tax withheld, and declare the income on your  2012, 2013 and 2014 returns) is far more beneficial to the OP than the company declaring to the IRS that it made a  mistake on the 2010 and 2011 W-2's issued to the OP, and that the actual income paid was higher. Not only will the OP have to file amended returns for 2010 and 2011 but the company will need to amend its tax returns too. In summary, the OP needs to know that He will have to pay taxes on the value of the waived rental payments   for 2010 and 2011. The company's mistake in not declaring this as income to the OP   for 2010 and 2011 does not absolve him of the responsibility   for paying the taxes What the company is proposing is a very reasonable solution to the   problem of recovering from the mistake. The alternative, as @mhoran_psprep points out, is to amend   your 2010 and 2011 federal and state tax returns to declare the   value of the rental during those years as additional income,   and pay taxes (and possibly penalties) on the additional   amount due. This takes the company completely out of the picture,   but does require a lot more work and a lot more cash now rather   than in the future."}
{"id": "257547", "text": "How do I calculate the adjusted real rate of return of an investment (such as mutual fund) after inflation and fees? I have always thought that you do this: (1 + nominal return - fees)/(1 + inflation) - 1, but I have been told that this is the wrong way to do it.   Additionally, what is the difference between real interest rate and inflation-adjusted return?"}
{"id": "257616", "text": "There is no tax code I know that would grant you such a privilege. And it just isn't practicable. In your examples, you always sold your product and were thus able, in retrospect, to give a value to your work. What if you don't sell your product? What if in one case your worked hour is reimbursed with one price, with the next product at another (i.e. difference in margin)? No, it won't work like that.  And by the way, I think you might have got some definitions upside down. What you want is a salary that your own company pays out to yourself and you can deduct from other profits. But as long as you can't afford to pay yourself a salary, and you don't have access to investors who are willing to front you the money, the time invested is your personal investment and cannot be deducted anywhere - though it might pay off nicely in the long run. That's the risk entrepreneurs take."}
{"id": "257625", "text": "\"This question and your other one indicate you're a bit unclear on how capital gains taxes work, so here's the deal: you buy an asset (like shares of stock or a mutual fund).  You later sell it for more than you bought it for.  You pay taxes on your profit: the difference between what you sold it for and what you bought it for.  What matters is not the amount of money you \"\"withdraw\"\", but the prices at which assets are bought and sold. In fact, often you will be able to choose which individual shares you sell, which means you have some control over the tax you pay.  For a simple example, suppose you buy 10 shares of stock for $100 each in January (an investment of $1000); we'll call these the \"\"early\"\" shares.  The stock goes up to $200 in July, and you buy 10 more shares (investing an additional $2000); we'll call these the \"\"late\"\" shares.  Then the stock drops to $150.  Suppose you want $1500 in cash, so you are going to sell 10 shares. The 10 early shares you bought have increased in value, because you bought then for $100 but can now sell them for $150.  The 10 late shares have decreased in value, because you bought them for $200 but can now only sell them for $150.  If you choose to sell the early shares, you will have a capital gain of $500 ($1500 sale price minus $1000 purchase price), on which you may owe taxes.  If you sell the late shares, you will have a capital loss of $500 ($1500 sale price minus $2000 purchase price is -$500), which you can potentially use to reduce your taxes.  Or you could sell 5 of each and have no gain or loss (selling five early shares for $150 gives you a gain of $250, but selling five late shares for $150 gives you a loss of $250, and they cancel out). The point of all this is to say that the tax is not determined by the amount of cash you get, but by the difference between the sale price and the price you purchased for (known as the \"\"cost basis\"\"), and this in turn depends on which specific assets you sell.  It is not enough to know the total amount you invested and the total gain.  You need to know the specific cost basis (i.e., original purchase price) of the specific shares you're selling.  (This is also the answer to your question about long-term versus short-term gains.  It doesn't matter how much money you make on the sale.  What matters is how long you hold the asset before selling it.) That said, many brokers will automatically sell your shares in a certain order unless you tell them otherwise (and some won't let you tell them otherwise).  Often they will use the \"\"first in, first out\"\" rule, which means they will always sell the earliest-purchased shares first. To finally get to your specific question about Betterment, they have a page here that says they use a different method.  Essentially, they try to sell your shares in a way that minimizes taxes.  They do this by first selling shares that have a loss, and only then selling shares that have a gain.  This basically means that if you want to cash out $X, and it is possible to do it in a way that incurs no tax liability, they will do that. What gets me very confused is if I continue to invest random amounts of money each month using Betterment, then I need to withdraw some cash, what are the tax implications.  As my long answer above should indicate, there is no simple answer to this.  The answer is \"\"it depends\"\".  It depends on exactly when you bought the shares, exactly how much you paid for them, exactly when and how much the price rose or fell, and exactly how much you sell them for.  Betterment is more or less saying \"\"Don't worry about any of this, trust us, we will handle everything so that your tax is minimized.\"\" A final note: if you really do want to track the details of your cost basis, Betterment may not be for you, because it is an automated platform that may do a lot of individual trades that a human wouldn't do, and that can make tracking the cost basis yourself very difficult.  Almost the whole point of something like Betterment is that you are supposed to give them your money and forget about these details.\""}
{"id": "257716", "text": "Basically, they all do. The relationship is much more dynamic with stocks but corporate financing costs increase, return requirements increase (risk free rate goes up). Same with real estate. Commodity demand is correlated with economic activity, which is correlated with interest rates, although not perfectly. The most important factor is, a higher risk free rate increases the discount rate, which reduces asset values"}
{"id": "257722", "text": "\"Here's a link to an online calculator employing the Discounted Cash Flow method:  Discounted Cash Flows Calculator.  Description: This calculator finds the fair value   of a stock investment the   theoretically correct way, as the   present value of future earnings. You   can find company earnings via the box   below.   [...] They also provide a link to the following relevant article:  Investment Valuation: A Little Theory.  Excerpt: A company is valuable to stockholders   for the same reason that a bond is   valuable to bondholders: both are   expected to generate cash for years   into the future. Company profits are   more volatile than bond coupons, but   as an investor your task is the same   in both cases: make a reasonable   prediction about future earnings, and   then \"\"discount\"\" them by calculating   how much they are worth today. (And   then you don't buy unless you can get   a purchase price that's less than the   sum of these present values, to make   sure ownership will be worth the   headache.)   [...]\""}
{"id": "258190", "text": "A few years ago, I had the rare opportunity to take advantage of a credit card offer. Specifically, a 10% cash back deal on purchases at drug stores or supermarkets. The offer was limited to 90 days, so during that time, I bought 100 cash gift cards at my local CVS.  Over the next year to use them all, when they dropped to a balance under $5 or so, I signed in to my cable TV account and charged the remaining balance there. No bothering a supermarket clerk, or store owner."}
{"id": "258447", "text": "The Net Present Value calculation would need to include 1) payments on the debt of $50 million (negative future cashflows) 2) returns from the project (positive future cashflows)  If both of those things are taken into account and the NPV is positive then the project could be accepted."}
{"id": "258658", "text": "There is a process called a backdoor IRA.   You now have effectively made a Roth IRA contribution in a year where technically you aren't eligible.  You do not have to pay taxes on earnings with a Roth IRA.  You are limited to the normal annual contribution to the IRA (Roth or traditional).   If you don't convert your traditional IRA contribution to a Roth IRA, then you are right.  That gains nothing except enhanced protection in bankruptcy.  Only do this if you are taking advantage of the Roth rollover.   I'm ignoring rolling over a 401k into an IRA, as that doesn't increase the amount you can contribute.  This does.  You can contribute the full $18,000 to the 401k and still make a full contribution to the backdoor IRA.   This is the tax advantaged form of an IRA.  This avoids double taxation.  Let's assume that your investment can go into something with a 5% annual return and you pay a 25% tax rate (doesn't matter as it drops out).  You are going to invest for thirty years and then withdraw.  You initially have $1000 before taxes.   With a regular investment:   You now have $2867.74.   With a pre-tax IRA.   You now have $3241.45 (it is not an accident that this is almost the same as the amount before the capital gains tax in the example without an IRA).   You avoided the $373.72 capital gains tax.  Even though you paid a lot more tax, you paid it out of the gains from investing the original $250 that you would have paid in tax.   This helps you even more if the capital gains tax goes up in the future.  Or if your tax bracket changes.  If you currently are in the 25% bracket but retire in the 15% bracket, these numbers will get even better in your favor.   If you currently are in the 15% bracket and worry that you might retire in the 25% bracket, consider a Roth instead.  It also avoids double taxation but its single taxation is at your current rate rather than your future rate."}
{"id": "258746", "text": "1.8% interest isn't bad, but unless you're a higher rate taxpayer a Santander 123 account might be better for you than an ISA. See http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/mar/23/cash-isas-pointless-savings-revolution"}
{"id": "258962", "text": "I think this question is best answered by simply spending 40-60 minutes looking over the tax documents from last year and tracing thru the calculations.   As much as we might like to do so, we can't treat taxes like a black box. Tax law is much more complicated than it should be, but its much easier to understand taxes after you've filed them than before or during... at least you have solid numbers to look at."}
{"id": "259072", "text": "What you want is a cashless transaction. It's part of the normal process. My employer gives me 1000 options at $1, I never need to come up with the money, the shares are bought and sold in one set of transactions, and if the stock is worth $10, I see $9000 less tax withholding, hit the account. No need for me to come up with that $1000."}
{"id": "259145", "text": "\"Is evaluating stocks just a loss of time if the stock is traded very much? Not at all! Making sound investment decisions based on fundamental analysis of companies will help you to do decide whether a given company is right for you and your risk appetite. Investing is not a zero-sum game, and you can achieve a positive long-term (or short-term, depending on what you're after) outcome for yourself without compromising your ability to sleep at night if you take the time to become acquainted with the companies that you are investing in. How can you ensure that your evaluation is more precise than the   market ones which consists of the evaluation of thousands of people   and professionals? For the average individual, the answer is often simply \"\"you probably cannot\"\". But you don't have to set the bar that high - what you can do is ensure that your evaluation gives you a better understanding of your investment and allows you to better align it with your investment objectives. You don't have to beat the professionals, you just have to lose less money than you would by paying them to make the decision for you.\""}
{"id": "259150", "text": "The advantage of a Traditional IRA is: tax deduction today.  The advantage of a Roth IRA: no tax on withdrawal. Both types are tax-deferred, and have no bearing on the question."}
{"id": "259341", "text": "\"Some investment trusts have \"\"zero dividend preference shares\"\" which deliver all their gains as capital gains rather than income, even if the trust was investing in income yielding stocks. They've rather gone out of fashion after a scandal some years ago (~2000).  Good 2014 article on them here includes the quote  \"\"Because profits from zero dividend preference shares are taxed as   capital gains, they can be used tax efficiently if you are smart about   how you use your annual capital gains tax allowance.\"\"\""}
{"id": "259456", "text": "As revised,  the answer is still that you're asking the wrong question. If your father wants to make money available on your debit card, all he has to do is deposit the money into your checking account. Where he gets that money from -- as an AmEx casH advance, by selling your bicycle for you, or simply out of one of his own bank accounts -- is irrelevant."}
{"id": "259564", "text": "Generally, no.  A mortgage is a lien against the property, which allows the bank to exercise certain options, primarily Power of Sale (Force you to sell the property) and outright seizure.   In order to do this, title needs to be clear, which it isn't if you have half title. However, if you have a sales agreement, you can buy your brother's half, and then mortgage the entire property.  This happens all the time.  When you buy a house from someone, you get pre-approved for that house, which, at the time, you have no title to.   Through some black magic lawyering and handwaving, this is all sorted out at closing time."}
{"id": "259728", "text": "\"$500, this is called \"\"cash basis\"\" accounting. A large company might handle it otherwise, counting shipments/billings as revenue. Not you. Yet.\""}
{"id": "259766", "text": "The first problem with your analysis is that you are not comparing equivalent contributions. The deductible Traditional IRA contribution is in terms of pre-tax money, whereas the Roth IRA contribution is in terms of post-tax money. A certain nominal amount of pre-tax money is equivalent to a smaller nominal amount of post-tax money, because taxes are taken out of it. For a fair comparison, you need to start with the same amount of pre-tax money being taken out of your wages. If you start with $1000 being taken out of your pre-tax wages, the deductible Traditional IRA contribution will be $1000, but your Roth IRA contribution will be $750, because 25% of it went to paying taxes. If you go through the calculation, you will see that after you withdraw it (and 25% taxes are paid in the Traditional case), you will be left with the exact same amount of money in your hand at the end in both cases. Even though you see that you end up with the same amount of money, you may still be confused because you paid different nominal amounts in taxes. That's the second problem with your analysis -- you are comparing the nominal amounts of taxes paid at different times. You are missing the time value of money. Would you rather pay $1000 of taxes today or $1001 of taxes in 10 years? Of course you would rather the latter, even though it is a higher nominal amount. A given amount of money now has the same value to you now as a bigger amount of money later. If I invest a given amount of money now, and it grows in to a bigger amount of money later, then that bigger amount of money later has the same value as the original contribution now. So the 25% tax on the contribution now is equivalent to the 25% tax on the total value later, even though the latter is a much bigger nominal amount. Another way to think about it is that you could have taken that 25% tax you paid now, and instead invest it, let it grow, and pay that result (which will still be 25% of the total later) in taxes later. You get to keep the remaining 75% of your investment either way. You are simply investing on behalf of the government the part of the money you would have paid them, and paying them the result of investing that portion of the money later."}
{"id": "259881", "text": "This is something that many people misunderstand. Nearly everyone who works in the U.S. is required to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes (sometimes called payroll taxes or FICA).  These are not a savings plan, and the money you pay is not going into an account with your name on it.  This money is used to pay for the benefits of the current retirees/beneficiaries.  When you retire, the benefits you get will be paid for by the workers that are still working and paying that tax. You may be receiving benefits, but you are also still working, so you still have to pay the tax."}
{"id": "259919", "text": "If they have borrowed money without paying it back, what makes you think you could get interest paid? The problem that you face first is to make clear to them that a loan is a loan. As long as they can get free money off you, they will keep borrowing."}
{"id": "260007", "text": "Sometimes I think it helps to think of the scenario in reverse. If you had a completely paid off car, would you take out a title loan (even at 0%) for a few months to put the cash in a low-interest savings account? For me, I think the risk of losing the car due to non-payment outweighs the tens of dollars I might earn."}
{"id": "260328", "text": "If you want to take to task the [$3.7 trillion](https://www.google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod=4&amp;sourceid=chrome&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;q=value+of+muni+bond+market#hl=en&amp;safe=off&amp;sclient=psy-ab&amp;q=%243.7+trillion+bonds&amp;oq=%243.7+trillion+bonds&amp;aq=f&amp;aqi=&amp;aql=&amp;gs_l=serp.3...2959.7140.0.7714.19.19.0.0.0.0.172.2410.1j18.19.0...0.0.TAsEgkE4bAg&amp;pbx=1&amp;bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&amp;fp=fea88144d3bdc45d&amp;biw=1283&amp;bih=739) bond market number enjoy your long list of sources using it. I guess they're all in the business of exaggeration huh?       [Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board](http://www.msrb.org/Municipal-Bond-Market.aspx)   &gt;The approximately $3.7 trillion municipal bond market brings together bond issuers and investors to finance public infrastructure projects.     So now tell me, was he making up a number to exaggerate his story or was he just using the same number the fucking MSRB uses as his source?      Why don't YOU start providing some proof as to why the number is wrong.  That's typically what someone challenging data is supposed to do.        EDIT:     [Fed Agrees With Citi On $3.7 Trillion Estimate](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-08/u-s-municipal-bond-market-28-larger-than-estimated-federal-reserve-says.html)"}
{"id": "260363", "text": "\"You ask a few different, though not unrelated, questions. Everywhere you turn today, you hear   people talk about how much they need   to save or how important it is to find   a good deal on things \"\"in this   economy\"\". They use phrases like \"\"now   more than ever\"\" and \"\"in these   uncertain times\"\". It seems to be a lot   of doom and gloom. Some of this is marketing spiel.  You may notice that when the economy goes south the number of ads for the cheaper alternatives goes north.  (e.g. hair clippers, discount grocery stores, discount just about anything)  Truth is, we should always be looking for ways to save money on goods and services we purchase.  The question is, what is acceptable to you for your desired lifestyle.  (And, is that desired lifestyle reasonable for your income, age and personal situation.)  Generally speaking, the harder times are the more we find discounted/cheaper alternatives acceptable.   Is there really a good reason that   people should be saving more than   spending right now? How much you are putting away is a personal matter.  I can still remember my dad griping whenever he couldn't save half of his paycheck.  That said, putting away half your paycheck may lead to a rather austere lifestyle.  This, of course, depends on the size of your paycheck and your desired lifestyle.  You could be raking it, living simply and potentially put away more than half your income with relative ease. If you have a stable job, and a decent cash reserve, is it anymore \"\"dangerous\"\" to make a large purchase now than it was seven years ago? Who knows?  Honestly, no one.  Predicting the future is a fool's errand.  (If you are interested in reading more on this view point, I suggest The Black Swan.) You mention the correct approach in this question.  Ensure that you have liquid assets (cash or cash equivalents, i.e. money that you can draw on immediately and isn't credit) which covers at least 3-6 months of your necessary expenses (rent/mortgage, bills, car payments, food).  (There is no reason that you couldn't try to increase this to 1 year, especially \"\"in this economy.\"\") You should also strive to have money available for emergencies that don't necessarily include loss of income.  Of course, make sure you're putting away for retirement, as appropriate for your retirement goals.  After that should come discretionary items, including investing, entertainment, the large purchase you mentioned, etc.   You should never use money that you may need immediately (5-10 years) for investing.  This doesn't necessarily include the large purchase you are contemplating.  For example, if you are considering purchasing a home, the down-payment may be one of the items for which you need money in the \"\"immediate\"\" future. Is it really only because of unemployment numbers? This is probably the big one that is the focus of everyone's attention.  That said, the human attention span is limited.  We have a natural need to simplify things.  This is one of the reasons that we tend to focus on a few, hopefully important, things.  However, the unemployment numbers are not that the only thing of concern.  Credit is still pretty hard to come by these days.  The overall economy is still hurting, even if we are technically no longer in a recession.  There are also concerns about U.S. government borrowing, consumer spending, recent trucking numbers, etc.  (It may not be obvious, but trucking is used as a barometer of economic activity.  If there aren't as many trucks carting goods across the country, it probably means that there is less economic activity.)  The headline number these days is unemployment, as most census workers have now been returned to the pool. To answer the overall question, we should always be saving money, in good times or in bad.  Be that by squeezing more value out of our purchases or by putting some money away.  We should always try to reduce our risks, by having an emergency \"\"cash\"\" cushion.  We should always be saving for retirement.  Truth be told, it is probably more important to put money away in good times, before the hardships hit.\""}
{"id": "260391", "text": "I don't see the problem with what they proposed. Visa, Mastercard, American Express etc don't run charities, they charge for their services. And you better believe that cost gets passed down to the consumer one way ir another.  Verizon wanted to itemize this charge directly on your bill. Big whoop. I'd prefer a little bit of transparency in where, exactly, my money goes when I pay a bill."}
{"id": "260499", "text": "I don't know, ask the various companies I'm forced to do business with why in the hell they want me to stop by their office so I can drop a check off vs just using some means of digital payment.  I would fucking LOVE to ditch paper checks."}
{"id": "260535", "text": "Regardless. It\u2019s a guaranteed 5.x%. Reducing student loans also allows you other benefits; i.e. reduces your credit risk allowing you to pull out more credit at a cheaper rate in the future etc. Unless you strongly believe in current bull market continuing.. (there is a high overvaluation from market principles atm and it has been the longest rise in history), you should go for the guaranteed change. Additionally, if your loan is pegged to variable interest rates such as the fed funds rate, be cognizant that the fed will probably continue rising rates for the near future of good times continue, meaning your rates will go up while markets go down. Long story short, would recommend paying down debt unless you\u2019re quite confident in your skills.  Edit: quick note that if you can do both, this is the best option."}
{"id": "260569", "text": "In this case, it looks like the interest is simply the nominal daily interest rate times number of days in the period. From that you can use a spreadsheet to calculate the total payment by trial and error. With the different number of days in each period, any formula would be very complicated. In the more usual case where the interest charge for each period is the same, the formula is: m=P*r^n*(r-1)/(r^n-1) where * is multiplication ^ is exponentiation / is division (Sorry, don't know if there's a way to show formulas cleanly on here) P=original principle r=growth factor per payment period, i.e. interest rate + 100% divided by 100, e.g. 1% -> 1.01 n=number of payments Note the growth factor above is per period, so if you have monthly payments, it's the rate per month. The last payment may be different because of rounding errors, unequal number of days per period, or other technicalities. Using that formula here won't give the right answer because of the unequal periods, but it should be close. Let's see: r=0.7% times an average of 28.8 days per period gives 20.16% + 1 = 1.2016. n=5 P=500 m=500*1.2016^5*(1.2016-1)/(1.2016^5-1) =167.78 Further off than I expected, but ballpark."}
{"id": "260677", "text": "Hopefully this $1000 is just a start, and not the last investment you will ever make. Assuming that, there are a couple of big questions to consider: One: What are you saving for? Are you thinking that this is for retirement 40 or 50 years from now, or something much sooner, like buying a car or a house? You didn't say where you live. In the U.S., if you put money into an IRA or a 401k or some other account that the government classes as a retirement account, you don't pay taxes on the profits from the investment, only on the original principal. If you leave the money invested for a long period of time, the profits can be many times the original investment, so this makes a huge difference.  Like suppose that you pay 15% of your income in state and local taxes.  And suppose you invest your $1000 in something that gives a 7% annual return and leave it there for 40 years. (Of course I'm just making up numbers for an example, but I think these are in a plausible range. And I'm ignoring the difference between regular income tax and capital gains tax, etc etc. It doesn't change the point.) If you put the money in a classic IRA, you pay 0% taxes the year you open the account, so you have your full $1000, figure that compound interest for 40 years, you'll end up with -- crunch crunch crunch the numbers -- $14,974. Then you pay 15% when you take it leaving you with $12,728. (The end result with a Roth IRA is exactly the same. Feel free to crunch those numbers.) But now suppose you invest in a no-retirement account so you have to pay taxes every year. Your original investment is only $850 because you have to pay tax on that, and your effective return is only 5.95% because you have to pay 15% of the 7%. So after 40 years you have -- crunch crunch -- $10,093. Quite a difference. But if you put money in a retirement account and then take it out before you retire, you pay substantial penalties. I think it's 20%. If you plan to take the money out after a year or two,  that would really hurt. Two: How much risk are you willing to take? The reality of investment is that, almost always, the more risk you take, the bigger the potential returns, and vice versa. Investments that are very safe tend to have very low returns. As you're young, if you're saving for retirement, you can probably afford a fairly high amount of risk. If you lose a lot of money this year, odds are you'll get it back over the next few years, or at least be able to put more money into investments to make up for it. If you're 64 and planning to retire next year, you want to take very low-risk investments. In general, investing in government bonds is very safe but has very low returns. Corporate bonds are less safe but offer higher returns. Stocks are a little more. Of course different companies have different levels of risk: new start-ups tend to be very risky, but can give huge returns. Commodities are much higher risk. Buying on margin or selling short are ways to really leverage your money, but you could end up losing more than you invested. Mutual funds are a relatively safe way to invest in stocks and bonds because they spread your risk over many companies. Three: How much effort are you willing to put into managing your investments? How much do you know about the stock market and the commodities market and international finance and so on, and how much are you willing to learn? If your answer is that you know a lot about these things or are willing to dive in and learn a lot, that you can invest in individual stocks, bonds, commodities, etc. If your answer is that you really don't know much about all this, then it makes a lot of sense to just put your money into a mutual fund and let the people who manage the fund do all the work."}
{"id": "260756", "text": "Fundamentally, it's no different than normal.  A risky entity must entice investors with higher interest rates than less risky entities.  We're just in such a low interest rate environment that the rate spread now dips below zero and very low risk entities can issue debt with a negative coupon. Though I agree that this makes no sense and the world's gone mad."}
{"id": "260795", "text": "Whether you're self-employed or not, knowing exactly how much tax you will pay is not always an easy task.  Various actions you can take (e.g., charitable donations, IRA contributions, selling stocks) may increase or reduce your tax liability. One tool I've found useful for estimating federal taxes is the Excel 1040 spreadsheet.  This is a spreadsheet version of the income tax return form.  It is not official and is not created by the IRS, but is maintained as a labor of love by a private individual.  In practice, however, it is pretty much an accurate implementation of the tax calculation algorithms encoded in the tax forms and instructions. The nice thing about it is that it's a spreadsheet.  You can plug numbers into various slots in the spreadsheet and see how they affect your federal tax liability.  (You may also owe state taxes depending on what state you live in.)  Of course, the estimates you get by doing this are only (at most) as accurate as your estimates of the various numbers you plug in.  Still, I think it's a free and useful way to get a ballpark estimate of your tax liability based on numbers that you can more easily estimate (e.g., how much money you expect to earn)."}
{"id": "260848", "text": "\"If you're really interested in the long-term success of your business, and you can get by in your personal finances without taking anything from the business for the time being, then don't.   There is no \"\"legal requirement\"\" to pay yourself a prevailing wage if doing so would put the company out of business.  it is common for a company's principals not to draw wages from the business until it is viable enough to sustain payroll.  I was in that situation when I first began my business, so the notion that somehow I'm violating a law by being fiscally responsible for my own company is nonsense. Be wise with your new business.  You didn't state why you feel the need to take some kind of payment out, but this can be a crucial mistake if it imperils your business or if that money could be better spent on marketing or some other areas which improve revenues. You can always create a salary deferral agreement between yourself and your own company which basically states that the company owes you wages but you are, for the time being, willing to defer accepting them until such time that the company has sufficient revenues to pay you.  That's one solution, but the simplest answer is, if you don't need the money you're thinking of paying yourself, don't do it.  Let that money work for you in the business so that it pays off better in the long run. Good luck!\""}
{"id": "260983", "text": "10k in taser stock at $1.00 per share made those who held into the hundreds per share made millions.  But think about the likelihood of you owning a $1 stock and holding it past $10.00. They (taser millionaires) were both crazy and lucky.  A direct answer, better off buying a lottery ticket. Stocks are for growing wealth not gaining wealth imho. Of course there are outliers though.  To the point in the other answer, if it was repeatable the people teaching the tricks (if they worked) would make much more if they followed their own advice if it worked.  Also, if everyone tells you how good gold is to buy that just means they are selling to get out. If it was that good they would be buying and not saying anything about it."}
{"id": "261087", "text": "\"Cash/CD's for a house downpayment = Good. Resist the urge to invest this money unless you're not planning on the house for at least 5 years. Roth IRA - Good. Amounts contributed are able to be withdrawn without tax penalties, though you would really need to be in a crisis for this to be a good idea. It's your long-term, retirement money. The earlier you start, the better. Use your 401K at work, if it's offered. Contribute to the Roth as much as you can, as well. Whole life (\"\"Cash value\"\") life insurance: Be careful... Cash-value life insurance (Whole, Universal, Variable Universal) must be watched more closely as you age. Once they reach that \"\"magical\"\" point of being self-sustaining, you cannot relax. The annual cost of insurance is taken from the cash value, which your premium payments replenish. If you stop making premium payments, eventually the cost of insurance (which goes up every year) will erode your cash value down to nothing, at which point more premium must be paid to keep the policy in force. This often happens in your old age, when you can least afford the surprise, and costs are highest. Some advisors get messed up in their priorities when they start depending on the 8-10% commissions they are paid on insurance policies. Since premiums for cash-value policies are far higher than for term policies, you might get some insight into your advisor if they ignore your attempts to consider a term policy. Because of the insurance costs' effects on your cash value, these types of policies are some of the most inefficient and expensive ways to invest. You are better off not investing via a life insurance policy. You don't need life insurance unless someone depends on your financial contribution to their life (spouse and children, for example). Some people just like the peace of mind it brings, and some people want a lump sum to leave as a gift to their loved ones (which is an expensive way to leave a gift).  You can have these \"\"feel-good\"\" benefits with a term policy for much less money, if you must have them. Unless you expect to become uninsurable at some point in the future, you should consider using term insurance to meet your life insurance needs until it is no longer needed.\""}
{"id": "261199", "text": "Start with the tax delta. For example, you'd hope to deposit at 25% bracket, but take withdrawals while at a marginal 15%. In this case, you're 10% to the good with the 401(k) and need to look at the fee eating away at this over time. Pay an extra 1%/yr and after 10 years, you're losing money. That's too simple, however. Along the way, you need to consider that the capital gain rate is lower than ordinary income. It's easier to take those gains as you wish to time them, where the 401(k) offers no flexibly for this. Even with low fees, this account is going to turn long term gains to ordinary income. (Note - in 2013, a couple with up to $72,500 in taxable income has a 0% long term cap gain rate. So, if they wish, they can sell and buy back a fund, claim the gain, and raise their cost basis. A tiny effort for the avoidance of tax on the gains each year.) First paragraph, don't forget, there are the standard deduction, exemption, and 10% bracket. While you are in the range to save enough to create he income to fill the low end at withdrawal, there's more value than just the 10% I discussed earlier.  Last, there's a phenomenon I call The Phantom Tax Rate Zone when one's retirement withdrawals trigger the taxation of Social Security.  It further complicates the math and analysis you seek."}
{"id": "261258", "text": "I've never heard of an employer offering this kind of arrangement before, so my  answer assumes there is no special tax treatment that I'm not aware of. Utilizing the clause is probably equivalent to exercising some of your options, selling the shares back to your employer at FMV, and then exercising more options with the proceeds. In this case if you exercise 7500 shares and sell them back at FMV, your proceeds would be 7500 x $5 = $37,500, with which you could exercise the remaining 12,500 options. The tax implications would be (1) short-term capital gains of 7500 x ($5 - $3) = $15,000 and (2) AMT income of 12,500 x ($5 - $3) = $25,000, assuming you don't sell the shares within the calendar year."}
{"id": "261522", "text": "Like others have already said, it may cause an immediate dip due to a large and sudden move in shares for that particular stock. However, if there is nothing else affecting the company's financials and investors perceive no other risks, it will probably bounce back a bit, but not back to the full value before the shares were issued. Why? Whenever a company issues more stock, the new shares dilute the value of the current shares outstanding, simply because there are now more shares of that stock trading on the market; the Earnings Per Share (EPS) Ratio will drop since the same profit and company value has to be spread across more shares. Example:  If a company is valued at $100 dollars and they have 25 shares outstanding, then the EPS ratio equates to $4 per share (100/25 = 4).  If the company then issues more shares (stock to employees who sell or keep them), let's say 25 more shares, then shares outstanding increase to 50, but the company's value still remains at $100 dollars. EPS now equates to $2 per share (100/50 = 2). Now, sometimes when shareholders (especially employees...and especially employees who just received them) suddenly all sell their shares, this causes a micro-panic in the market because investors believe the employees know something bad about the company that they don't. Other common shareholders then want to dump their holdings for fear of impending collapse in the company. This could cause the share price to dip a bit below the new diluted value, but again if no real, immediate risks exist, the price should go back up to the new, diluted value. Example 2: If EPS was at $4 before issuing more stock, and then dropped to $2 after issuing new stock, the micro-panic may cause the EPS to drop below $2 and then soon rebound back to $2 or more when investors realize no actual risk exists. After the dilution phase plays out, the EPS could actually even go above the pre-issuing value of $4 because investors may believe that since more stock was issued due to good profits, more profits may ensue. Hope that helps!"}
{"id": "261549", "text": "\"BTW -- you realize I'm the author, right?  And that I've launched not 1, but 2 successful web apps, right?  Just checking.  My whole point is this: \"\"From the investment aspect, roughly 1 in 10 companies that receive investments do not fail\"\" -- is that a cause or an effect? Why do so many ventures fail? They are allegedly started by smart, capable people and funded by people with \"\"experience.\"\"\""}
{"id": "261622", "text": "Yes, it's a simple calculation. (x+0.0625x)=200 or x=200/1.0625 = $188.24 Technically $188.24 plus tax comes to $200.01. I would just eat the extra $0.01."}
{"id": "261802", "text": "Open, high, low, close, volume. The hint is that volume on new years day is 0.  DC's comment is actually a better answer than mine - when given any data set, you should really know the meaning of each cell/number."}
{"id": "261846", "text": "\"Their banking systems basically avoid usury, which is essentially interest, because it is immoral.  So how the lenders make money is by being a \"\"partner\"\" and getting a pre-agreed to amount of profit. However, risk of failure is still on the borrower. In the end the numbers come out the same, they just call it something different.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury#Islamic_banking\""}
{"id": "261858", "text": "$500 per package, with a package representing 100 stocks, or $5k for the entire market from a single source (NYSE, for example).  IIRC that was the neighborhood when I went looking. I actually only needed one index in great detail - I chose the S&amp;P 500, and found a source for well under $100."}
{"id": "261902", "text": "\"The IRS rules are actually the same.  26 U.S. Code \u00a7 1091 - Loss from wash sales of stock or securities In   the case of any loss claimed to have been sustained from any sale or   other disposition of shares of stock or securities where it appears   that, within a period beginning 30 days before the date of such sale   or disposition and ending 30 days after such date, the taxpayer has   acquired (by purchase or by an exchange on which the entire amount of   gain or loss was recognized by law), or has entered into a contract or   option so to acquire, substantially identical stock or securities,   then no deduction shall be allowed... What you should take away from the quote above is \"\"substantially identical stock or securities.\"\" With stocks, one company may happen to have a high correlation, Exxon and Mobil come to mind, before their merger of course. With funds or ETFs, the story is different. The IRS has yet to issue rules regarding what level of overlap or correlation makes two funds or ETFs \"\"substantially identical.\"\"  Last month, I wrote an article, Tax Loss Harvesting, which analyses the impact of taking losses each year. I study the 2000's which showed an average loss of 1% per year, a 9% loss for the decade. Tax loss harvesting made the decade slightly positive, i.e. an annual boost of approx 1%.\""}
{"id": "261926", "text": "\"The language in the starbucks accounts is highly ambiguous. But Starbucks has no treasury shares which helps work out what is going on.  Where it says \"\"respectively\"\" it is referring to the years 2014 and 2013 rather than \"\"issued and outstanding\"\"...even though it doesn't read that way. Not easy to work out. The figures are:  Authorised 1200 2014 Issued 749.5 2014 Outstanding 749.5 2013 Issued 753.2 2013 Outstanding 753.2\""}
{"id": "261965", "text": "I think the IRS doc you want is http://www.irs.gov/publications/p550/ch04.html#en_US_2010_publink100010601 I believe the answers are:"}
{"id": "261983", "text": "A questoin that I deal with almost every day.  Like most investments it comes down to.....What is the purpose for this money?  If it is truly a rainy day savings account that you may need in the short term, then fixed income investments like savings accounts, GIC's, Bonds, Bond funds and Fixed Income ETF's are ideal as they are taxed very inefficiently outside of any registered plan (therefore tax free in here).  However if you have a plan in place that has all your short term needs covered elsewhere, I believe this is the place that you should be the most aggressive in your overall portfolio.  If that mining stock goes up by 1000% wouldn't it be nice to put all of that gain in your pocket?"}
{"id": "262180", "text": "\"Put the whole lot into a couple of low-cost broad index funds with dividends reinvested (also known as accumulation funds) and then don't look at them. Invest through a low-cost broker. There are a number to choose from and once you start googling around the theme of \"\"index fund investing\"\" you'll find them. The S&P 500 is a popular index to start with.\""}
{"id": "262521", "text": "Donations need to be with no strings attached. In this case, you make the cash donation, a deduction, and then they pay you, in taxable income. It's a wash. Why not just give them the service for free? Otherwise this is just money going back and forth."}
{"id": "262591", "text": "Tell your broker.  You can usually opt to have certain positions be FIFO and others LIFO.  Definitely possible with Interactive Brokers."}
{"id": "262721", "text": "Square prices are hard to beat for a small operation. I've looked around when I was considering starting up a business, and they're definitely one of the cheapest. Paypal are the second best, but I do not trust Paypal in general. However, looking locally may provide you some more options. If you walk in to one of the local banks, you may be able to get offers for merchant accounts with better rate, depending on your relationships with that bank. You can also check out Costco merchant services, they seem to be quite competitive with the rates, but there may be other costs (they will probably charge more for equipment)."}
{"id": "262885", "text": "\"What you are looking for is a Money Coach or a Personal Finance Coach. From mymoneycoach.com: \"\"Money Coach: Everyone uses money, but few people fully understand how to use it wisely. To be debt free and enjoy a comfortable lifestyle takes special skills. Money coaches provide solutions for household budgeting, investing, using credit wisely, and saving for retirement. With the principles offered by a money coach, you can live the life you want to live.\"\" Usually money coaches or personal finance coaches will not tell you \"\"you should put your money here or there\"\" but instead they will work with you to identify and correct bad money behaviours that affect more than just your investments, and they will not sell you anything. Maybe you could take a look at some coaches in your area, but a lot of them work via the internet too. Good luck!\""}
{"id": "262960", "text": "You can always reduce the income by the direct expenses required to earn it, and figure out whether it is ultimately a net profit or loss.   The net profit is taxable income.  The loss may be tax deductible if the underlying thing is tax deductible.    For the book, the $50 revenue required a $100 expense, so that's a $50 net loss.  You don't owe any income tax since it's a loss.  You could take the loss as a tax deduction if you have a business trading books, or if buying the book would be tax deductible for some reason.  Note that in the latter case you can only deduct the $50 not the $100.  For the airline ticket, it is to compensate you for the losses you took as a result if the delayed flight. So you tally up the $22 meal you had in the airport waiting for news, the $110 on the motel room you rented or forfeited, any other way you can peg a cash value to any losses you took.  Total them up, again, a net loss is only deductible if the travel is already deductible. Note that if the actual expenses (book, flight) were tax deductible for some reason, the cash-back reduces the amount of your tax deduction, so it has the same effect as the sale/gift being taxable income."}
{"id": "263088", "text": "Keep in mind the ex-dividend date is different from the payable date (the day the dividend is paid). That means the market price will already have adjusted lower due to the dividend. Short answer: you get the lower price when reinvesting. So here's Vanguard's policy, it should be similar to most brokers: When reinvesting dividends, Vanguard Brokerage Services combines the   cash distributions from the accounts of all clients who have requested   reinvestment in the same security, and then uses that combined total   to purchase additional shares of the security in the open market.   Vanguard Brokerage will attempt to purchase the reinvestment shares by   entering a market order at the market opening on the payable date. The   new shares are divided proportionately among the clients' accounts, in   whole and fractional shares rounded to three decimal places. If the   total purchase can't be completed in one trade, clients will receive   shares purchased at the weighted average price paid by Vanguard   Brokerage Services."}
{"id": "263485", "text": "IRS pub 521 has all the information you need. Expenses reimbursed. If you are reimbursed for your expenses and you   use the cash method of accounting, you can deduct your expenses either   in the year you paid them or in the year you received the   reimbursement. If you use the cash method of accounting, you can   choose to deduct the expenses in the year you are reimbursed even   though you paid the expenses in a different year. See Choosing when to   deduct, next. If you deduct your expenses and you receive the   reimbursement in a later year, you must include the reimbursement in   your income on Form 1040, line 21 This is not unusual. Anybody who moves near the end of the year can have this problem. The 39 week time test also can be an issue that span over 2 tax years. I would take the deduction for the expenses as soon a I could, and then count the income in the later year if they pay me back. IF they do so before April 15th, then I would put them on the same tax form to make things easier."}
{"id": "263751", "text": "I guess the answer lies in your tax jurisdiction (different countries tax capital gains and income differently) and your particular tax situation. If the price of the stock goes up or down between when you buy and sell then this counts for tax purposes as a capital gain or loss. If you receive a dividend then this counts as income.  So, for instance, if you pay tax on income but not on capital gains (or perhaps at a lower rate on capital gains) then it would pay you to sell immediately before the stock goes ex-dividend and buy back immediately after thereby making a capital gain instead of receiving income."}
{"id": "263867", "text": "\"I took a second mortgage when I moved house because I had a long-term fixed rate mortgage that would have incurred punitive fees if I had cancelled it. Rather than doing that I took a second mortgage over the same term for the difference. As my second mortgage was with the same lender, they still had \"\"First Charge\"\" on the property (This means that in the event of default they have first call on the property to recoup their losses), so the interest rate was not higher (actually it was slightly less than my first mortgage). My case is not that usual, normally a 'second mortgage' is with a separate provider that takes a \"\"Second Charge\"\" on the property. The interest rates are normally higher as a result as there is more chance that the lender will not recoup their money in case of a default as the first charge has priority. The second mortgage may still be cheaper than an unsecured loan, as the second charge provides some collateral, this might make it attractive if a sudden expense needs to be covered.\""}
{"id": "263947", "text": "\"In your example, no one has exchanged anything yet: &gt; All we have up to this point are promises, but no one has done any work yet.  When something goes wrong, no exchange has taken place so there is no direct economic impact, because no one is in debt. The farmer needs to get his barrel from somewhere else, but he has not lost anything other than time.  However in otherwiseyep's example, the cobbler has exchanged a pair of shoes for the promissory note: &gt;Tell you what: if you can write me a promise to pay twelve Loddars in October, I can give that to the shoe-maker.\"\"  When something goes wrong, there is a direct economic impact, because the farmer is in debt to the hunter, and the hunter is in debt to the cobbler.  I think otherwiseyep explains it best [in his response to another post](http://www.reddit.com/r/finance/comments/utf5u/where_has_all_the_money_in_the_world_gone/c4ypy2q).\""}
{"id": "264010", "text": "What are you missing? Volume. Bank of America is more than willing to refinance a loan from Wells Fargo as long as the loan is still profitable. There are some caveats with that, though. For one, many land have penalties if they are paid off within two or three years. Additionally, the fact that banks are offering to refinance at great rates doesn't mean that you'll be approved, or that you'll get those rates. If you could post some actual numbers, we could help you see if it's a good deal to refi, and explain exactly where the bank expects it's profit."}
{"id": "264068", "text": "\"If a person is not a U.S. citizen and they live and work outside the U.S., then any income they make from a U.S. company or person for services provided does not qualify as \"\"U.S. Source income\"\" according to the IRS.  Therefore you wouldn't need to worry about withholding or providing tax forms for them for U.S. taxes.  See the IRS Publication 519 U.S. Tax Guide for Aliens.\""}
{"id": "264237", "text": "\"This can be answered by looking at the fine print for any prospectus for any stock, bond or mutual fund. It says: \"\"Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.\"\". A mutual fund is a portfolio of common stocks, managed by somebody for a fee. There are many factors that can drive performance of a fund up or down. Here are a few:  I'm sure there are many more market influences that I cannot think of that push fund prices up or down. What the fund did last year is not one of them. If it were, making money in the mutual fund market would be as easy as investing in last year's winners and everyone would be doing it.\""}
{"id": "264263", "text": "\"Read the check: it says \"\"Pay to the order of ...\"\". It's simply an order from you to your bank to give money to someone. It can be written on anything. Back in the olden days (a hundred years or so ago) it would have simply been a letter to the bank. Those rules haven't changed much with today's automation. What matters is that the order comes from you, which means it must have your signature. If the bank pays a check with a fraudulent signature they're responsible. Granted, banks don't look very carefully at checks any more (I once accidentally swapped two checks when I paid bills, and the phone company simply gave me a $700 credit on my $50-a-month account), but if they screw up it's their problem.\""}
{"id": "264326", "text": "\"You sound like you're already doing a lot to improve your situation... paying off the credit cards, paying off the taxes, started your 401k... I'm in a similar situation, credit ruined & savings gone after the divorce.  I know it feels like you're just spinning your wheels, but look at it this way: every monthly payment you make on a debt directly increases your net worth.  Paying those bills regularly is one of the single best things you can do right now. As for how you can improve your situation, only two things really jump out at me: 1) $1,300 in rent, plus $300 in utilities, seems quite high for a single man.  I don't know the housing costs in your area, though.  Depending on where you live, you could cut that in half while still living alone, or get a roommate and save even more.  You might have to accept a \"\"suboptimal\"\" living arrangement (like a smaller apartment), but we all have to sacrifice at times. 2) That last $1,000... you really need to budget how it's being spent.  Consider cooking at home more / eating out less, or trading in your car for one with lower insurance premiums.  Or spending less money on the kids.  You say it's for their entertainment, but don't say what that is... are we talking about going to the movies once a month, or rock concerts twice a week? 3) If the kids are on their own for college, it's not the end of the world.  I know you want to provide the best future you can for them... help them get good grades, and it'll do more for them than any amount of money. After all those & any other ways you find to save money, even if you can only put a hundred bucks in a savings account at the end of the month (and I'd be surprised if you couldn't put five), do it.  Put it in, and leave it there, despite the temptation to take it out and spend it.\""}
{"id": "264425", "text": "NL7 is most likely right. With the rise of regulatory burden some financial institutions are refusing to do business for which they are at risk of not being compliant (because of complexity) or where being compliant is to onerous. Would suggest you have a look at  Good luck"}
{"id": "264490", "text": "\"The VIX is a mathematical aggregate of the implied volatilities of the S&P 500 Index components. It itself cannot be traded as there currently is no way to only hold a position on an implied volatility alone.  Implied volatility can only currently be derived from an option relative to its underlying.  Further, the S&P 500 index itself cannot be traded only the attempts to replicate it.  For assets that are not tradable, derivatives can be \"\"cash settled\"\" where the value of the underlying is delivered in cash.  Cash settlement can be used for underlyings that in fact due trade but are frequently only elected if the underlying is costly to deliver or there is an incentive to circumvent regulation. Currently, only futures that settle on the value of the VIX at the time of delivery trade; in other words, VIX futures holders must deliver on the value of the VIX in cash upon settlement.  Options in turn trade on those futures and in turn are also cash settled on the value of the underlying future at expiration. The VXX ETF holds one to two month VIX futures that it trades out of before delivery, so while it is impossible to know exactly what is held in the VXX accounts unless if one had information from an insider or the VXX published such details, one can assume that it holds VIX futures contracts no later than two settlements from the preset.  It should be noted that the VXX does not track the VIX over the long run because of the cost to roll the futures and that the futures are more stable than the VIX, so it is a poor substitute for the VIX over time periods longer than one day. \"\"Underlying\"\" now implies any abstract from which a financial product derives its value.\""}
{"id": "264565", "text": "\"The terms debit and credit come from double-entry book-keeping. In this system, every transaction is applied against two accounts: it debits one and credits the other by equal amounts. (Or more technically, it affects two or more accounts, and the total of the credits equals the total of the debits.) Whether a debit or a credit adds or subtracts from the balance depends on the type of account. The types of accounts were defined so that it is always possible to have these matching debits and credits. Assets, like cash or property that you own, are \"\"debit accounts\"\", that is, a debit is an increase in the balance of the account. Liabilities, like money you owe, are \"\"credit accounts\"\", that is, a credit is an increase. To get into all the details would require giving a tutorial on double-entry book-keeping, which I think is beyond the scope of a forum post. By a quick Bing search I find this one: http://simplestudies.com/double-entry-accounting-system.html. I haven't gone through it so I can't say if it's a particularly good tutorial. There are plenty of others on the Web and in bookstores. Note that the terminology can be backwards when someone you're doing business with is describing the account, because their viewpoint may be the opposite of yours. For example, to me, my credit card is a liability: I owe the bank money. So when I post a charge, that's a credit, and when I pay it off, that's a debit. But to the bank, my account is an asset: the customer (me) owes them money. So to the bank, a charge is a debit and a payment is a credit.\""}
{"id": "264822", "text": "Oh my God.  Turn. Back. Now.  This is literally a textbook scam.  I know you want to believe this is true. Its not. Even if it was true it would still be a high, high risk investment that would then be compounded by the fact that you would be doing it with 100% debt."}
{"id": "264934", "text": "\"There is no \"\"reason why this cannot be done\"\", but you can tell your friend that these actions are officially shady in the eyes of the US government. Any bank transactions with a value of $10,000 or more are automatically reported to the government as a way to prevent money laundering, tax evasion, and other criminal shenanigans. \"\"Structuring\"\" bank deposits to avoid this monetary limit is a crime in and of itself.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_transaction_report\""}
{"id": "265090", "text": "If one is looking at this from the perspective of a store where debits could be how money comes into the store's account and credit is what has to be paid out to customers, then the employee salaries would also be something going out of the account for the store."}
{"id": "265109", "text": "i think keensian is right.  krudeman is wrong.   why was it anybody could get a loan from a bank to buy a house then during the bubble boom?  u telling me there were that much savings and reserve in the system?  m2 credit lead m1.  banks can create money out of nothing by writing loans."}
{"id": "265218", "text": "Since 1971, mortgage interest rates have never been more than .25% below current rates (3.6%).  Even restricting just to the last four years, rates have been as much as .89% higher.  Overall, we're much closer to the record low interest rate than any type of high.  We're currently at a three-year low.   Yes, we should expect interest rates to go up.  Eventually.  Maybe when that happens, bonds will fall.  It hasn't happened yet though.  In fact, there remain significant worries that the Fed has been overly aggressive in raising rates (as it was around 2008).  The Brexit side effects seem to be leaning towards an easing in monetary policy rather than a tightening."}
{"id": "265278", "text": "This is dangerous as it is a typical a scam.  Trudy convinces Bob to help her avoid an ATM free or some other pretense.  She writes Bob a check for $100, but is willing to take only $80 to return the favor.  Bob agrees. Bob deposits the check, gives Trudy the $80 and then later finds out the check is bad.   In most cases Bob will not be able to find or contact Trudy.   However, in some rare cases if Trudy feels Bob is very gullible, she will do the same thing again and again as long as Bob allows.  Sometimes the amounts will increase to surprisingly high levels."}
{"id": "265533", "text": "Probably means cutting the travel short. A small business owner employing specialist staff needs to identify and plan for this risk.   The plan might be to personally cover for the staff until a replacement is found.   Ideally in this situation the business will be able to support the salary of two staff in the role, even if one is part time or an apprentice/trainee. This is the approach our business takes with key staff."}
{"id": "265747", "text": "\"These services and other employee perks are referred to as fringe benefits. An employee \"\"fringe benefit\"\" is a form of pay other than money for the   performance of services by employees. Any fringe benefit provided to   an employee is taxable income for that person unless the tax law   specifically excludes it from taxation. One example of taxable fringe benefit is award/prize money (to prevent someone from \"\"winning\"\" most of their salary tax-free.) Cash awards are taxable unless given to charity.   Non-cash awards are taxable unless nominal in value or given to   charity. A less intuitive example is clothing. Clothing given to employees that is suitable for street wear   is a taxable fringe benefit. Your example possibly fits under de minims (low-cost) fringe benefits such as low-value birthday or holiday    gifts, event tickets, traditional awards (such as a retirement gift),   other special occasion gifts, and coffee and soft drinks working condition fringe benefits--that is, property and services   provided to an employee so that the employee can perform his or her   job. Note that \"\"cafeteria plans\"\" in the source don't refer to cafeteria but allow employee choice between benefit options available.\""}
{"id": "265866", "text": "I did the reverse several years ago, moving from NH to MA. You will need to file Form 1-NR/PY for 2017, reporting MA income as a part-year residence. I assume you will need to report the April capital gain on your MA tax return, as you incurred the gain while a MA resident. (I am not a lawyer or tax professional, so I don't want to state anything about this as a fact, but I would be very surprised if moving after you incurred the gain would have any affect on where you report it.)"}
{"id": "265874", "text": "\"A 'indexed guaranteed income certificate' (Market Growth GIC) fits the criteria defined in the OP. The \"\"guaranteed\"\" part of the name means that, if the market falls, your capital is guaranteed (they cover the loss and return all your capital to you); and the \"\"index linked\"\" or \"\"market growth\"\" means that instead of the ROI being fixed/determined when you buy the GIC, the ROI depends on (is linked to) the market growth, e.g. an index (so you get a fraction of profit, which you share with the fund manager). The upside is that you can't 'lose' (lose capital). The fund manager doesn't just share the losses with you, they take/cover all the losses. The downside is that you only make a fraction of whatever profit you might make by investing directly in the market (e.g. in an index fund). Another caveat is that you buy a GIC over some fixed term, e.g. you have to give them you money for a year or more, two years.\""}
{"id": "266194", "text": "\"If you want a Do-It-Yourself solution, look to a Vanguard account with their total market index funds.   There's a lot of research that's been done recently in the financial independence community.  Basically, there's not many money managers who can outperform the market index (either S&P 500 or a total market index).  Actually, no mutual funds have been identified that outperform the market, after fees, consistently.  So there's not much sense in paying someone to earn you less than a low fee index fund could do.  And some of the numbers show that you can actually lose value on your 401k due to high fees. That's where Vanguard comes in.  They offer some of the lowest fees (if not the lowest) and a selection of index funds that will let you balance your portfolio the way you want.  Whether you want to go 100% total stock market index fund or a balance between total stock market index fund and total bond index fund, or a \"\"lazy 3 fund portfolio\"\", Vanguard gives you the tools to do it yourself.  Rebalancing would require about an hour every quarter. (Or time span you declare yourself). jlcollinsnh A Simple Path to Wealth is my favorite blog about financial independence.  Also, Warren Buffet recommended that the trustees for his wife's inheritance when he passes invest her trust in one investment.  Vanguard's S&P500 index fund.  The same fund he chose in a 10 year $1M bet vs. hedge fund managers.  (proceeds go to charity).  That was about 9 years ago.  So far, Buffet's S&P500 is beating the hedge funds.  Investopedia Article\""}
{"id": "266239", "text": "If you need the money in the short-term, you want to invest in something fairly safe.  These include saving accounts, CDs, and money market funds from someplace like Vanguard.  The last two might give you a slightly better return than the local branch of a national bank."}
{"id": "266480", "text": "We struck a deal. I sold an asset to some body on june 1 . However he says, he would pay me any time on or before august 1st . This puts me in a dilemma.  What if price goes down by august 1st and i would have to accept lower payment from him.? If price goes up till august 1st, then obviously i make money since ,even though item is sold,price is yet to be fixed between parties. However i know anytime on or before august 1st, i would get paid the price quoted on that particular day. This price could be high in my favor, or low against me. And, this uncertainty is causing me sleepless nights. i went to futures market exchange. My item (sugar,gold,wheat,shares etc..anything). i short sell a futures which just happens to be equivalent to the quantity of my amount i sold to the acquirer of my item. I shorted at $ 100 , with expiry on august 1st. Now fast orward and august 1st comes. price is $ 120 quoted . lets Get paid from the guy who was supposed to pay on or before august 1st. He  pays 120 $. his bad luck, he should have paid us 100 $ on june 1st instead of waiting for august 1st . His judgement of price movement faulted. WE earned 20 $ extra than we expected to earn on june 1st (100$) . However the futures short of 100$ is now 120$ and you must exit your position by purchasing it at back. sell at 100$ and buy at 120$ = loss of 20$ . Thus 20 $ gained from selling item is forwarded to exchange . Thus we had hedged our position on june 1st and exit the hedge by august 1st. i hope this helps"}
{"id": "266567", "text": "Let me offer an anecdote to this -  I started helping a woman, widowed, retired, who had been paying $500/yr to get her taxes done. As I mentioned in my comment here, she got a checklist each year and provided the info requested. From where I sat, it seemed a clerk entered the info into tax software.  As part of the transition to me helping her, I asked the prior guy (very nice guy, really) for a quick consult. She took the standard deduction, but also showed a nice annual donation. Didn't take advantage of the QCD, donate directly from an IRA (she was over 70-1/2) to save on the tax of this sum. That could have saved her $500.  She was in the 15% bracket, with some room left for a Roth conversion. Converting just enough to 'fill' that bracket each year seemed a decent strategy as it would avoid the 25% rate as her RMDs rose each year and would push her to 25%. To both items the guy suggested that this was not his area, he was not a financial planner. Yes, I understand different expertise. With how simple her return was, I didn't understand the value he added.  If you go with a professional, be sure you have an understanding of what he will and won't do for you."}
{"id": "266783", "text": "For the period 1950 to 2009, if you adjust the S&P 500 for inflation and account for dividends, the average annual return comes out to exactly 7.0%. Source. Currently inflation is around 2%.  So your 2% APY is a 0% real return where the stock market return is 7%.  I.e. on average, stocks have a return that is higher by 7.   If you mix in bonds, 70% stocks to 30% bonds, your real returns will drop to around 5.5%, but you are safer in individual years (bonds often have good years when stocks have bad years).   We're making a bit of a false dichotomy here.  We're talking about returns on stocks in retirement accounts versus returns on CDs in regular accounts.  You can buy stocks in regular accounts and it is legally possible to have a CD in a retirement account.  So you can get bankruptcy protection and tax advantages with a CD."}
{"id": "266785", "text": "\"You said your strategy was to put it into a index fund.  But then you asked about setting  stock limits.   I'm confused. Funds usually trade at their price at the end of the day, so you shouldn't try to time this at all. Just place your order. If you are buying ETFs, there is going to be so much volume on the market that your small trade is going to have no impact on the price. You should just place a market order. A market order is an order to buy or   sell a stock at the current market   price. A limit order is an order to buy or   sell a security at a specific price. In the US, when you place a trade with any broker, you can either place a limit order or a market order.  A market order just fills your order with the next best sellers in line.  If you place an order for 100 shares, the sellers willing to sell 100 shares at the lowest price will be matched with your order (sometimes you may get 50 shares at one price and 50 shares at a slightly different price).    If your stock has a lot of volatility and you place a market order for a small amount of shares,  you will get the best price. If you place a limit order, you specify the price at which you want to buy shares.  Your order will then only be filled with sellers willing to sell at that price or lower (i.e. they must be at least as good as you specified).  This means you could place an order at a limit that does not get filled (the stock could move in a direction away from your limit price).  If you really want to own the stock, you shouldn't use a limit order.  You shouldn't only use a limit order if you want to tell your broker \"\"I will only buy this stock at this price or better.\"\"  p.s. Every day that passes is NOT a waste.  It's just a day that you've decided investing in cash is safer than investing in the market.\""}
{"id": "266900", "text": "\"The margin money you put up to fund a short position ($6000 in the example given) is simply a \"\"good faith\"\" deposit that is required by the broker in order to show that you are acting in good faith and fully intend to meet any potential losses that may occur.  This margin is normally called initial margin.  It is not an accounting item, meaning it is not debited from you cash account.  Rather, the broker simply segregates these funds so that you may not use them to fund other trading.  When you settle your position these funds are released from segregation.   In addition, there is a second type of margin, called variation margin, which must be maintained while holding a short position.  The variation margin is simply the running profit or loss being incurred on the short position.  In you example, if you sold 200 shares at $20 and the price went to $21, then your variation margin would be a debit of $200, while if the price went to $19, the variation margin would be a credit of $200.   The variation margin will be netted with the initial margin to give the total margin requirement ($6000 in this example).  Margin requirements are computed at the close of business on each trading day.  If you are showing a loss of $200 on the variation margin, then you will be required to put up an additional $200 of margin money in order to maintain the $6000 margin requirement - ($6000 - $200 = $5800, so you must add $200 to maintain $6000).  If you are showing a profit of $200, then $200 will be released from segregation - ($6000 + $200 = $6200, so $200 will be release from segregation leaving $6000 as required). When you settle your short position by buying back the shares, the margin monies will be release from segregation and the ledger postings to you cash account will be made according to whether you have made a profit or a loss.  So if you made a loss of $200 on the trade, then your account will be debited for $200 plus any applicable commissions.  If you made a profit of $200 on the trade then your account will be credited with $200 and debited with any applicable commissions.\""}
{"id": "267067", "text": "In the US this is considered a sale, and the proceeds will be taxed as if you've sold the stocks in any other way. The decision about the treatment (capital, ordinary, etc) is dependent on what kind of stock that is, how you acquired it, how long have you held it, etc. If it is a regular stock that you bought as an investment and held it for more than a year - then it will likely to be a capital gain treatment. However, this is only relevant for the US taxation. Since you're a UK person, you should also check how it is handled in the UK, which may or may not be different."}
{"id": "267070", "text": "\"Seems like you could shoehorn this into an investment account. You make purchases similar to what you would make in a money market account ($1 per share) via your premium payments. You see appreciation in those shares. You incur expenses on your \"\"purchases\"\" via cost of insurance and possibly monthly payment fees.\""}
{"id": "267627", "text": "Yes, and there are several ways, the safest is a high-yield savings account which will return about 1% yearly, so $35 per month. That's not extremely much, but better than nothing (you probably get almost zero interest on a regular checking account)."}
{"id": "267740", "text": "\"Been a long while since I've read it but if I remember correctly with quotational loss Graham refers to an unjustified decline in stock price because of Mr. Market's fear and loathing where the business prospects of the company are actually still sound.  This is opposed to \"\"actual\"\" loss of capital which he would consider to be a company going bankrupt or just more generally turning out to have way worse business prospects than expected with the justified decline in stock price that entails.\""}
{"id": "267818", "text": "\"Yes, but the rates at which they're borrowing make all the difference.  Japan's central bank is borrowing at about 2 percent on a 30 year bond, and Greece is borrowing at 18 percent. Japan would thus be paying 4.6% of GDP on debt service for government borrowing, while Greece would thus be paying 27% (assuming that all current bonds could be converted to current rates).   [Japan](http://www.bloomberg.com/markets/rates-bonds/government-bonds/japan/), [Greece](http://www.ecb.int/stats/money/long/html/index.en.html).   Further, as many other commenters have noted, Japan retains the ability to print money and thus inflate their debt away, while Greece relies on the European Central Bank, which would not hyperinflate the entire Eurozone to help out Greece's government.  As a comparison, the US is currently paying 1.3% of its GDP on government debt service.   (My calculations are amateur. Please correct me if I'm wrong.)  As [Dean Baker notes](http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/cepr-blog/the-devasting-interest-burden-of-the-debt):  \"\"It is important to remember that most of the people in Washington debates on economic policy do not know much economics. They tend not to be very good at arithmetic either. That is why they were blindsided by the collapse of the $8 trillion housing bubble that wrecked the economy.  As we get endless pontification about the crushing debt burden it is worth touching base with reality on occasion. In that spirit, CEPR brings you the latest data and projections on the ratio of the federal government's interest payments to GDP, courtesy of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  [T]he interest to GDP ratio is currently at a crushing 1.3 percent, near the post World War II low. However this figure overstates the burden somewhat. Last year the Federal Reserve Board refunded almost $80 billion to the Treasury. This was interest earned on government bonds and other assets it now holds. That leaves a net interest burden of 0.8 percent of GDP, by far the lowest of the post World War II era.\"\"  **TL;DR**: what matters is not total size of debt alone, but also borrowing costs and ability to inflate the debt away. Japan is paying very little on its large debt; Greece is paying a lot.   **TL;DR TL;DR**: I'd like to borrow a few trillion dollars at 2%, too.\""}
{"id": "268026", "text": "\"If you sign the check \"\"For Deposit Only\"\", the bank will put it in your account. You may need to set up a \"\"payable name\"\" on the account matching your DBA alias. However, having counted offerings for a church on several occasions, I know that banks simply have no choice but to be lax about the \"\"Pay to the Order Of\"\" line on checks. Say the church's \"\"legal name\"\" for which the operating funds account was opened is \"\"Saint Barnabas Episcopal Church of Red Bluff\"\". You'll get offering checks made out to \"\"Saint Barnabas\"\", \"\"Saint B's\"\", \"\"Episcopal Church of Red Bluff\"\", \"\"Red Bluff Episcopal\"\", \"\"Youth Group Fund\"\", \"\"Pastor Frank\"\", etc. The bank will take em all; just gotta stamp em with the endorsement for the church. Sometimes the money will be \"\"earmarked\"\" based on the payable line; any attempt to pay the pastor directly will go into his \"\"discretionary fund\"\", and anything payable to a specific subgroup of the church will go into their asset account line, but really all the cash goes directly to the same bank account anyway. For-profit operations are similar; an apartment complex may get checks payable to the apartment name, the management company name, even the landlord. I expect that your freelance work will be no different.\""}
{"id": "268069", "text": "Generally, prize money is miscellaneous income, reported on line 21 of your 1040 and not subject to self employment tax. See IRS publication 525 for more details; under 'Prizes and Awards', they give an example of winning a photography contest. Now, there are a couple of exceptions. If your main occupation is participating in contests such as this - or you do it sufficiently that it could be considered such - then it may be considered something you should pay self employment taxes on. If it's your first one - you're fine. Also, it would have to be something that doesn't look like work for me to be confident it's self employment income. I'm not sure that winning the Netflix prize for improving on their algorithm by 10% wouldn't run the risk of being considered sort of employment. I'm not a tax advisor, but in that case I would hire one to be sure.  I could imagine companies abusing 'prizes' otherwise to get out of paying employment taxes..."}
{"id": "268261", "text": "At this point the cost of borrowing money is very low.  For the sake of argument, say it is 1% per year for a large institution. I can either go out and find a client to invest 100,000$ and split profit and loss with them. Or, I could borrow 50,000$, pay 500$/year in interest, and get the same return and loss, while moving the market half as much (which would let me double my position!) In both cases the company is responsible for covering all fixed costs, like paying for traders, trades, office space, branding, management, regulatory compliance, etc. For your system to work, the cost to gather clients and interact with them has to be significantly less than 1% of the capital they provide you per year. At the 50% level, that might actually be worth it for the company in question.  Except at the 50% level you'd have really horrible returns even when the market went up.  So suppose a more reasonable level is the client keeps 75% of the returns (which compares to existing companies which offer larger investors an 80% cut on profits, but no coverage on losses). Now the cost to gather and interact with clients has to be lower than 2500$ per million dollars provided to beat out a simple loan arrangement.  A single sales employee with 100% overhead (office, all marketing, support, benefits) earning 40,000$/year has to bring in 32 million dollar-years worth of investment every year to break even. Cash is cheap.  Investment houses sell cash management, and charge for it.  They don't sell shared investment risk (at least not to retail investors), because it would take a lot of cash for it to be worth their bother. More explicitly, for this to be viable, they'd basically have to constantly arrange large hedges against the market going down to cover any losses.  That is the kind of thing that some margin loans may require.  That would all by itself lower their profits significantly, and they would be exposed to counter-party risk on top of that. It is much harder to come up with a pile of cash when the markets go down significantly.  If you are large enough to be worthwhile, finding a safe counterparty may be nearly impossible."}
{"id": "268330", "text": "That's technically true but there will still be a max level they can hit before the signal clips. Part of why commercials are so jarring is because they are heavily compressed (eliminating those peaks and  valleys and basically making the entire commercial blare at just below the max volume) vs a movie or tv show that would use more dynamic range of volume levels."}
{"id": "268553", "text": "\"When you invest in a property, you pay money to purchase the property. You didn't have to spend the money on the property though - you could have invested it in the stock market instead, and expected to make a 4% annualized real rate of return or thereabouts. So if you want to know whether something's a \"\"good investment\"\", ask whether your annual net income will be more or less than 4% of the money you put into it, and whether it is more or less risky than the stock market, and try to judge accordingly. Predicting the net income, though, is a can of worms, doubly so when some of your expenses aren't dollar-denominated (e.g. the time you spend dealing with the property personally) and others need to be amortized over an unpredictable period of time (how long will that furnace repair really last?). Moreover your annualized capital gain and rental income is also unpredictable; rent increases in a given area cannot be expected to conform to a predetermined mathematical formula. Ultimately it is impossible to predict in the general case - if it were possible we probably would have skipped that last housing bubble, so no single simple formula exists.\""}
{"id": "268653", "text": "\"Hence why keeping the capital gains tax rate down is not such a bad idea. Sure, it may benefit \"\"rich\"\" people, but it will also allow RESPONSIBLE low and middle class income families to reinvest their capital gains and accumulate more wealth.\""}
{"id": "268731", "text": "I like that you are hedging ONLY the Roth IRA - more than likely you will not touch that until retirement.  Looking at fees, I noticed Vanguard Target retirement funds are .17% - 0.19% expense ratios, versus 0.04 - 0.14% for their Small/Mid/Large cap stocks."}
{"id": "268989", "text": "Pretty much. There is an executive trying decide between a trader who has made the firm millions in the past few years and a quant who costs him a 6 figure salary but doesn't pull in any revenue. Then on top of it the quant is talking mathematics which the executive doesn't even know in the first place. Who is executive going to side with?"}
{"id": "269129", "text": "Unless you suffer from the illusion that you can time the market, it honestly doesn't matter much; the difference is lost in the noise. That may be true even if you do suffer from that illusion.  Also, as discussed here previously, the drop in a stock's price right after the dividend has been paid just reflects the fact that you aren't about to get an immediate refund in the form of a dividend. If you look at the real cost per share, it's meaningless and can/should be ignored. Buying after the dividend is paid may save you a tiny fraction of a cent of short-term income tax, but that's meaningless in real terms."}
{"id": "269385", "text": "I think you understood much of what I say, in general. Unfortunately, I didn't follow Patches math.  What I gleen from your summary is a 1% match to the 10% invested, but a .8% expense. The ETF VOO has a .05% annual fee, a bit better than SPY.  A quick few calculations show that the 10% bonus does offset a long run of the .75% excess expense compared to external investing. After decades, the 401(k) appears to still be a bit ahead. Not the dramatic delta suggested in the prior answer, but enough to stay with the 401(k) in this situation. The tiny match still makes the difference. Edit - the question you linked to. The 401(k) had no match, and an awful 1.2% annual expense. This combination is deadly for the younger investor. Always an exception to offer - a 25% marginal rate earner close to retiring at 15%. The 401(k) deposit saves him 25, but can soon be withdrawn at 15, it's worth a a few years of that fee to make this happen. For the young person who is planning a quick exit from the company, same deal."}
{"id": "269575", "text": "Based on the additional comment you gave, I would recommend that you keep the capital from the businesses separate as much as possible.  It sounds like you won't get into any trouble legally if you make 'loans' or transfers of capital from one business into the other. But I would suggest that you keep detailed records of any transfers that you do make.  The reason why is that in any business, it is important to know the economics of how your business makes money. If you find yourself making transfers repeatedly, then your business model may be bad. Even if your transfers are only to deal with the cost of poor customers, it could still mean that your business model needs to be adjusted.  But if it's a question of the timing of cash flows, then there's really nothing wrong with taking some of the money from your successful pants operation and building up more working capital in your stationery shop."}
{"id": "269656", "text": "Are these estimates? I didn't see a link or source in there to actual financial statements. As a private company I'm not sure that information is public. A quick Google search didn't bring anything to light.  Regardless, I'd be much more interested in seeing Spotify's cash flow statement. For startup companies that can be much more indicative of health."}
{"id": "269727", "text": "In terms of operations, banks are indifferent to inflation. Short rates except right before a recession or near-recession are always lower than long rates, regardless of inflation level, assuming no quotas or price controls. Banks produce credit by borrowing short to lend long, so as long as short rates are lower than long rates, they can be expected to produce loans, again assuming no quotas or price controls. In short, from the banks' perspective, inflation does not affect their desire to produce credit."}
{"id": "269943", "text": "Assuming here that you're talking about deducting your tuition as a below the line deduction as a business expense or similar, then it depends. Per 1.162-5, if the education: Then it qualifies as a legitimate business expense and is deductible.  If not - if you're going to school for a different career, such as someone employed as a waiter but going to school to get a degree in nursing, or someone employed as a teacher getting a law degree - then it's not; you'd have to qualify under one of the other (simpler, but lesser) credits. Read more on this topic at Tax topic 513. Note that the other most commonly applicable deduction - the above the line Tuition and Fees deduction - expired in 2016 and is not applicable (yet?) in 2017, and further would not require most of what you describe as it only counts tuition and fees paid directly to the institution and required as a condition of attendance, so books, parking, etc. don't count."}
{"id": "269969", "text": "&gt; Which is why you'll essentially never find anybody running less than $10m, and usually more than that.  1) You have to get started somewhere.  2) If you're already trading your own account, why not spend 5k or so to start a hedge fund and earn additional money managing other people's money too?  3) It seems to me you are only looking at normal hedge funds and not considering the thousands of micro sized hedge funds which largely go un-reported on.  Even those do indeed typically start with 500k-5 mil, but to suggest that I can't start one with 100-150k is simply nonsense.  I did, and anyone else can too if they go through the proper paperwork (management LLC, fund LP, memorandum of offering written up, etc), and get the proper NASD licensing.  BTW, now that I think about it more, I think mine was 150k, not 100k.  Never-the-less, it was certainly one of the smallest ever."}
{"id": "269987", "text": "\"As cryptocurrencies are rather new compared to most assets, there hasn't been a lot of specific guidance for a lot of situation, but in 2014 the IRS announced that it published guidance in Notice 2014-21. I'm not aware of further guidance that has been published beyond that, though it wouldn't surprise me if treatments changed over time. In that notice, the answer to the first question describes the general treatment: For federal tax purposes, virtual currency is treated as property. General tax principles applicable to property transactions apply to transactions using virtual currency. Your specific questions (about what constitutes a \"\"business\"\", and when you're considered to be \"\"selling\"\" the cryptoproperty) are likely to be considered on a case by case basis by the IRS. As the amounts involved here are so small (relatively speaking), my recommendation would be to read through what the IRS has published carefully, make reasonable assumptions about what scenarios that are described are closest to what you're doing, and document doing so clearly as part of your tax preparations. And when in doubt, erring on the side of whichever option incurs more tax is unlikely to be objected to by them. Of course, I'm not a lawyer or tax advisor, I'm a stranger on the Internet, so for \"\"real\"\" advice you should contact somebody qualified. I doubt you'd be faulted too much for not doing so given the amounts involved. You could also attempt contacting a local IRS office or calling them with your specific questions, and they may be able to provide more specific guidance tailored to you, though doing so may not save you from an auditor deciding something differently if they were to examine your return later. There are also phone numbers to contact specific people listed at the end of Notice 2014-21; you could try calling them as well.\""}
{"id": "270221", "text": "\"There are no risk-free high-liquidity instruments that pay a significant amount of interest.  There are some money-market accounts around that pay 1%-2%, but they often have minimum balance or transaction limits.   Even if you could get 3%, on a $4K balance that would be $120 per year, or $10 per month.  You can do much better than that by just going to $tarbucks two less times per month (or whatever you can cut from your expenses) and putting that into the savings account. Or work a few extra hours and increase your income. I appreciate the desire to \"\"maximize\"\" the return on your money, but in reality increasing income and reducing expenses have a much greater impact until you build up significant savings and are able to absorb more risk.  Emergency funds should be highly liquid and risk-free, so traditional investments aren't appropriate vehicles for them.\""}
{"id": "270426", "text": "Self employment is. Freelancing is the same thing as owning a shop on mainstreet.  Many small businesses are operated by a single person.  It occurs to me now there are probably people who differentiate between business ownership and freelancing because they want to diminish the achievements of freelancers. Those people are wrong and should be looked out for.  What are your motives? /u/spitinthecola"}
{"id": "270642", "text": "A routing number and account number are on the bottom of every check. If anybody who ever handled your checks or even saw your checks could just withdraw as much money as they wanted, the whole banking system would need to be reworked. In short, just having that info is not enough. Not legally."}
{"id": "270952", "text": "My grandmother passed away earlier this year. When I got my car 3 years ago, I did not have good enough credit to do it on my own or have her as a co-signer. We had arranged so that my grandmother was buying the car and I was co-signing.  A similar situation was happening and I went to my bank and took out a re-finance loan prior to her passing. I explained to them that my grandmother was sick and on her death bed. They never once requested a power of attorney or required her signature. I am now the sole owner of the vehicle."}
{"id": "270983", "text": "we're grateful that you took the time to read the newest post made by my friend matt perry nguyen in buildingbusinesscreditblog.com. we hope you can also post your comments and suggestions on this piece. in behalf of my friend and fellow poster a million thanks!"}
{"id": "271048", "text": "\"There are two ways you can \"\"cash in.\"\" 1) Buy enough additional shares to bring your share total to 100, then exercise the put. 2) Sell the put in the open market for a profit.\""}
{"id": "271243", "text": "\"Have the stock certificate in with a letter from the previous owner of the company from what I can tell in the letter these stocks were distributed from the owner himself stating \"\"after evaluation we have determined that your investment in this company is worth 10,000 shares at $1.00 a piece\"\" as well as I believe these shares were also acquired when the company was going through name changes or their company was bought\""}
{"id": "271395", "text": "You are both right and wrong.   A few key things   - I'm not charging the government body I work for, it's a free implementation  - I ensured I do all the work on my own time, not company time. I live somewhere where most government employees work multiple jobs, so this isn't uncommon. In fact, my government body actually does often hire contractors who are also employed.   - I don't live in the US, things are somewhat less different where I am.  - It is certainly not illegal, and I would even argue that it is even somewhat ethical. My work saved my employer (the tax payer) a significant amount of money, which is a net positive. The service is of high quality, and I did not break any employment agreements or laws in the process.   - I hired a lawyer to double check everything."}
{"id": "271525", "text": "\"First, pay off the highest interest first.  If you have 80%, pay it first.   Paying off a card/loan with a lower rate, but a lower payment or a lower balance can help your mental capacity by having fewer things to pay.  But, this should be a decision where things are similar, such as 20-25%, not 20-80%.   What about any actual loans?  Any loans with a fixed payment and a fixed amount?   If you must continue to use CC while paying them off, use the one with the lowest interest rate.   Call all of your debtors and ask for reduction in interest rate.   This is not the option to take first...  This is a strategic possibility and will cause credit score issues... If you are considering bankruptcy or not paying back some, then you have even more negotiation power.  Consider calling them all and telling them that you only have a little bit of money and would like to negotiate a settlement with them.  \"\"I have only a limited amount of money, and lots of debt.  I will pay back whomever gives me the best deal.\"\"  See what they say.  They may not negotiate until you stop paying them for a few months...  It is not uncommon to get them to reduce interest (even to 0%) and/or take a reduction in the amount due - up to 25 cents on the dollar.  To do this, you might need to pay the amount all at once, so look into loans from sources like retirement, home equity, life insurance, family...   Also, cut out all expenses.  Cut them hard; cut until it hurts.  Cut out the cell phone (get a pre-paid plan and/or budget $10-20/month), cut out all things like alcohol, tobacco, firearms, lottery, tattoos, cable tv, steak, eating out. Some people would suggest that you consider pets and finding them a new home.  No games, no trips, no movies, no new clothes...  Cut out soft drinks, candy, and junk food.   Take precautions to stay healthy - don't wear shoes in the house, brush your teeth, take a multi vitamin, get exercise, eat healthy (this is not expensive, organic stuff, just regular groceries).   Consider other ways to save, like moving in with family or friends.  Having family or friends live with you and pay rent.  Analyze costs like daycare vs. job income.  Apply for assistance - there are lots of levels, and some don't rely on others, such as daycare.   Consider making more money - new job, 2nd job, overtime, new career.   Consider commute - walk, bike, take the bus.  Work 4/10's.  Telework.   Make a list of every expense and prioritize them.  Only keep things which are really necessary.   Good Luck.\""}
{"id": "271691", "text": "\"That characterisation of arbitrage-free pricing sounds a bit like the \"\"relative vs. fundamental\"\" approaches to asset pricing that Cochrane outlines (in his text, *Asset Pricing*). Rebonato also makes this distinction with regard to term structure models in *Volatility and Correlation*.   On one extreme you have CAPM-style models in which asset prices are completely determined by investors' risk preferences; on the other extreme, you would have something like a SABR-Libor Market Model where you take everything up to and including the volatility surface as given.   What's interesting to me is the way in which these different classes of models get used in various parts of the financial industry. So, buy side firms tend to rely a lot more on equilibrium-style models, since they ultimately care about things like how the equity risk premium or the bond risk premium affect asset prices. In contrast, derivatives quants working at a big sell-side bank who are pricing exotics don't care about what the \"\"fundamental\"\" value of their underlying assets is; they just take that as given and price the exotic accordingly.\""}
{"id": "271825", "text": "One of the things to consider is that most Vanguard funds are very tax efficient, that is they don't throw off much in the way of cap gains or taxable dividends while they grow. So if you do it right you won't have to pay much in the way of taxes on your investments even if they are in taxable accounts until retirement when at the very least you will have a lot more flexibility in managing your money and very likely be in a lower tax bracket. Roth is better if you are planning other types of investments, but if you are planning to hold an efficient Vanguard fund the difference isn't that bit."}
{"id": "272174", "text": "For a time period as short as a matter of months, commercial paper or bonds about to mature are the highest returning investments, as defined by Benjamin Graham:  An investment operation is one which, upon thorough analysis, promises safety of principal and a satisfactory return. Operations not meeting these requirements are speculative. There are no well-known methods that can be applied to cryptocurrencies or forex for such short time periods to promise safety of principal. The problem is that with $1,500, it will be impossible to buy any worthy credit directly and hold to maturity; besides, the need for liquidity eats up the return, risk-adjusted.  The only alternative is a bond ETF which has a high probability of getting crushed as interest rates continue to rise, so that fails the above criteria. The only alternative for investment now is a short term deposit with a bank. For speculation, anything goes... The best strategy is to take the money and continue to build up a financial structure: saving for risk-adjusted and time-discounted future annual cash flows.  After the average unemployment cycle is funded, approximately six or so years, then long-term investments should be accumulated, internationally diversified equities."}
{"id": "272279", "text": "What options do I have? Realistically?  Get a regular full time job.  Work at it for a year or so and then see about buying a house. That said, I recently purchased a decent home.  I am self-employed and my income is highly erratic.  Due to how my clients pay me, my business might go a couple months with absolutely no deposits.   However, I've been at this for quite a few years.  So, even though my business income is erratic, I pay myself regularly once a month.  In order to close the deal with the mortgage company I had to provide 5 years worth of statements on my business AND my personal bank accounts.  Also I had about a 30% down payment.   This gave the bank enough info to realize that I could absolutely make the payments and we closed the deal. I'd say that if you have little to no actual financial history, don't have a solid personal income and don't have much of a down payment then you probably have no business buying a house at this point.  The first time something goes wrong (water heater, ac, etc) you'll be in a world of trouble."}
{"id": "272318", "text": "Those are the expected yields; they are not guaranteed. This was actually the bread and butter of Graham Newman, mispriced bonds.  Graham's writings in the Buffett recommended edition of Securities Analysis are invaluable to bond valuation. The highest yielder now is a private subsidiary of Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 G\u00e9n\u00e9rale.  A lack of financial statements availability and the fact that this is the US derivatives markets subsidiary are probably the cause of the higher rates. The cost is about a million USD to buy them. The rest will be similar cases, but Graham's approach could find a diamond; however, bonds are big ticket items, so one should expect to pay many hundreds of thousands of USD per trade."}
{"id": "272328", "text": "It's never too early, but age 3 is when we started a piggy bank.  Age 4 is when we opened a bank account. When you go shopping with your children, discuss what items cost (such as bread, milk, books, etc.) Start teaching them that everything has a value...then relate it to how much they have saved.  Kids need to learn 3 basic things from their parents:  how to save/invest, how to spend wisely, how to share/donate"}
{"id": "272425", "text": "I'm assuming you're in the United States for this. I highly recommend getting a CPA to help you navigate the tax implications. Likely, you'll pay taxes as a sole proprietor, on top of any other income you made. Hopefully you kept good records because you'll be essentially paying for the profits, but you'll need to show the revenue and expenditures that you had. If you have any capital expenditures you may be able ton amortize them. But again, definitely hire a professional to help you, it will be well worth the cost."}
{"id": "272520", "text": "\"All investors have ultimately the same investment goal: maximize returns while limiting risk to an acceptable level. Of course we would love to maximize returns while minimizing risk, but in most cases if you want higher returns you must be willing to accept higher levels of risk. We must keep in mind that investors are humans, not computers. As such not everybody is willing to accept the same level of risk. Insurance is simply a way to \"\"buy down\"\" risk. Yes, it reduces our overall gains (most of the time), but so do bonds vs stocks (most of the time). And yet who among us doesn't have bonds in our portfolio? Insurance is yet another way to balance risk and return.\""}
{"id": "272559", "text": "Definitely! BitCoin could also alleviate some of the concern that people might have about their identity/payment details being used to track their browsing habits.  If your payment method is anonymous, and you can register with a pseudonym, you can read all the twilight fan-fic you want!"}
{"id": "272693", "text": "He would spend it into the economy that is accepting his dollars. As an example, the apple maker might borrow $100 with $10 interest for the deer shank, then later on get the $100 back from the deer hunter in trade for 150 apples, and then pay this $100 to the banker. Now the apple maker still needs $10 to pay off his loan. The banker says he'll trade his $10 in interest profit for 15 apples, now the apple maker can resolve his debt without further borrowing.  The difference between spending interest earnings and issuing a loan is that when the banker is spending, they are getting something for their own use, when they are issuing the loan, they aren't getting anything but the promise to repay that loan."}
{"id": "272807", "text": "While you can print that on the check, it isn't considered legally binding. If you are concerned about a check not being deposited in a timely manner, consider purchasing a cashier's check instead. This doesn't solve the problem per se, but it transfers responsibility of tracking that check from you to the bank."}
{"id": "272820", "text": "\"In the UK, I could start my own business - either as a self-employed person, or by starting a company. With a company, the company might have \u00a350,000 income, \u00a35,000 cost, and pay me a \u00a345,000 salary. In that case the company has no profit and pays no taxes, but I personally pay income tax. Or I could pay myself any salary I like, say \u00a320,000 salary, so I pay tax on \u00a325,000 profit and \u00a320,000 salary. The state actually gets less money in total if I set my salary so the company makes a profit.  If I'm self employed, income minus cost is my profit and I pay taxes on that. If I don't make profit, I pay no tax. Unfortunately, I also wouldn't have any money to buy food, pay the rent, and so on and so on. I'd have the same income and pay the same taxes as someone who is unemployed.  There are \"\"businesses\"\" that are just run for the enjoyment of the owner and don't make profit. Rich guy buys a farm and starts breeding race horses, that kind of thing. In that case, there is zero difference between a guy breeding race horses and calling it a \"\"business\"\" and another guy breeding race horses and calling it a hobby. Neither makes money and neither pays taxes.\""}
{"id": "272840", "text": "Without making specific recommendations, it is worthwhile to point out the differing tax treatments for a Roth IRA: investments in a Roth IRA will not be taxed when you withdraw them during retirement (unless they change the law on that or something crazy). So if you are thinking about investing in some areas with high risk and high potential reward (e.g. emerging market stocks) then the Roth IRA might be the place to do it. That way, if the investment works out, you have more money in the account that won't ever be taxed. We can talk about the possible risks of certain kinds of investments, but this is not an appropriate forum to recommend for or against them specifically. Healthcare stocks are subject to political risk in the current regulatory climate. BRICs are subject to political risks regarding the political and business climate in the relevant nations, and the growth of their economies need not correspond with growth in the companies you hold in your portfolio. Energy stocks are subject to the world economic climate and demand for oil, unless you're talking alternative-energy stocks, which are subject to political risk regarding their subsidies and technological risk regarding whether or not their technologies pan out. It is worth pointing out that any ETF you invest in will have a prospectus, and that prospectus will contain a section discussing the risks which could affect your investment. Read it before investing! :)"}
{"id": "272940", "text": "\"You are pushing your luck, but not because you're not in the US, because it is likely that you're not qualified. From what you said, I doubt you can take it (I'm not a professional though, get a professional opinion). You say \"\"dedicated space\"\". It has to be an exclusive room. You cannot deduct 10 sq. ft. from your living room because your computer that is used wholly for your business is there. It has to be a room that is used exclusively for your business, and for your business only. I.e.: nothing not related to the business is there, and when you're there the only thing you do is working on your business. Your office doesn't have to be in the US necessarily, to the best of my knowledge. Your office must be in your home. If you take primary residence exclusion as part of your FEI, then I doubt you can deduct as well.\""}
{"id": "273142", "text": "\"I would think that a lot of brokers would put the restriction suggested in @homer150mw in place or something more restrictive, so that's the first line of answer. If you did get assigned on your short option, then (I think) the T+3 settlement rules would matter for you.  Basically you have 3 days to deliver.  You'll get a note from your broker demanding that you provide the stock and probably threatening to liquidate assets in your account to cover their costs if you don't comply.  If you still have the long-leg of the calendar spread then you can obtain the stock by exercising your long call, or, if you have sufficient funds available, you can just buy the stock and keep your long call.  (If you're planning to exercise the long call to cover the position, then you need to check with your broker to see how quickly the stock so-obtained will get credited to your account since it also has some settlement timeline.  It's possible that you may not be able to get the stock quickly enough, especially if you act on day 3.) Note that this is why you must buy the call with the far date.  It is your \"\"insurance\"\" against a big move against you and getting assigned on your short call at a price that you cannot cover. With the IRA, you have some additional concerns over regular cash account - Namely you cannot freely contribute new cash any time that you want.  That means that you have to have some coherent strategy in place here that ensures you can cover your obligations no matter what scenario unfolds.  Usually brokers put additional restrictions on trades within IRAs just for this reason. Finally, in the cash account and assuming that you are assigned on your short call, you could potentially could get hit with a good faith, cash liquidation, or free riding violation when your short call is assigned, depending on how you deliver the stock and other things that you're doing in the same account.  There are other questions on that on this site and lots of information online.  The rules aren't super-simple, so I won't try to reproduce them here.  Some related questions to those rules: An external reference also on potential violations in a cash account: https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/trading-investing/trading/avoiding-cash-trading-violations\""}
{"id": "273433", "text": "A CFA is plus all over the world but it probably won't be as useful as in the US. You can take the exams in many countries though so if you start in the US you should be able to continue back home. Better look online to see what your options are.   CFA is not perfect for all types of finance careers though so before you start make sure it makes sense for you."}
{"id": "273472", "text": "\"Edit:  This is false.  Seritage has no listed properties in Canada [on their website](http://www.seritage.com/properties)  And \"\"Fast Eddie\"\" will make even more bank by renting out the space occupied by his old hobby project through Seritage, after neglecting the space his hobby project was in since his purchase during his stock buybacks.\""}
{"id": "273565", "text": "Try to find out (online) what 'the experts' think about your stock. Normally, there are some that advise you to sell, some to hold and some to buy. Hold on to your stock when most advise you to buy, otherwise, just sell it and get it over with. A stock's estimated value depends on a lot of things, the worst of these are human emotions... People buy with the crowd and sell on panic. Not something you should want to do.  The 'real' value of a stock depends on assets, cash-flow, backlog, benefits, dividends, etc. Also, their competitors, the market position they have, etc. So, once you have an estimate of how much the stock is 'worth', then you can buy or sell according to the market value. Beware of putting all your eggs in one basket. Look at what happened to Arthur Andersen, Lehman Brothers, Parmalat, Worldcom, Enron, etc."}
{"id": "273567", "text": "Sample Numbers: Owe $100k on house.  House (after 'crash') valued at: $50K.  Reason for consternation: What rational person pays $100k for property that is only worth half that amount? True Story: My neighbor paid almost $250K (a quarter-of-a-million dollars - think about that..) for a house that when he walked (ran!) away from it was sold by the bank for $88K.  Unless he declares bankruptcy (and forgoes all his other assets, including retirement savings) he still owes the bank the difference. And even with bankruptcy, he may still owe the bank - this should cause anyone to be a bit concerned about being up-side down in a mortgage loan."}
{"id": "273645", "text": "\"In the UK there is a non-profit called the Citizen's Advice Bureau which provides free advice to people on a wide range of subjects, but including debt and budgeting. Consumer Credit Counselling Service provides explicit help but again, in the UK. A search for \"\"volunteer debt counsellor\"\" reveals a whole host of organizations that do that, but almost all based in the UK or Canada or Australia. The US seems not to be well provided with such organizations. This page advises people to volunteer as a debt counsellor, but gives no specifics of organizations, just \"\"Volunteer at local county community centers, churches and agencies. Your local faith-based organization might be a good place to start, even if you are not a member. Regrettably a search for \"\"free debt counselling\"\" produced a similar list of non-profits in UK and Canada, but mainly companies peddling consolidation loans in the US.\""}
{"id": "273761", "text": "\"As you note, your question is inherently opinion-based.  That said, if I were in your situation I would sell the stock all at once and buy whatever it is you want to buy (hopefully some index ETF or mutual fund). According to what I see, the current value of the HD stock is about $8500 and the JNJ stock is worth less than $500.  With a total investment of less than $10,000, any gain you are likely to miss by liquidating now is not going to be huge in absolute terms. This is doubly true since you were given the stock, so you have no specific reason to believe it will do well at all.  If you had picked it yourself based on careful analysis, it could be worth keeping if you \"\"believed in yourself\"\" (or even if you just wanted to test your acumen), but as it is the stock is essentially random.  Even if you want to pursue an aggressive allocation, it doesn't make sense to allocate everything to one stock for no reason.  If you were going to put everything in one stock, you'd want it to be a stock you had analyzed and picked.  (I still think it would be a bad idea, but at least it would be a more defensible idea.) So I would say the risk of your lopsided allocation (just two companies, with more than 90% of the value in just one) outweighs any risk of missing out on a gain.  If news breaks tomorrow that the CEO of Home Depot has been embezzling (or if Trump decides to go on the Twitter warpath for some reason), your investment could disappear. Another common way to think about it is: if you had $9000 today to buy stocks with, would you buy $8500 worth of HD and $500 worth of JNJ?  If not, it probably doesn't make sense to hold them just because you happen to have them. The only potential exception to my advice above would be tax considerations.  You didn't mention what your basis in the stock is.  Looking at historical prices, it looks like if all the stock was 20 years old you'd have a gain of about $8000, and if all of it was 10 years old you'd have a gain of about $6000.  If your tax situation is such that selling all the stock at once would push you into a higher tax bracket, it might make sense to sell only enough to fit into your current bracket, and sell the rest next year.  However, I think this situation is unlikely because: A) since the stock has been held for a long time, most of the gains will be at the lower long-term rate; B) if you have solid income, you can probably afford the tax; and C) if you don't have solid income, your long-term capital gains rate will likely be zero.\""}
{"id": "273820", "text": "Your Purchase and Sale agreement should have a financing contingency. If it doesn't, your money may be at risk, and the agent did you no favor. Edit - I answered when away from computer. This is a snapshot of the standard clause from the Greater Boston Real Estate Board. Each state has its own standard documents.   The normal process is to have some level of prequalification, showing a high probability of final approval, make offer, then after it's accepted, this form is part of the purchase and sale process."}
{"id": "273947", "text": "\"Exactly what accounts are affected by any given transaction is not a fixed thing. Just for example, in a simple accounting system you might have one account for \"\"stock on hand\"\". In a more complex system you might have this broken out into many accounts for different types of stock, stock in different locations, etc. So I can only suggest example specific accounts. But account type -- asset, liability, capital (or \"\"equity\"\"), income, expense -- should be universal. Debit and credit rules should be universal. 1: Sold product on account: You say it cost you $500 to produce. You don't say the selling price, but let's say it's, oh, $700. Credit (decrease) Asset \"\"Stock on hand\"\" by $500. Debit (increase) Asset \"\"Accounts receivable\"\" by $700. Credit (increase) Income \"\"Sales\"\" by $700. Debit (increase) Expense \"\"Cost of goods sold\"\" by $500. 2: $1000 spent on wedding party by friend I'm not sure how your friend's expenses affect your accounts. Are you asking how he would record this expense? Did you pay it for him? Are you expecting him to pay you back? Did he pay with cash, check, a credit card, bought on credit? I just don't know what's happening here. But just for example, if you're asking how your friend would record this in his own records, and if he paid by check: Credit (decrease) Asset \"\"checking account\"\" by $1000. Debit (increase) Expense \"\"wedding expenses\"\" by $1000. If he paid with a credit card: Credit (increase) Liability \"\"credit card\"\" by $1000. Debit (increase) Expense \"\"wedding expenses\"\" by $1000. When he pays off the credit card: Debit (decrease) Liability \"\"credit card\"\" by $1000. Credit (decrease) Asset \"\"cash\"\" by $1000. (Or more realistically, there are other expenses on the credit card and the amount would be higher.) 3: Issue $3000 in stock to partner company I'm a little shakier on this, I haven't worked with the stock side of accounting. But here's my best stab: Well, did you get anything in return? Like did they pay you for the stock? I wouldn't think you would just give someone stock as a present. If they paid you cash for the stock: Debit (increase) Asset \"\"cash\"\". Credit (decrease) Capital \"\"shareholder equity\"\". Anyone else want to chime in on that one, I'm a little shaky there. Here, let me give you the general rules. My boss years ago described it to me this way: You only need to know three things to understand double-entry accounting: 1: There are five types of accounts: Assets: anything you have that has value, like cash, buildings, equipment, and merchandise. Includes things you may not actually have in your hands but that are rightly yours, like money people owe you but haven't yet paid. Liabilities: Anything you owe to someone else. Debts, merchandise paid for but not yet delivered, and taxes due. Capital (some call it \"\"capital\"\", others call it \"\"equity\"\"): The difference between Assets and Liabilities. The owners investment in the company, retained earnings, etc. Income: Money coming in, the biggest being sales. Expenses: Money going out, like salaries to employees, cost of purchasing merchandise for resale, rent, electric bill, taxes, etc. Okay, that's a big \"\"one thing\"\". 2: Every transaction must update two or more accounts. Each update is either a \"\"debit\"\" or a \"\"credit\"\". The total of the debits must equal the total of the credits. 3: A dollar bill in your pocket is a debit. With a little thought (okay, sometimes a lot of thought) you can figure out everything else from there.\""}
{"id": "273960", "text": "Let the man be. If you've tried again and again to convince him, and haven't, maybe he doesn't want to be convinced. It's his money, and he has every right to manage it as he sees fit. You can advise him, but its his call whether he accepts your advice or not, and for what reasons. And suppose you push and push and it gets through? Now either he has more money than he would otherwise, and he's happy he has such a smart friend. Or he loses 30% of his money, and you're trying to tell him that he's going to earn it back in due time, but you can't, because he's not talking to you. Ever. What do you think is the mean benefit to your friendship?"}
{"id": "274306", "text": "Here's another answer on the topic: Saving for retirement: How much is enough? An angle on it this question made me think of: a good approach here is to focus on savings rate (which you can control) rather than the final number (which you can't, plus it will fluctuate with the markets and make you nervous). For example, focus on saving at least 10% of your income annually (15% is much safer).  If you focus on the final number: The way it works in the real world is that you save as much as you can, but there are lots of random factors and unknowns. Some people end up having to work a lot longer than they hoped to. Others end up able to retire early. Others retire on time but have to spend less than they hoped. But the one thing you can often control (as long as you have an income and no catastrophes, anyway) is that you spend less than you make."}
{"id": "274359", "text": "The data provided in your question is irrelevant. The data that you provided in the comments (that you're physically present in the US while doing the work) is the only relevant information needed to answer your question. You will need to pay taxes in the US for the earnings. The company invoicing the US client will also need to pay taxes in the US for its earnings from these invoices. You can transfer between bank accounts and deposit whatever you want anywhere you want, no-one cares (with respect to the US taxes, check with Indian tax accountant about Indian requirements)."}
{"id": "274721", "text": "If your business is a Sole Proprietorship and meets the criteria, then you would file form Schedule C. In this case you can deduct all eligible business expenses, regardless of how you pay for them (credit/debit/check/cash). The fact that it was paid for using a business credit card isn't relevant as long as it is a true business expense. The general rules apply: Yes - if you sustain a net loss, that will carry over to your personal tax return. Note: even though it isn't necessary to use a business credit card for business expenses, it's still an extremely good idea to do so, for a variety of reasons."}
{"id": "274833", "text": "Taking into account that you are in Cyprus, a Euro country, you should not invest in USD as the USA and China are starting a currency war that will benefit the Euro. Meaning, if you buy USD today, they will be worth less in a couple of months. As for the way of investing your money. Look at it like a boat race, starting on the 1st of January and ending on the 31st of December each year. There are a lot of boats in the water. Some are small, some are big, some are whole fleets. Your objective is to choose the fastest boat at any time. If you invest all of your money in one small boat, that might sink before the end of the year, you are putting yourself at risk. Say: Startup Capital. If you invest all of your money in a medium sized boat, you still run the risk of it sinking. Say: Stock market stock. If you invest all of your money in a supertanker, the risk of it sinking is smaller, and the probability of it ending first in the race is also smaller. Say: a stock of a multinational. A fleet is limited by it's slowest boat, but it will surely reach the shore. Say: a fund. Now investing money is time consuming, and you may not have the money to create your own portfolio (your own fleet). So a fund should be your choice. However, there are a lot of funds out there, and not all funds perform the same.  Most funds are compared with their index. A 3 star Morningstar rated fund is performing on par with it's index for a time period. A 4 or 5 star rated fund is doing better than it's index. Most funds fluctuate between ratings. A 4 star rated fund can be mismanaged and in a number of months become a 2 star rated fund. Or the other way around. But it's not just luck. Depending on the money you have available, your best bet is to buy a number of star rated, managed funds. There are a lot of factors to keep into account. Currency is one. Geography, Sector... Don't buy for less than 1.000\u20ac in one fund, and don't buy more than 10 funds. Stay away from Gold, unless you want to speculate (short term). Stay away from the USD (for now). And if you can prevent it, don't put all your eggs in one basket."}
{"id": "274945", "text": "Investors hungry for returns are piling back into securities once tarnished by the financial crisis.  Complex structured investments developed a bad reputation during the credit crunch. Ten years later, investors seeking yield are overcoming their skepticism and buying into securities that rely on financial engineering to juice returns.   Volumes of CLOs, or collateralized loan obligations, hit a record $247 billion in the first nine months of the year, according to data from J.P. Morgan Chase  JPM 1.59%\u25b2  &amp; Co. Fueled by a wave of refinancings and nearly $100 billion in new deals, that far outpaces their recent full-year high of $151 billion in 2014 and the precrisis peak of $136 billion in 2006.  The CLO boom is the latest sign of the ferocious hunt for yield permeating markets. Stellar performance over the past year has made CLOs increasingly hard to ignore for investors like insurance companies and pension funds.  CLOs carve up a portfolio of bank loans to highly indebted companies into slices of securities with different levels of risk. The securities at the bottom of the CLO stack offer the highest potential source of returns, but they are also the first to absorb losses if there are defaults in the underlying loan portfolio. The more senior slices offer lower returns but are more insulated from losses.  CLOs are often lumped together with other alphabet-soup acronyms of the financial crisis, such as more toxic CDOs, or collateralized debt obligations. But CLOs actually weathered the financial crisis well: Investors who bought at the top of the market in 2007 suffered paper losses, but there were no defaults at all for the highest-rated securities.  That track record has helped boost CLOs\u2019 appeal for investors with lingering concerns over scooping up more complex investments.    .   Taking off / Global CLO volumes   \u201cThe demand for things like CLOs\u2026.is extraordinary,\u201d said Rick Rieder, chief investment officer for global fixed income at BlackRock  Inc.   CLOs are one of the largest demand sources for the leveraged loan market, which has also been booming this year. Volumes of leveraged loans, often used by private-equity firms to fund buyouts, are on track to surpass their 2007 record, according to LCD, a unit of S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence. At the same time, investors have voiced concerns about companies\u2019 rising leverage level, and weaker creditor protections.  Within a CLO are different risk profiles: Investors in the most senior, AAA-rated piece of debt get paid first and are the most insulated from losses if defaults rise in the underlying loan portfolio. They also receive the skinniest returns. Slices of debt further down receive higher returns, but will suffer losses if defaults spike. At the bottom sits the equity tranche, the first loss-absorber and last to get paid, but the highest potential source of returns.  A 2014 report from Standard &amp; Poor\u2019s Ratings Services stated that AAA-rated and AA-rated CLO tranches incurred no losses at all between 1994 and 2013. Loss rates for lower-rated tranches, meanwhile, were low\u2014just 1.1% for B-rated securities over that period.    .   Flying High / Market returns since J.P. Morgan recommended buying CLOs last July   That doesn\u2019t prevent some conservative investors from conflating the CLOs with the now-infamous CDOs, many of which were linked to subprime mortgages and spread and amplified losses in the U.S. housing market. One breed of CDOs are on a comeback path of their own, with more investors returning to them during an aging bull market.  Many people were \u201cburnt by these acronyms from the crisis,\u201d said Zak Summerscale, head of credit fund management for Europe and Asia Pacific at Intermediate Capital Group . He is currently recommending that clients buy senior CLO tranches over investment-grade bonds.  CLOs, like other types of securitizations, have been subject to greater regulation since the financial crisis. That includes forcing funds that manage a CLO to retain 5% of the securities, in an effort to align incentives with investors.  That has \u201cattracted additional capital into the market,\u201d said Mike Rosenberg, a principal at alternative investment manager Tetragon.  Assets under management in the \u201cloan participation\u201d sector\u2014a proxy for funds that invest in CLOs\u2014have grown 21% this year to $206 billion, according to Thomson Reuters Lipper.  The pickup in CLOs has been a boon to banks weathering declines in trading revenues in the current low-volatility environment. Revenue from CLO-related activity at the top 12 global investment banks more than doubled over the first half of 2017 from a year earlier to almost $1 billion, according to financial consultancy Coalition.  CLO investors have been handsomely rewarded in recent months. J.P. Morgan strategist Rishad Ahluwalia recommended clients buy CLOs last July as he thought they looked too cheap. Between then and the end of September, BB-rated CLO tranches returned 25.4%, compared with a 25.2% return for the technology-oriented Nasdaq stock index, according to his calculations.  \u201cCLOs have been an absolute home run,\u201d said Mr. Ahluwalia, though he added such chunky returns aren\u2019t repeatable.  Analysts say CLOs got beaten down last year following a series of troubles in the underlying loan market, including distress in the energy sector. Some analysts think the strong rally in CLO tranches since then should give investors pause; others think the market has further to run.  Renaud Champion, head of credit strategies at Paris-based hedge fund La Fran\u00e7aise Investment Solutions, likes AAA-rated CLO tranches but with a twist: leverage.  Mr. Champion says he buys senior European CLO tranches and borrows money against them to increase the size of his position between five and 10 times. That can amplify gains\u2014and losses\u2014significantly.  \u201cThe difference between now and a year ago is the availability of leverage,\u201d he said.  Bankers say only a small proportion of CLO buyers use leverage and emphasize that trades are subject to daily margin calls. That means investors have to post cash to cover mark-to-market losses on a position, which in turn limits how much they are willing to borrow.  \u201cThe leverage in the system today is a fraction compared to precrisis,\u201d said J.P. Morgan\u2019s Mr. Ahluwalia.  Write to Christopher Whittall at christopher.whittall@wsj.com   Appeared in the October 23, 2017, print edition as 'Crisis-Era Securities Regain Investors\u2019 Favor.'"}
{"id": "275171", "text": "\"I (and probably most considering trading) had a similar thought as you.  I thought if I just skimmed the peaks and sold before the troughs, perhaps aided by computer, I'd be able to make a 2% here, 2% there, and that would add up quickly to a nice amount of money.  It almost did seem \"\"foolproof\"\". Then I realized that sometimes a stock just slides...down...and there is no peak higher than what I bought it for.  \"\"That's OK,\"\" I'd think, \"\"I'm sure it will recover and surpass the price I bought it for...so now I play the waiting game.\"\"  But then it continues sliding, and my $10k is now worth $7k.  Do I sell?  Did I build a stop loss point into my computer program?  If so, what is the right place to put that stop?  What if there is a freak dip down and it triggers the stop loss but THEN my stock recovers?  I just lost $14,000 like this last week--luckily, only virtually! The point is, your idea only has half a chance to work when there is a mildly volatile stock that stays around some stable baseline, and even then it is not easy.  And then you factor in fees as others mentioned... People do make money doing this (day traders), and some claim you can use technical analysis to time orders well, so if you want to try that, read about technical analysis on this site or elsewhere.\""}
{"id": "275319", "text": "I think it's fairly obvious that I'm talking about people that have recently graduated college that are 21-25 years old. If you need me to spell it out, plenty of people make 100k out of college after having graduated at the age of &lt;25."}
{"id": "275516", "text": "I think the point is that m2 is 13.7 trillion usd, the Swiss investment is not even *half* a percent.  The us equities marker valuation is larger at 22.5 trillion USD. Dumping an extra 100 bil usd is too little to do anything. Even dumping a trillion USD  is a relatively small number."}
{"id": "275543", "text": "This doesn't sound very legal to me. Real estate losses cannot generally be deducted unless you have other real estate income. So the only case when this would work is when that person has bunch of other buildings that do produce income, and he reduces that income, for tax purposes, by deducting the expenses/depreciation/taxes for the buildings that do not. However, depreciation doesn't really reduce taxes, only defers them to the sale. As mhoran_psprep said - all the rest of the expenses will be minimal."}
{"id": "275833", "text": "I don't recommend Roth for those in the 25% bracket. If you are in the 25% bracket now, I'd suggest you go pretax and as you are planning to be in a lower bracket in a few years, use that bracket to convert. Depositing today at 25% to convert at 15% in a few years puts you that much ahead.  I understand the allure of a Roth heavy strategy. And the fuzzy crystal ball for what the tax code will look like doesn't help. That said, a retiree today who is a few years too young for Social Security will see an Exemption + STD deduction of $10,000, and a 15% bracket ending at $36,250, so $46,250 total with a total tax bill of $4991. A retiree should target $250K-$500K pretax to stay flexible and not miss these low brackets in the future."}
{"id": "275932", "text": "\"I think it's apt to remind that there's no shortcuts, if someone thinks about doing FX  fx: - negative sum game (big spread or commissions) - chaos theory description is apt - hard to understand costs (options are insurance and for every trade there is equivalent option position - so unless you understand how those are priced, there's a good chance you're getting a \"\"sh1tty deal\"\" as that Goldman guy famously said) - averaging can help if timing is bad but you could be just getting deeper into the \"\"deal\"\" I just mentioned and giving a smarter counterparty your money could backfire as it's the \"\"ammo\"\" they can use to defend their position.  This doesn't apply to your small hedge/trade? Well that's what I thought not long ago too! That's why I mentioned chaos theory. If you can find a party to hedge with that is not hedging with someone who eventually ends up hedging with JPM/Goldman/name any \"\"0 losing days a year\"\" \"\"bank\"\".. Then you may have a point. And contrary to what many may still think, all of the above applies to everything you can think of that has to do with money. All the billions with 0-losing days need to come from somewhere and it's definitely not coming just from couple FX punters.\""}
{"id": "276009", "text": "It's better to use the accounting equation concept: Asset + Expenses = Capital + Liabilities + Income If you purchase an asset: Suppose you purchased a laptop of $ 500, then its journal will be: If you sell the same Laptop for $ 500, then its entry will be:"}
{"id": "276189", "text": "I guess you are from US? EDI solutions are starting to be standard in most EU countries. The invoices we get are through EDI solutions and we can automate most of them.  We recently upgraded our invoice process solution and now we need one less AP position."}
{"id": "276314", "text": "Selling options is a great idea, but tweak it a bit and sell credit spreads on both sides of the market, i.e. sell OTM bear call spreads and OTM bull put spreads. This is also known as an iron condor, and limits risk, and allows for much more flexibility."}
{"id": "276323", "text": "The problem would not only be that of Kyle but also that of American Express. When Kyle pays by credit card, American Express pays the bills out of their pockets on his behalf and then forwards the bill to Kyle. The issuer of a credit card takes the risk that the holder of the card won't pay the credit card bill. In practice there are safeguards in place which prevent a company like AE to pay such huge sums in one day through an automated process. Credit card companies have sophisticated algorithms to determine unusual spending patterns and block any transactions which appear unusual. Also, after a few billions their bank will likely block them and prevent them from paying any more bills. But let's play along and pretend these safeguards wouldn't exist. That means after Kyle's spending spree, American Express will be trillions in debt, with their main debitor being a 10 year old boy who won't ever be able to pay. Kyle will have to declare personal bankruptcy. There are various variants of bakruptcy in the US, but they basically all boil down to him paying everything he can pay (not much considering that he is 10) and then defaulting on his debt. Afterwards he is debt-free. That means the debt is now that of American Express. American Express will not be able to pay that debt with their bank(s) either, so they will have to declare bankruptcy and default on their debt too. This domino effect passes the burden on to the banks which can not carry a trillion-level debt either. A bank going bankrupt is a serious issue because it means they can not pay back any of the money in the saving accounts hold by companies or private people with them. So the problem would return to those people Kyle wanted to help in the first place. Also, the collapse of one bank will often result in the collapse of further banks, resulting in a collapse spiral destroying the whole world-wide finance system. Nothing would be gained."}
{"id": "276631", "text": "I think you leave out the major problem of your partners in crime there.    Chances are one of them will eventually slip up later in life, and at some point snitch on you in order to get out of trouble.  This is particularly true if you would manage to acquire amounts in the 100k range per participant.  The inside man would pose the greatest risk there."}
{"id": "276839", "text": "\"By protected you mean what exactly? In the US, generally you'd get a promissory note signed by B saying \"\"B promises to repay A such and such amount on such and such terms\"\". In case of default you can sue in a court of law, and the promissory note will be the evidence for your case. In case of B declaring bankruptcy, you'd submit the promissory note to the bankruptcy court to get in line with all the other creditors. Similarly in all the rest of the world, you make a contract, you enforce the contract in courts.\""}
{"id": "276906", "text": "How often do you need to actually go to a bank?  atm's, debit and credit cards work where ever.  you can even deposit checks by taking a picture of them.  dealing with cash would be more troublesome though."}
{"id": "276955", "text": "Reading the descriptions on Amazon.com it appears Investments is a graduate text and Elements of Investments is the undergraduate version of the text."}
{"id": "277190", "text": "Buying back shares is an indication that the company does not believe that there is justification to invest in production, employee training, or technology. In the end, what it mostly does is pump up the share price, which very directly pumps up the value of share-based compensation that the CEO has.  On mergers and acquisitions, I don't have the time to look for the source right now, but I've read a few reports that showed that the vast majority of mergers and acquisitions actually erodes the value when compared to the two separate companies. They cite reasons like overblown expectations, clash in company cultures, and manipulations up top as a reason to do this. On paper, they all sound great, but these are very dificult things to operationalise which only the very best management teams manage to work out.  The above parties are part of the real economy as long as they are companies that produce goods or services, which is often the case. It contrasts with the paper economy which is the world of bonds, hedge funds, share markets, and commodity markets. The money moving around in this world seldom makes a diference to anybody but the directly involved. The share market is a classic example of this. Although the value of stocks may be high, most people who own the stocks don't actually have more money to spend, unless, obviously they sell the shares. The value is on paper until it is transacted, and can collapse like a house of cards.   The real economy is much more stable and resiliant, and has a large impact on the majority of the population. It won't vary hugely from one month to the next like the stock market can.  I don't have any educaton in economics other than curiosity on how these things work. I read Krugman's blog and generally google any term or concept that tickles my fancy. I also partake in quite a few discussions here on reddit that frequently prompt me to go investiage some more. I don't proport to be some sort of expert, but I do have concise ideas of how things work, and have a very strong bias of looking at evidence and fact-based postulations rather than ideology."}
{"id": "277208", "text": "I would strongly suggest you select an answer: all the above two cover everything I can possibly recommend, but perhaps my perspective as a person who was exactly in your shoes a year ago might appeal to you more. My first bank was Chase, and they usually give out a free checking account to students that come with leaves of 100 checks. Unfortunately, I was 24 at that time, and the max possible age to qualify was 23 or 21. Paying $25 for any number of checks was a big deal for me as I had no job, and transportation and rent was costing me $1k/month anyways. I came here and asked questions: lots of them. MrChrister, God bless his soul, recommended credit unions to me. I never knew they existed. A year later, I am a proud member of 3 CUs: I recommend Alliant, DCU and SchoolsFirst: I am their member and very proud of it!"}
{"id": "277373", "text": "You need a find a financial planner that will create a plan for you for a fixed fee. They will help you determine the best course of action taking into account the pension, the 403B, and any other sources of income you have, or will have. They will know how to address the risk that you have that that particular pension.  They will help you determine how to invest your money to produce the type of retirement you want, while making sure you are likely to not outlive your portfolio."}
{"id": "277491", "text": "It's illegal and you can go to jail because it exploits the small companies and their investors who believe in the company."}
{"id": "277548", "text": "\"Personally I would have a hard time \"\"locking up\"\" the money for that very little return.  I would probably rather earn no interest in favor of the liquidity. However, you should find out what the early removal penalties are.  If those are minimal and you are very confident that you will not need the money over the term period then its definitely better to earn something rather than nothing. If inflation is negative you aren't out as much not getting any interest as you would be normally. Consider that in 2014 US inflation was 0.8%.  Online liquid savings accounts pay about 1%.  so that's only .2% positive.  In comparison at -.4% you are better off with no interest than a US person putting their money in a paying savings account.  Keep in mind though that inflation can change month to month so just because June was negative doesn't mean the year will be that way. Not sure your ability to invest in the US market or what stable dividend payers may exist in Sweden.... You said you are risk averse, but it may be worth it to find a stable dividend paying fund.  I like one called PFF, it pays a monthly dividend of 6% and over 5 years stock price is very stable.  Of course this is quite a significant jump in risk because you can lose money if markets tank (PFF is down over 10 years quite a bit).  Maybe splitting up the money and diversifying?\""}
{"id": "277583", "text": "Good tax people are expensive. If you are comfortable with numbers and computers, you can do it better yourself."}
{"id": "277810", "text": "A self-directed IRA could be a good solution for you and all IRAs are qualified IRAs the administrator must allow for alternative assets. However, if you're looking to do the ROBS (Roll Over Business Start-up) system, there are not very many administrators that can facilitate that. There is also a checkbook IRA (aka single member LLC) that more administrators are able to work with, but the rules are different from a ROBS plan. Check with your financial adviser, CPA, tax guru and ask which method would work best for what you're looking to accomplish."}
{"id": "277915", "text": "First of all, it's pretty rare that would cash out your entire Traditional IRA at once when you retire. That would incur major taxes and negate much of the tax deductibility benefit. Instead, you'd want to take distributions of just what you want to live on, which are taxed at income rates, and let the rest continue to grow tax free until you need/want it. As to your main question, if you don't expect to be in a lower tax bracket in retirement, then yes, Roth makes sense. But this is a pretty major assumption. When you're working, your salary pushes you into higher tax brackets. Once you're retired, you don't have as many sources of income. It could be mostly distributions from retirement accounts, and even coming from a Traditional IRA a lot of that will be tax free or taxed at a low rate (e.g. 15%). If when it was earned it would have been taxed at a higher marginal rate (e.g. 25%), then the Traditional IRA was a better choice than the Roth. Traditional versus Roth, if both are options to you (with deductibility for the Traditional), all comes down to tax rate now versus what you expect your tax rate to be in retirement. There is no universal answer."}
{"id": "277955", "text": "So what, if anything, might this mean for those of us who still have those Countrywide mortgages?  BTW, my subprime mortgage is awesome. We rode out a bad year where the price shot up to $4,000/month. Today it's way down and we're paying only 2.5%."}
{"id": "278071", "text": "\"I strongly suggest you look at CreditKarma and see how each aspect of what you are doing impacts your score. Here's my take - There's an anti-credit approach that many have which, to me, is over the top. \"\"Zero cards, zero credit\"\" feels to me like one step shy of \"\"off the grid.\"\" It's so far to the right that it actually is more of an effort than just playing the game a bit. You are depositing to the card frequently to do what you are doing. That takes time and effort. Why not just pay the bill in full each month, and just track purchases so you move the cash to the account in advance, whether that's physical or on paper?  In your case, it's the same as charging one item every few months to keep the card active. If that's what you'd like to do, that's fine. I'd just avoid having the card take up too much of your time and thought.  (Disclaimer - I've used and written about Credit Karma. I have no business relationship with them, my articles are to help readers, and not paid placement.) mhoran's response is in line with my thinking. His advice to use the card to build your score is what the zero-credit folk criticize as \"\"a great debt score.\"\" Nonsense. If you use debt wisely, you'll never pay interest (except for a mortgage, perhaps) and you may gain rewards with no cost to you.\""}
{"id": "278082", "text": "That seems to indicate that you can in fact depreciate a vehicle given   to you? Section 1015 discusses the calculation of basis for gifted property, it says nothing about depreciation. Personal property cannot be depreciated for tax purposes unless it is used for business purposes. So unless you drive your car as part of your sole-proprietor business, you cannot depreciate it, be it a gift or a car you purchased yourself. If you can depreciate the car, then sec. 1015 is used to calculate the basis for the depreciation."}
{"id": "278102", "text": "\"I found the answer after some searching online. It turns out that when talking options, rarely is the current P/L line considered when talking about making adjustments/taking trades off. From Investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/breakevenpoint.asp \"\"... For options trading, the breakeven point is the market price that a stock must reach for an option buyer to avoid a loss if they exercise the option. For a call buyer, the breakeven point is the strike price plus the premium paid, while breakeven for a put position is the strike price minus the premium paid.\"\" The first sentence sounds more like the current P/L line, but the bold section clearly states the rule I was looking for. In the example posted in my question above, the breakpoints labeled with \"\"1\"\" would be the break points I should consider.\""}
{"id": "278122", "text": "Your biggest concern will be what happens during the transition period. In the past when my employer made a switch there has been a lockout period where you couldn't move money between funds. Then over a weekend the money moved from investment company A to investment Company B. All the moves were mapped so that you knew which funds your money would be invested in, then staring Monday morning you could switch them if you didn't like the mapping. No money is lost because the transfer is actually done in $'s. Imagine both investment companies had the same S&P 500 fund, and that the transfer takes a week. If when the first accounts are closed the S&P500 fund has a share value of $100 your 10 hares account has a value of $1000. If the dividend/capital gains are distributed during that week; the price per share when the money arrives in the second investment company will now be $99. So that instead of 10 shares @ $100 you now will buy 10.101 shares @ $99. No money was lost. You want that lookout period to be small, and you want the number of days you are not invested in the market to be zero. The lockout limits your ability to make investment changes, if for instance the central bank raises rates. The number of days out of the market is important if during that period of time there is a big price increase, you wouldn't want to miss it. Of course the market could also go lower during that time."}
{"id": "278197", "text": "Diversity of risk is always a good idea.  The cheapest equity-based investment (in terms of management costs) is some form of tracker or indexed fund.  They're relatively low risk and worth putting in a fixed amount for long-term investment. I agree with Ngu Soon Hui, you're going to need a lot of cash if you decide to start your own business.  You may have to cover a significant amount of time without an income and you don't want all your cash tied up. However, putting all your money into one business is not good risk management.  Keep some savings where they can be a lifeline, should you need it."}
{"id": "278373", "text": "\"According to the book of Hull, american and european calls on non-dividend paying stocks should have the same value. American puts, however, should be equals to, or more valuable than, european puts. The reason for this is the time value of money. In a put, you get the option to sell a stock at a given strike price. If you exercise this option at t=0, you receive the strike price at t=0 and can invest it at the risk-free rate. Lets imagine the rf rate is 10% and the strike price is 10$. this means at t=1, you would get 11.0517$. If, on the other hand, you did'nt exercise the option early, at t=1 you would simply receive the strike price (10$). Basically, the strike price, which is your payoff for a put option, doesn't earn interest. Another way to look at this is that an option is composed of two elements: The \"\"insurance\"\" element and the time value of the option. The insurance element is what you pay in order to have the option to buy a stock at a certain price. For put options, it is equals to the payout= max(K-S, 0) where K=Strike Price and St= Stock price.  The time value of the option can be thought of as a risk-premium. It's difference between the value of the option and the insurance element. If the benefits of exercising a put option early (i.e- earning the risk free rate on the proceeds) outweighs the time value of the put option, it should be exercised early. Yet another way to look at this is by looking at the upper bounds of put options. For a european put, today's value of the option can never be worth more than the present value of the strike price discounted at the risk-free rate. If this rule isn't respected, there would be an arbitrage opportunity by simply investing at the risk-free rate. For an american put, since it can be exercised at any time, the maximum value it can take today is simply equals to the strike price. Therefore, since the PV of the strike price is smaller than the strike price, the american put can have a bigger value. Bear in mind this is for a non-dividend paying stock. As previously mentioned, if a stock pays a dividend it might also be optimal to exercise just before these are paid.\""}
{"id": "278460", "text": "Flipping usually refers to real-estate transaction: you buy a property, improve/renovate/rehabilitate it and resell it quickly. The distinction between flipper and investor is similar to the distinction between trader and investor, even though the tax code doesn't explicitly refer to house flipping. Gains on house flipping can be considered as active business gain or passive activity income, which are treated differently: passive income goes on Schedule E and Schedule D, active income goes on Schedule C. The distinction between passive and active is based on the characteristics of the activity (hours you spent on it, among other things). Trading income can similarly be considered as either passive (Schedule D/E treatment) or active (Schedule C treatment). Here's what the IRS has to say about traders: Special rules apply if you are a trader in securities, in the business   of buying and selling securities for your own account. This is   considered a business, even though you do not maintain an inventory   and do not have customers. To be engaged in business as a trader in   securities, you must meet all of the following conditions: The following facts and circumstances should be considered in   determining if your activity is a securities trading business: If the nature of your trading activities does not qualify as a   business, you are considered an investor... Investor, in this context, means passive income treatment (Schedule D/E). However, even if your income is considered active (Schedule C), stock sale proceeds are not subject to the self-employment tax. As you can see, there's no specific definition, but the facts and circumstances matter. You may be considered a trader by the IRS, or you may not. You may want to be considered a trader (for example to be able to make a mark-to-market election), or you may not. You should talk to a professional tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) for more details and suggestions."}
{"id": "278626", "text": "At the area where I live (Finland), banks typically charge a lot more for additional mortgage credit taken after purchasing the house. So, if you are planning to purchase a house, and pay it with a mortgage, you get a very good rate, but if you pay back the mortgage and then realize you need additional credit, you get a much worse rate. So, if this is applicable to your area as well, I would simply buy stocks after you have paid enough of the mortgage that it is only 50% of the house price or so. This is especially good advice if you are young. Also, if your mortgage is a fixed rate and not an adjustable rate mortgage, you probably have a very low permanent interest rate on it as interest rates are low currently (adjustable rate mortgages will also have a low rate but it will surely go up). Some people say there's a bubble currently in the stock market, but actually the bubble is in the bond market. Stocks are expensive because the other alternatives (bonds) are expensive as well. Paying back your mortgage is equivalent to investing money in bonds. I don't invest in bonds at the current ridiculously low interest rates; I merely invest in stocks and have a small cash reserve that will become even smaller as I discover new investment opportunities. I could pay back a significant percentage (about 50%) of the loans I have by selling my stocks and using my cash reserves. I don't do that; I invest in stocks instead, and am planning to increase my exposure to the stock market at a healthy pace. Also, consider the fact that mortgage is cheap credit. If you need additional credit for consumption due to e.g. becoming suddenly unemployed, you will get it only at very expensive rates, if at all. If you're very near the retirement age (I'm not), this advice may not be applicable to you. Edit: and oh, if your mortgage is fixed rate, and interest rates have come down, the bank will require you to pay the opportunity cost of the unpaid interests. So, you may need to pay more than you owe the bank. Edit2: let's assume the bank offered you a 4% fixed rate for a 10-year loan, which you agreed to. Now let's also assume interest rates of new agreements have come down to 2%. It would be a loss to the bank to pay back the amount of the loan (because the bank cannot get 4% by offering somebody else a new loan, only 2%), unless you paid also 10 years * (4% - 2%) * amount = 20% * amount of lost interest income. At least where I live, in fixed rate loans, one needs to pay back the bank this opportunity cost of unpaid interests."}
{"id": "278629", "text": "Question (which you need to ask yourself): How well are your friends paid for their work? What would happen if you just took your money and bought a garage, and hired two car mechanics? How would that be different from what you are doing?  The money that you put into the company, is that paid in capital, or is it a loan to the company that will be repaid?"}
{"id": "278653", "text": "Quick get a Social Security Number for the child. You will need it before you file your taxes early next year. If you don't have a SSN for your child you will not be able to claim them as a dependent. If you applied for one already, many do so at the hospital, then wait for it to arrive. The next step is to open a savings account with the child's SSN. Then have your parent write the check in the child's name and deposit it into the account.  If it is written in the child's name already then you don't need a new check from them. If the check is large, you may run into problems if you take a check in the name of a minor and try and deposit it into your account. The bank would have no idea that the person is related to you."}
{"id": "278702", "text": "You can try Wave Accounting. Its a free software for Small Business and web-based. http://waveaccounting.com/"}
{"id": "278729", "text": "It's not quite identical, due to fees, stock rights, and reporting & tax obligations.  But the primary difference is that a person could have voting rights in a company while maintaining zero economic exposure to the company, sometimes known as empty voting. As an abstract matter, it's identical in that you reduce your financial exposure whether you sell your stock or short it.  So the essence of your question is fundamentally true.  But the details make it different.  Of course there are fee differences in how your broker will handle it, and also margin requirements for shorting.  Somebody playing games with overlapping features of ownership, sales, and purchases, may have tax and reporting obligations for straddles, wash sales, and related issues.  A straight sale is generally less complicated for tax reporting purposes, and a loss is more likely to be respected than someone playing games with sales and purchases. But the empty voting issue is an important difference.  You could buy stock with rights such as voting, engage in other behavior such as forwards, shorts, or options to negate your economic exposure to the stock, while maintaining the right to vote.  Of course in some cases this may have to be disclosed or may be covered by contract, and most people engaging in stock trades are unlikely to have meaningful voting power in a public company.  But the principle is still there. As explained in the article by Henry Hu and Bernie Black: Hedge funds have been especially creative in decoupling voting rights from economic ownership. Sometimes they hold more votes than economic ownership - a pattern we call empty voting. In an extreme situation, a vote holder can have a negative economic interest and, thus, an incentive to vote in ways that reduce the company's share price. Sometimes investors hold more economic ownership than votes, though often with morphable voting rights - the de facto ability to acquire the votes if needed. We call this situation hidden (morphable) ownership because the economic ownership and (de facto) voting ownership are often not disclosed."}
{"id": "278734", "text": "Yes. Although I imagine the risk is small, you can remove the risk by splitting your money amongst multiple accounts at different banks so that none of the account totals exceed the FDIC Insurance limit. There are several banks or financial institutions that deposit money in multiple banks to double or triple the effective insurance limit (Fidelity has an account like this, for example)"}
{"id": "278902", "text": "The advice is always to not get a big refund from the IRS, because that is giving them an interest free loan. You actually have an opportunity to get an interest free loan from them.  When you file your taxes for 2013 note how much you paid in taxes. Not the check you had to send in with your tax form or the refund you received, but the total amount in taxes you paid. Multiply that amount by 1.1 or (110%). For example $8,000 * 1.10 = $8,800. When you get your paychecks in 2014 you goal is to make sure that your federal taxes (not state, Social security or medicare) taken from your paycheck will get you over that number $8,800 /26 or ~350 a paycheck. Keep in mind that the later you start the more each check needs to be. You will owe them a big check in April 2015. But because of the 110% rule you will not owe interest, penalties, or have to deal with quarterly taxes. The 110% rule exempts you from these if you end them 110% as much a you paid in taxes the previous year. Note that no matter how you pay your taxes for 2014: big check now, extra per paycheck, or minimum now; you will have to watch your withholding during 2015 because the 110% rule won't protect you."}
{"id": "278991", "text": "\"There are several areas of passive fraud by being unclear on what you are doing.  When a citizen buys a house, the mortgage lender wants all the details as to how the buyer rounded up the money.  That is so they can use their own formulas to assess the buyer's creditworthiness and the probability that the buyer will be able to keep up on payments, taxes and maintenance; or have they overextended themselves. The fraud is in the withholding of that info. By way of tricking them into making a favorable decision, when they might not have if they'd had all the facts.  Then there's making this sound all lovey-dovey, good intentions, no strings attached, no expectations. You're lying to yourself.  What you've actually done is put money between yourselves, because you have not laid down FAIR rules to cover every possibility.  You're not willing to plan for failure because you don't want to admit failure is possible, which is vain.  Once you leap into this bell jar, the uncertainty of \"\"what happens if...\"\" will intrude itself into everyone's thoughts, slowly corroding your relationship.  It's a recipe for disaster.  That uncertainty puts her in a very uncomfortable position.  She has to labor to make sure the issue doesn't explode, so she's tiptoeing around you to avoid fights.  Every fight, she'll wonder if you'll play the breakup card and threaten to demand the money back.  The money will literally come between you. This is what money does.  Thinking otherwise is a young person's mistake of inexperience.  Don't take my word on it, contact Suze Orman and see what she says. Your lender is also not going to like those poorly defined lovers' promises, because they've seen it all before, and don't want to yet again foreclose on a house that fighting lovers trashed.  (it's like, superhero battles are awesome unless you own the building they trashed.)  This thing can still be done, but to remove this fraud of wishful thinking, you need to scrupulously plan for every possibility, agree to outcomes that are fair and achievable, put it in writing and share it with a neutral third party.  You haven't done it, because it seems like it would be awkward as hell - and it will be! - Or it will test your relationship by forcing direct honesty about a bunch of things you haven't talked about or are afraid to - and it will! - And to be blunt, your relationship may not be able to survive that much honesty.  But if it does, you'll be in much better shape.   The other passive fraud is taxes.  By not defining the characteristics of the payment, you fog up the question of how your contribution will be taxed (if it will be taxed). A proper contract with each other will settle that.  (there's an argument to be made for involving a tax advisor in the design of that contract, so that you can work things to your advantage.)  As an example, defining the payment as \"\"rent\"\" is about the worst you could do, as you will not be able to deduct any home expenses, she will need to pay income tax on the rent, but she can cannot take landlord's tax deductions on anything but the fraction of the house which is exclusively in your control; i.e. none.\""}
{"id": "279047", "text": "I didn't take too many finance or economics courses so i can't comment.   In my post I recommended the YouTube video or audiobook 'why an economy grows and why it doesn't'  I guess it's more economy related than finance related, but is still relevant as it touches on loans and net worth and stuff."}
{"id": "279151", "text": "\"What you're looking for are either FX Forwards or FX Futures.   These products are traded differently but they are basically the same thing -- agreements to deliver currency at a defined exchange rate at a future time.   Almost every large venue or bank will transact forwards, when the counterparty (you or your broker) has sufficient trust and credit for the settlement risk, but the typical duration is less than a year though some will do a single-digit multi-year forward on a custom basis.  Then again, all forwards are considered custom contracts.  You'll also need to know that forwards are done on currency pairs, so you'll need to pick the currency to pair your NOK against.  Most likely you'll want EUR/NOK simply for the larger liquidity of that pair over other possible pairs. A quote on a forward will usually just be known by the standard currency pair ticker with a settlement date different from spot.  E.g. \"\"EUR/NOK 12M\"\" for the 12 month settlement. Futures, on the other hand, are exchange traded and more standardized.  The vast majority through the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange).  Your broker will need access to one of these exchanges and you simply need to \"\"qualify\"\" for futures trading (process depends on your broker).  Futures generally have highest liquidity for the next \"\"IMM\"\" expiration (quarterly expiration on well known standard dates), but I believe they're defined for more years out than forwards.   At one FX desk I've knowledge of, they had 6 years worth of quarterly expirations in their system at any one time.  Futures are generally known by a ticker composed of a \"\"globex\"\" or \"\"cme\"\" code for the currency concatenated with another code representing the expiration.  For example, \"\"NOKH6\"\" is 'NOK' for Norwegian Krone, 'H' for March, and '6' for the nearest future date's year that ends in '6' (i.e. 2016).   Note that you'll be legally liable to deliver the contracted size of Krone if you hold through expiration!  So the common trade is to hold the future, and net out just before expiration when the price more accurately reflects the current spot market.\""}
{"id": "279185", "text": "\"Simplest way to answer this is that on margin, one is using borrowed assets and thus there are strings that come with doing that. Thus, if the amount of equity left gets too low, the broker has a legal obligation to close the position which can be selling purchased shares or buying back borrowed shares depending on if this is a long or short position respectively. Investopedia has an example that they walk through as the call is where you are asked to either put in more money to the account or the position may be closed because the broker wants their money back. What is Maintenance Margin? A maintenance margin is the required   amount of securities an investor must hold in his account if he either   purchases shares on margin, or if he sells shares short. If an   investor's margin balance falls below the set maintenance margin, the   investor would then need to contribute additional funds to the account   or liquidate stocks in the account to bring the account back to the   initial margin requirement. This request is known as a margin call. As discussed previously, the Federal Reserve Board sets the initial   margin requirement (currently at 50%). The Federal Reserve Board also   sets the maintenance margin. The maintenance margin, the amount of   equity an investor needs to hold in his account if he buys stock on   margin or sells shares short, is 25%. Keep in mind, however, that this   25% level is the minimum level set, brokerage firms can increase, but   not decrease this level as they desire. Example: Determining when a margin call would occur. Assume that an   investor had purchased 500 shares of Newco's stock. The shares were   trading at $50 when the transaction was executed. The initial margin   requirement on the account was 70% and the maintenance margin is 30%.   Assume no transaction costs. Determine the price at which the investor   will receive a margin call. Answer: Calculate the price as follows: $50 (1- 0.70) = $21.43 1 - 0.30 A margin call would be received when the price of Newco's stock fell   below $21.43 per share. At that time, the investor would either need   to deposit additional funds or liquidate shares to satisfy the initial   margin requirement. Most people don't want \"\"Margin Calls\"\" but stocks may move in unexpected ways and this is where there are mechanisms to limit losses, especially for the brokerage firm that wants to make as much money as possible. Cancel what trade? No, the broker will close the position if the requirement isn't kept. Basically think of this as a way for the broker to get their money back if necessary while following federal rules. This would be selling in a long position or buying in a short sale situation. The Margin Investor walks through an example where an e-mail would be sent and if the requirement isn't met then the position gets exited as per the law.\""}
{"id": "279229", "text": "The financial reasons, beyond simply owning your home outright, are: You're no longer paying interest. Yes, the interest is tax-deductible in the U.S. (though not in Canada), but the tax savings is a percentage of a percentage; if you paid, say, $8000 in interest last year, at the 25% marginal rate you effectively save $2000 off your taxes. But, if you paid off your home and had that $8000 in your pocket, you'd pay the $2000 in taxes but you'd have $6000 left over. Which is the better deal? In Canada, the decision gets even easier; you pay taxes on the interest money either way, so you're either spending the $8000 in interest, lost forever as cost of capital, or on other things. Whatever you're earning is going into your own pocket, not the bank's. Similar to the interest, but also including principal, a home you own outright is a mortgage payment you don't have to make. You can now use that money, principal and interest, for other things. Whether these advantages outweigh those of anything else you could do with a few hundred grand depends primarily on the rate of return. If you got in at the bottom of the mortgage crisis (which is pretty much right now) and got a rate in the 3-4% range, with no MIP or other payment on top, then almost anything you can do with the amount you'd need to pay off a mortgage principal would get you a better rate of return. However, you'll need some market savvy to avoid risks.  In most cases when someone has pretty much any debt and a big wad of cash they're considering how to spend, I usually recommend paying off the debt, because that is, in effect, a risk-free way to increase the net rate of return on your total wealth and income. Balancing debt with investments always carries with it the risk that the investment will fail, leaving you stuck with the debt. Paying the debt on the other hand will guarantee that you don't have to pay interest on that outstanding amount anymore, so it's no longer offsetting whatever gains you are making in the market on your savings or future investments."}
{"id": "279488", "text": "To start, I hope you are aware that the properties' basis gets stepped up to market value on inheritance.  The new basis is the start for the depreciation that must be applied each year after being placed in service as rental units. This is not optional. Upon selling the units, depreciation is recaptured whether it's taken each year or not. There is no rule of thumb for such matters. Some owners would simply collect the rent, keep a reserve for expenses or empty units, and pocket the difference. Others would refinance to take cash out and leverage to buy more property. The banker is not your friend, by the way. He is a salesman looking to get his cut. The market has had a good recent run, doubling from its lows. Right now, I'm not rushing to prepay my 3.5% mortgage sooner than it's due, nor am I looking to pull out $500K to throw into the market.  Your proposal may very well work if the market sees a return higher than the mortgage rate. On the flip side I'm compelled to ask - if the market drops 40% right after you buy in, will you lose sleep?  And a fellow poster (@littleadv) is whispering to me - ask a pro if the tax on a rental mortgage is still deductible when used for other purposes, e.g. a stock purchase unrelated to the properties.   Last, there are those who suggest that if you want to keep investing in real estate, leverage is fine as long as the numbers work. From the scenario you described, you plan to leverage into an already pretty high (in terms of PE10) and simply magnifying your risk."}
{"id": "279538", "text": "\"Yes, you can deduct up to your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) or your contribution limit, whichever is lower. Note that this reduces your taxable income, not your taxes.  This is self-employment income, which is included as compensation for IRA purposes.   You still have to pay self-employment taxes (Social Security and Medicare) though.  You pay those before calculating AGI.  So this won't entirely shield your 1099 income from taxes, just from income taxes.   Note that if you have both W-2 and 1099-MISC income, you don't get to pick which gets \"\"shielded\"\" from taxes.  It all gets mixed together in the same bucket.  There may be additional limitations if you are covered by a retirement plan at work.\""}
{"id": "279677", "text": "\"**The 25% is an utterly meaningless statistic absent the age-demographic breakdown.**  One would easily expect the 18 to ~30 year age group to have little in the way of savings (and the 18 to 30 year age group is &gt; 20% of the population by itself).  This is (like the \"\"upper X% have more net worth than the lower YY%\"\") yet another one of these idiotic/inane/misleading abuses of aggregate statistics.  Also, this really isn't \"\"news\"\" in that it isn't anything *new* -- for the majority of Americans \"\"savings\"\" pretty much disappeared a couple of decades ago.\""}
{"id": "279897", "text": "Car dealers as well as boat dealers, RV dealers, maybe farm vehicle dealers and other asset types make deals with banks and finance companies to they can make loans to buyers. They may be paying the interest to the finance companies so they can offer a 0% loan to the retail customer for all or part of the loan term.  Neither the finance company nor the dealer wants to make such loans to people who are likely to default. Such customers will not be offered this kind of financing. But remember too that these loans are secured by the asset - the car - which is also insured. But the dealer or the finance company holds that asset as collateral that they can seize to repay the loan. So the finance company gets paid off and the dealer keeps the profit he made selling the car. So these loans are designed to ensure the dealer nor the finance company looses much. These are called asset finance loans because there is always an asset (the car) to use as collateral."}
{"id": "279936", "text": "You're right about FICA (I forgot it is calculated on gross income and not Adjusted Gross Income). State tax rate in that bracket still should be nominal or zero depending on the state. Sales tax... things cost what they cost.  &gt; Regardless, 70% of minimum wage isn't enough to cover a car, a child, a good vacation, a serious health care problem, an aging parent, or a modest retirement.  Social safety nets are impossible to address via a minimum wage. You could make the minimum wage $30/hr and some people will still become bankrupt by our ridiculous healthcare system. Why not lobby for single-payer healthcare and a universal basic income like $1000/mo/adult and $500/mo/child?"}
{"id": "280177", "text": "There is no issue whatsoever, getting a mortgage this way as an unmarried couple. This is very similar to what I did while my wife and I were engaged. We we're on the title as joint tenants. I would expect them to have her as a signee to the mortgage.  She won't be able to claim 50% ownership and make things hard on the lender. The title will be contingent on the mortgage being paid. What will be harder is if you guys decide to split. It's not at all uncommon for unmarried couples to buy a house together. Find a broker and get their advice."}
{"id": "280335", "text": "The examples of debt in the article are about the ones who bought at around $100,000 years ago and then borrowed against the medallion as its value soared towards a million. This is like pretty much every bubble. Banks didn't place that level of debt on the owners, they foolishly loaned money to owners based on inflated values. Now both the banks and the owners are suffering the consequences of those bad loans as the values plummet."}
{"id": "280452", "text": "\"The Business Dictionary has three definitions of \"\"turnover\"\".  When it comes to share dealing, the most likely one is the total value of shares traded on the stock exchange in a given period.\""}
{"id": "280483", "text": "\"If i do this, I would assume I have an equal probability to make a profit or a loss. The \"\"random walk\"\"/EMH theory that you are assuming is debatable. Among many arguments against EMH, one of the more relevant ones is that there are actually winning trading strategies (e.g. momentum models in trending markets) which invalidates EMH.  Can I also assume that probabilistically speaking, a trader cannot do worst than random? Say, if I had to guess the roll of a dice, my chance of being correct can't be less than 16.667%. It's only true if the market is truly an independent stochastic process. As mentioned above, there are empirical evidences suggesting that it's not.  is it right to say then that it's equally difficult to purposely make a loss then it is to purposely make a profit?  The ability to profit is more than just being able to make a right call on which direction the market will be going. Even beginners can have a >50% chance of getting on the right side of the trades. It's the position management that kills most of the PnL.\""}
{"id": "280492", "text": "\"In your situation, you probably should not cash in your IRA and 401(k). A good mortgage lender will want to see that you have \"\"reserves\"\" -- money that you could fall back on if you hit a very rough patch.  Your current savings and retirement accounts might add up to a suitable reserve. You might want to do something like this instead: By the way, instead of cashing in a 401(k), it is usually better to: This method avoids large tax penalties, and encourages you to rebuild your 401(k).  Unfortunately, your large debt balances might prevent you from getting the PLOC.  But even in the worst case scenario (where you cannot use a PLOC to pay off a 401(k) balloon payment), it postpones the tax hit until after the balloon payment.\""}
{"id": "280538", "text": "In some circumstances losses from self-employment can be offset against total income and/or capital gains. If this applies to you may be able to claim back some of the tax taken by PAYE from your day job.  You can also to some extent carry the loss backwards into previous tax years or forward into the next one if you can't use it fully this year. HMRC have some information available on the current rules: When you can claim losses  You can claim: But You can\u2019t claim:"}
{"id": "281049", "text": "The other answers assumed student loan debt -- and for that, it's rarely worth it (unless your company only offers managed plans w/ really bad returns, or the economy recovers to the point where banks are paying 5% again on money market accounts) ... but if it's high rate debt, such as carrying a credit card debt, and the current rate of returns on the 401k aren't that great at the time, it would be worth doing the calculations to see if it's better to pay them down instead. If you're carrying extremely high interest debt (such as 'payday loans' or similar), it's almost always going to be worth paying down that debt as quickly as possible, even if it means forgoing matching 401k payments. The other possible reason for not taking the matching funds are if the required contributions would put you in a significant bind -- if you're barely scraping by, and you can't squeeze enough savings out of your budget that you'd risk default on a loan (eg, car or house) or might take penalties for late fees on your utilities, it might be preferable to save up for a bit before starting the contributions -- especially if you've maxed your available credit so you can't just push stuff to credit cards as a last resort."}
{"id": "281166", "text": "a. Depends on whether it is a gift (no tax, but need to file gift tax form against his lifetime exclusion) or a loan (in which case he needs to charge fair market interest, which he can forgive as a gift with no gift tax form, but for which will need to pay tax on the forgiven income. b. This is a definite possibility. Probably depends on the specific lender, but I would imagine this might be questioned, especially if there is an expectation of paying him back. c. Relationships. I would always avoid mixing family and finances in this way. Do you want your family gatherings to be tainted by owing him money? What if you fall on hard times? What if you go on a nice vacation instead of paying him back faster?"}
{"id": "281529", "text": "Account number are Unique based on the following combinations, based on manual banking practise of early days; -Country -Bank -Branch -Location -Account Number -Currency -Account Type [Savings, Checking] With the current computerization, there are quite a few items that have been coded into the number, for example Branch, Currency, Account Number and Account Type are part of account number.  Overall there are some attempts to standardize the account number so that they can be unique across the world as described as littleadv."}
{"id": "281568", "text": "It may clarify your thinking if you look at this as two transactions: I am an Australian so I cannot comment on US tax laws but this is how the Australian Tax Office would view the transaction. By thinking this way you can allocate the risks correctly, Partnership Tenancy Two things should be clear - you will need a good accountant and a good lawyer - each."}
{"id": "281599", "text": "A bridge loan (or bridging loan) is designed for exactly this circumstance. They're short-term loans (6 months is common) designed to help home-buyers to bridge the gap between buying and selling. MoneySupermarket defines them like this: Bridging loans are designed to help people complete the purchase of a property before selling their existing home by offering them short-term access to money at a high-rate of interest. As well as helping home-movers when there is a gap between the sale and completion dates in a chain, this type of loan can also help someone planning to sell-on quickly after renovating a home, or help someone buying at auction. Interest rates are very high, and there are likely to be fees, because you'll only need the loan for a short period. Here are some links to Canadian websites that explain more."}
{"id": "281612", "text": "When I was contracting I wish I had joined a tax efficient umbrella organisation rather than just work as a sole trader. I also wish I had put money aside to pay my taxes rather than just spend it all. :("}
{"id": "281638", "text": "Yes it is, one of the best private schools in the country is two miles down the road from me.  And it looks like a prison with a paint job and flowers in the windows.  I'd rather my kid learned on the street than the hyper paranoid security of what we call schools around here."}
{"id": "281644", "text": "\"Put Options for Kids: You have a big box of candy bars. You saved up your allowance to get a lot of them, so you could have one whenever you want one. But, you just saw a commercial on TV for a new toy coming out in one month. Your allowance alone won't buy it, and you want that toy more than you want the candy. So, you decide that you'll sell the candy to your friends at school to buy the toy. Now, you have a choice. You can sell the candy now, and put the money in your piggy bank to buy the toy later. Or, you can save the candy, and sell it in a month when you actually need the money to buy the toy. You know that if you sell all the candy you have today, you can get 50 cents a bar. That's not quite enough to buy the toy, but your allowance will cover the rest.  What you don't know is how much you might be able to sell the candy for in a month. You might be able to get 75 cents a bar. If you did, you could pay for the toy with just the money from the candy and even have some left over. But, you might only be able to sell them for 25 cents each, and you wouldn't have enough to buy the toy even with your allowance. You'd like to wait and see if you could get 75 cents each, but you don't want to risk getting only 25 cents each. So, you go to your father. He and his co-workers like these candy bars too, so he'd be willing to buy them all and sell them to his friends the way you're planning to do with yours. You ask for the option to sell him all the candy bars for 50 cents each in one month. If you find out you can get more for them at school, you want to be able to take that deal, but if you can't sell them for 50 cents at school, you'll sell them to your dad. Now, your dad knows that he could have the same problem selling the candy at 50 cents or more that you are afraid of. So, he offers a compromise. If you pay him $5 now, he'll agree to the deal. You figure that even without that $5, between your allowance and the candy money, you can still buy the toy. So, you take the deal.  In one month, you can offer the candy at school. If nobody will pay 50 cents, you can sell the candy to your dad when you get home, but if the kids at school will pay 50 cents or more, you can sell it all at school. Either way, you have enough money to buy the toy, and you can also choose which price to accept, but you had to pay your dad $5, and you can't get that back, so if it turns out that you can sell the candy at school for 50 cents, same as today, then because you paid the $5 you don't end up with as much as if you'd simply waited. In the financial market, this type of option is a \"\"put option\"\". Someone who owns something that's traded on the market, like a stock, can arrange to sell that stock to someone else at an agreed-on price, and the seller can additionally pay some money to the buyer up front for the option to not sell at that price. Now, if the stock market goes up, the seller lets the contract expire and sells his stock on the open market. If it goes down, he can exercise the option, and sell at the agreed-upon price to the buyer. If, however, the stock stays about the same, whether he chooses to sell or not, the money the seller paid for the option means he ends up with less than he would have if he hadn't bought the option. Call Options for Kids: Let's say that you see another ad on TV for another toy that you like, that was just released. You check the suggested retail price on the company's web site, and you see that if you save your allowance for the next month, you can buy it. But, in school the next day, everybody's talking about this toy, saying how they want one. Some already have enough money, others are saving up and will be able to get it before you can. You're afraid that because everyone else wants one, it'll drive up the price for them at the local store, so that your month's allowance will no longer buy the toy. So, you go to your dad again. You want to be able to use your allowance money for the next month to buy the new toy. You're willing to wait until you actually have the money saved up before you get the toy, but you need that toy in a month. So, you want your dad to buy one for you, and hold it until you can save up to buy it from him. But, you still want it both ways; if the price goes down in a month because the toy's not so new anymore and people don't want it, you don't want to spend your entire month's allowance buying the one from your dad; you just want to go to the store and buy one at the lower price. You'll pay him $5 for the trouble, right now, whether you buy the toy he got you or not. Your dad doesn't want to have a toy he's not using sitting around for a month, especially if you might not end up buying it from him, so he offers a different deal; In one month, if you still want it, he'll stop by the store on his way home and pick up the toy. You'll then reimburse him from the allowance you saved up; if it ends up costing less than a month's allowance, so be it, but if it costs more than that, you won't have to pay any more. This will only cost you $3, because it's easier for him. But, because he's not buying it now, there is a small chance that the item will be out of stock when he goes to buy it, and you'll have to wait until it's back in stock. You agree, on the condition that if you have to wait longer than a month for your toy, because he couldn't get one to sell you, he pays you back your $3 and knocks another $5 off the cost to buy the toy from him. The basic deal to buy something at an agreed price, with the option not to do so, is known as a \"\"call option\"\". Someone who wishes to buy some stocks, bonds or commodities at a future date can arrange a deal with someone who has what they want to buy them at a specific price. The buyer can then pay the seller for the option to not buy. The counter-offer Dad made, where he will buy the toy from the store at whatever price he can find it, then sell it to you for the agreed price, is known as a \"\"naked call\"\" in finance. It simply means that the seller, who is in this case offering the option to the buyer, doesn't actually have what they are agreeing to sell at the future date, and would have to buy it on the open market in order to turn around and sell it. This is typically done when the seller is confident that the price will go down, or won't go up by much, between now and the date of the contract. In those cases, either the buyer won't exercise the option and will just buy what they want on the open market, or they'll exercise the option, but the difference between what the seller is paying to buy the commodity on the market and what he's getting by selling it on contract is within the price he received for the option itself. If, however, the price of an item skyrockets, the seller now has to take a significant, real loss of money by buying something and then selling it for far less than he paid. If the item flat-out isn't available, the buyer is usually entitled to penalties for the seller's failure to deliver. If this is all understood by both parties, it can be thought of as a form of insurance.\""}
{"id": "282143", "text": "From my own personal experience, you cannot trade spreads in RRSP or TFSA accounts in Canada. You can only buy options (buy a call or buy a put) or you can sell calls against your stock (covered call selling). You will not be able to sell naked options, or trade any type of spread or combo (calendars, condors, etc). I am not sure why these are the rules, but they are at least where I trade those accounts."}
{"id": "282168", "text": "http://www.andrewsfcu.org/ is one of the only US financial institutions to issue a low or no annual fee chip and pin visa or mastercard.. Andrews is primarily for civilian employees of the Andrews Air Force Base but is available to members of the American Consumer Council, which offers free membership, see http://www.andrewsfcu.org/page.php?page=330 .  The chip and pin card is a visa with $0 annual fee and charges a 1% foreign transaction fee. Getting one is modestly difficult because you have to first join the credit union then apply for the card, then go through underwriting as if it were a personal loan rather than a revolving credit account.  Still, for travelers, it is probably worth it."}
{"id": "282189", "text": "\"Blue Sky Laws refer to various state laws requiring disclosure in new security offerings. Here's a summary: A blue sky law is a state law in the United States that regulates the   offering and sale of securities to protect the public from fraud.   Though the specific provisions of these laws vary among states, they   all require the registration of all securities offerings and sales, as   well as of stockbrokers and brokerage firms. Each state's blue sky law   is administered by its appropriate regulatory agency, and most also   provide private causes of action for private investors who have been   injured by securities fraud. From the United States Securities and Exchange Commission Every state has its own securities laws\u2014commonly known as \"\"Blue Sky   Laws\"\"\u2014that are designed to protect investors against fraudulent sales   practices and activities. While these laws can vary from state to   state, most states laws typically require companies making small   offerings to register their offerings before they can be sold in a   particular state. The laws also license brokerage firms, their   brokers, and investment adviser representatives.\""}
{"id": "282262", "text": "\"Unfortunately, we don't know your country, but I'd guess \"\"Not US\"\" with the hint being your use of the word bugger in a comment.  Realized profits are taxed by all tax authorities I'm aware of, i.e. the Tax Man in every country. Annually, so that you can let the profits run during the year, and offset by the losses during that year.  The exception is within a qualified retirement account. Many countries offer accounts that will let you do just what you're suggesting, start with XXX number of Quatloos in your account, trade for decades, and only take the tax hit on withdrawal. In some cases there's an opportunity to fund the account post tax, and never pay tax again. But to repeat, this is with a retirement account, not the usual trading accounts.\""}
{"id": "282293", "text": "How about having him make you CEO (and/or president, depending on structure), and keep him as an advisor. Then over the next year you can evaluate if you want to be the owner and/or if costs justify it. You can use your first year as training."}
{"id": "282435", "text": "\"No, 90% of investors do not lose money. 90% or even larger percentage of \"\"traders\"\" lose money. Staying invested in stock market over the long term will almost always be profitable if you spread your investments across different companies or even the index but the key here is long term which is 10+ years in any emerging market and even longer in developed economies where yields will be a lot lower but their currencies will compensate over time if you are an international investor.\""}
{"id": "282499", "text": "I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think it would be considered a free ride. The idea of a free ride is that you are engaging in a transaction when you do not actually have the money available to cover it, since the broker is technically giving you a 3 day loan whenever you purchase your stock (3 day rule to settle.) However, if you are using a margin account, and you have enough credit available, then you are not actually using unsettled assets, but rather an additional line of credit which was granted to you. You would just need to make sure that your total transactions are less than your purchasing power. That's my take on it anyway. I hope that helps, and hopefully someone can confirm or reject what I have said."}
{"id": "282502", "text": "Here's a very good series of classroom lectures by Robert Schiller, one of America's top economists and a prof at Yale:  http://www.youtube.com/user/YaleCourses#g/c/8F7E2591EE283A2E  This should give you some general insight into basic principles of finance and give you a framework to learn more later."}
{"id": "282538", "text": "Alot of these answers have focused on the dilution aspect, but from a purely legal aspect, there are usually corporate bylaws that spell out what kind of vote and percentage of votes is needed to take this type of action.  If all other holders of stock voted to do this, so 90% for, and you didn't, so 10% against, it's still legal if that vote meets the threshold for taking the action. As an example of this, I known of a startup where employees got $0/share for their vested shares when the company was sold because the voting stock holders agreed to it.  Effectively the purchase amount was just enough to cover debts and preferred stock."}
{"id": "282623", "text": "\"I'm not a fan of using cash for \"\"emergency\"\" savings. Put it in a stable investment that you can liquidate fairly quickly if you have to. I'd rather use credit cards for a while and then pay them off with investment funds if I must. Meanwhile those investments earn a lot more than the 0.1 percent savings or money market accounts will. Investment grade bond funds, for example, should get you a yield of between 4-6% right now. If you want to take a longer term view put that money into a stock index fund like QQQ or DIA. There is the risk it will go down significantly in a recession but over time the return is 10%. (Currently a lot more than that!) In any event you can liquidate securities and get the money into your bank is less than a week. If you leave it in cash it basically earns nothing while you wait for that rainy day which many never come.\""}
{"id": "282683", "text": "I think it's a bad idea. You are taking a large amount of cash and changing it into an investment that is not liquid - if you need the money, it is expensive to get it back."}
{"id": "282706", "text": "It's a similar case where you are basically choosing to forgo negotiating price on your own. In the case you describe neither you nor the business are in any way forced to accept the terms being offered to you and presumably you would not if you had certainty of a better price somewhere else. The value being added is that you now have another choice you can consider that you may not have known about and may ultimately be cheaper than each continuing a search on their own even with the lower/higher rates. If continuing to search causes you lost wages or the business lost productivity then the value is in reducing the amount of loss."}
{"id": "282770", "text": "If you don't receive a W2, there are 2 scenarios you should consider: If you have reason to believe that scenario 1 is accurate, then you could file your taxes based on the last valid paycheck you received. If you have reason to believe that scenario 2 is accurate, then you need to do some extra math, but fortunately it is straight forward. Simply treat your final paychecks as if the gross amount of your check was equal to the sum of your taxes paid, and the net amount of the check is $0. This way your income will increase by the proper amount, and you will still receive credit for the taxes paid. This should work out cleanly for federal and state taxes, but will likely result in an overpayment of FICA taxes. You can use form 843 to receive a refund of excess FICA taxes. As a side note, I'd recommend spot checking the YTD numbers on your last paychecks against previous paystubs to make sure there wasn't any fuzzy math going on when they realized they were going out of business."}
{"id": "283079", "text": "\"I'm not sure what you mean by \"\"writing off your time,\"\" but to answer your questions: Remember that, essentially, you are a salaried employee of a corporation.  So if you are spending time at your job, even if you are not billing anything to a client, you are earning your salary. If there are costs involved with these activities (maybe class fees, a book purchase, or travel expenses), the corporation should be paying the costs as business expenses.  However, the logistics of this, whether the corporation writes a business check to the vendor directly, or you put the expenses on a personal credit card and are reimbursed with an expense check from the corporation, don't matter.  Your accountant can show you the right way to do this.\""}
{"id": "283505", "text": "If your net profit is $0, then no, you will not owe income tax as a result of providing this service. But there's a lot more to consider than just that... Before you begin you'll need to decide if this is a business or a hobby. Based on the fact that you don't intend to make a profit, you are probably going to be calling it a hobby for tax purposes. Regardless of whether it is a business or a hobby, since you will be accepting payments from people, you will need to report the income on your tax return. As both a business and a hobby you can deduct all of your expenses to bring your profit down to $0. (Assuming all the expenses are legitimate business/hobby expenses.) The main differences between business and hobby are: If you choose to run as a business you'll likely save quite a bit of money by avoiding the 2% rule, and also by being able to deduct any non-specific-customer expenses and take a loss. Be careful though that you don't go too many years with a business loss or the IRS may re-classify it as a hobby, which may include an audit. If you decide to run as a business you may need to charge a little more than just expenses to attempt to turn a profit, or at least break even."}
{"id": "284051", "text": "I believe the reason is because society and the economy is set up a certain way, and re-enforced by the government. Your options are: So, people usually go with the most attractive of their limited options, getting a mortgage. If you want to dig deeper, do some research as to why housing is expensive. Some things to consider: you need the government's permission to build houses, thus limiting the competition in the home building market, the housing bubble, artificially setting house prices, etc.) To summarize: people need mortgages because houses are expensive, and houses are expensive for many reasons, big ones having to do with the government."}
{"id": "284318", "text": "Excellent answers so far, so I will just add one additional consideration: liquidity. Money invested in a mutual fund (exclusive of retirement accounts with early withdrawal penalties) has a relatively high liquidity. Whereas excess equity in your home from paying down early has very low liquidity. To put it simply: If you get in a desperate situation (long term unemployment) it is better to have to cash in a mutual fund than try to sell your house on the quick and move in with your mother. Liquidity becomes less of an issue if you also manage to fund a decent sized rainy-day fund (6-9 months of living expenses)."}
{"id": "284610", "text": "I'd approach the lender that you're getting the lease from, but be prepared for them either saying 'no' to putting the lease into the name of an LLC without any proven track record (because it hasn't been around for a while) or require you to sign a personal guarantee, which partially defeats the purpose of putting the car lease into the LLC. I'd also talk to an accountant to see if you can't just charge the business the mileage on your vehicle as that might be the simplest solution, especially if the lender gets stroppy. Of course the mileage rate might not cover the expense for the lease as that one is designed to cover the steepest part of the depreciation curve. Does your LLC generate the revenue needed so it can take on the lease in the first place? If it's a new business you might not need or want the drain on your finances that a lease can be."}
{"id": "284680", "text": "I think it should be free. Why? I had a coupon for 35, I bought something for 35.01 including taxes and total to pay was 0.01, rounded to 0.00. I think it's almost the same scenario."}
{"id": "285135", "text": "\"The IRS has been particularly vague about the \"\"substantially identical\"\" investment part of the wash rule.  Many brokers, Schwab for instance, say that only identical CUSIPs (exactly the same ETF) matter for the wash rule in their internal calculations, but warn that the IRS might consider two ETFs over the same index to be substantially identical.  In your case, the broker has chosen to call these a wash despite even having different underlying indices.  Talking to the broker is the first step as they will report it to the IRS.  Though technically you have the final say in your taxes about the cost basis,  discussing this with the IRS could be rather painful. First though it is probably worth checking with your broker about exactly what happened.  There are other wash sale triggers that frequently trip people up that may have been in play here.\""}
{"id": "285147", "text": "Robert Kiyosaki repeatedly stressed that starting your own business is risk free and the easiest way to get rich, yet he's never done it - and has actually failed in business 3 times. He won't release his real estate investment history or his stock market investments.   After failing many times he had no money until he joined network marketing groups to sell these books, he has made his money from his courses and books and has probably lost money from actual investments - I say this because most of his property investments were bought when market prices were very high. He's also stated that he essentially speculates on stock prices, when his broker phones him with the idea that a stock is about to go up he will shift lots of money into those stocks.  If you'd like to read more, this exposes everything about him: [http://www.johntreed.com/Kiyosaki.html#bothsides](http://www.johntreed.com/Kiyosaki.html#bothsides)  [Wall street journal article about him and Donald Trump.](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116052181216688592.html?mod=money_page_left_hs)  [Another video about 'get rich quick real estate gurus' ](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx2KMUvqRIM&amp;feature=player_embedded)  This is turning into a cult following with people spending thousands on credit cards to go to these courses and receive this poor advice, please watch this BBC documentary to see the way people are acting about this 'get rich quick real estate' scheme: [BBC Iplayer link](http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b017xgn6/Money_Who_Wants_to_be_a_Millionaire/)"}
{"id": "285214", "text": "The company could use registered shares with restricted transferability, i.e. shares that require the consent of the issuing company for a change of ownership."}
{"id": "285255", "text": "\"I'm afraid the great myth of limited liability companies is that all such vehicles have instant access to credit.  Limited liability on a company with few physical assets to underwrite the loan, or with insufficient revenue, will usually mean that the owners (or others) will be asked to stand surety on any credit. However, there is a particular form of \"\"credit\"\" available to businesses on terms with their clients.  It is called factoring. Factoring is a financial transaction   whereby a business sells its accounts   receivable (i.e., invoices) to a third   party (called a factor) at a discount   in exchange for immediate money with   which to finance continued business.   Factoring differs from a bank loan in   three main ways. First, the emphasis   is on the value of the receivables   (essentially a financial asset), not   the firm\u2019s credit worthiness.   Secondly, factoring is not a loan \u2013 it   is the purchase of a financial asset   (the receivable). Finally, a bank loan   involves two parties whereas factoring   involves three. Recognise that this can be quite expensive.  Most banks catering to small businesses will offer some form of factoring service, or will know of services that offer it.  It isn't that different from cheque encashment services (pay-day services) where you offer a discount on future income for money now. An alternative is simply to ask his clients if they'll pay him faster if he offers a discount (since either of interest payments or factoring would reduce profitability anyway).\""}
{"id": "285449", "text": "You should have a partnership agreement of some sort.  The reason partnership agreements exist is so nobody can change the game because of the outcome.   I'd say the most typical partnership agreement is that everyone gets an equal cut, meaning that everyone also makes an equal contribution.  If you have start up expenses of $10,000, you'd each contribute $5,000.  Separately, you can determine ownership share by contribution amounts, maybe one of you contributed $2,000 and the other $8,000; this would be an 80/20 split. The performance of the operation doesn't have anything to do with determining how to divide the pie, your partnership agreement determines that.  How much have you each contributed and what agreement did you make before you decided to be partners? If you have a poor performing business segment, then the partnership should get together and consider adjusting or stopping that line of business.  But you don't change how the pie is divided because of it; unless your partnership agreement says you do."}
{"id": "285524", "text": "Businesses have bond ratings just like people have credit ratings. It has become common for businesses to issue low rate bonds to show that they are strong, and leave the door open for further borrowing if they see an opportunity, such as an acquisition.  One of the reasons Microsoft might want to build a credit reputation, is that people become familiar with their bonds and will purchase at lower rates when they want to borrow larger amounts of money, rather than assuming they are having financial issues which would lead them to demand higher rates."}
{"id": "285794", "text": "\"that just goes to show that - if you aren't making it up - either \"\"wealth manager\"\" is a joke job like \"\"life coach\"\" or that you are very terrible at it, and I feel sorry for anyone dumb enough to fall for your bamboozle.\""}
{"id": "285799", "text": "\"I have family in Argentina, this is no surprise to them.  Everybody I know over there, family and friends, are going crazy \"\"blowing up their credit cards\"\" and going through savings like there is no tomorrow.  Their mantra is.. \"\"enjoy it today, because tomorrow its evaporated\"\".\""}
{"id": "285803", "text": "The price the provider charges you is the amount he would like to get for his services. Let's take an example, you do a blood test at a lab, and they charge you 1200.00$ If you have insurance, and the provider has a contract with that insurance (meaning 'they take them'), the contract limits what they can charge and what the will get. For the example, that might be 21.56$. This is what the insurance pays them (or what you pay them, if you have deductible). Note that if you have no insurance, you owe them 1200.00$. They are typically willing to negotiate that you only pay maybe 850.00$, but it still will be much higher than the insurance price. Why? The reason is that the insurance-agreed payment of 21.56$ does not cover their cost (but the insurance forces them to make that contract or basically be out of business). Let's say for example they need 26.56$ to make a living on it; so they lose 5.00$ on every insured customer. One in 235 customers has no insurance, and his price is calculated as 26.56+235*5.00 = ~1200.00$, so his bill covers the losses for all insured 'under-payers' (all numbers are examples made up to illustrate the math the provider does). My bloodwork typically comes between 800 and 1400, and gets reduced to around 20: so the numbers are not completely off. The ratio and concept works for doctors and hospitals the same, just not as significant a difference."}
{"id": "285812", "text": "As others have noted, you can do better than a checking or savings account. If you're going to invest emergency money, the vehicle you put it into should be: Liquid - Wherever you put it, you should be able to quickly cash it out. Highly liquid exchange traded products are good for this.   Low volatility/drawdowns - If you need at least 6 months of your paycheck to cover you in the event of an emergency, you don't want to park it in a portfolio that can potentially lose 30% value. Insured - Your investments should have SIPC coverage (protection against losses resulting from failure on part of broker). Moderate/Steady Growth - If the emergency fund doesn't grow, you'll need to continually pump money into it. My 'steady growth' portfolio is majorly allocated to fixed income. Within that, a major portion is allocated to high yielding instruments. Over the past 10 years, it's seen at least a 7% annualized return."}
{"id": "285913", "text": "Pennsylvania is one of the states that divide the land up in to thousands of jurisdictions all of which have the power to tax.  Where you live (or work) is located in either a county, city, township or borough. They can tax you based on either your income, your property. You can also be taxed by the school district which can encompass multiple jurisdictions. You should get local tax help to make sure that all the appropriate taxes are being covered."}
{"id": "285918", "text": "I am in a very similar situation as you (software engineer, high disposable income). Maximize your contributions to all tax-advantaged accounts first. From those accounts you can choose to invest in high risk funds. At your age and date-target funds will invest in riskier investments on your behalf; and they'll do it while avoiding the 30%+/- haircut that you'll be paying in taxes anyhow. If, after that, you're looking for bigger risk plays then look into a brokerage account that will let you buy and sell options. These are big risk swingers and they are sophisticated, complicated products which are used by many people who likely understand finance far better than you. You can make money with them but you should consider it akin to gambling. It might be more to your liking to maintain a long position in a stock and then trade options against your long position. Start with trading covered calls, then you could consider buying options (defined limited downside risk)."}
{"id": "286182", "text": "It is a lousy investment to purchase an apartment in China. Chinese citizens purchase apartments in China because, well... here's how China works: There's some fundamentals driving Chinese property values higher, but mostly it's a bubble caused by those reasons."}
{"id": "286226", "text": "Risk is reduced but isn't zero The default risk is still there, the issuer can go bankrupt, and you can still loose all or some of your money if restructuring happens. If the bond has a callable option, the issuer can retire them  if conditions are favourable for the issuer, you can still loose some of your investment. Callable schedule should be in the bond issuer's prospectus while issuing the bond. If the issuer is in a different country, that brings along a lot of headaches of recovering your money if something goes bad i.e. forex rates can go up and down. YTM, when the bond was bought was greater than risk free rate(govt deposit rates) Has to be greater than the risk free rate, because of the extra risk you are taking. Reinvestment risk is less because of the short term involved(I am assuming 2-3 years at max), but you should also look at the coupon rate of your bond, if it isn't a zero-coupon bond, and how you invest that. would it be ideal to hold the bond till maturity irrespective of price change It always depends on the current conditions. You cannot be sure that everything is fine, so it pays to be vigilant. Check the health of the issuer, any adverse circumstances, and the overall economy as a whole. As you intend to hold till maturity you should be more concerned about the serviceability of the bond by the issuer on maturity and till then."}
{"id": "286335", "text": "I couldn't find historical data either, so I contacted Vanguard Canada and Barclays; Vanguard replied that  This index was developed for Vanguard, and thus historical information is available as of the inception of the fund. Unfortunately, that means that the only existing data on historical returns are in the link in your question. Vanguard also sent me a link to the methodology Barclay's uses when constructing this index, which you might find interesting as well.  I haven't heard from Barclays, but I presume the story is the same; even if they've been collecting data on Canadian bonds since before the inception of this index, they probably didn't aggregate it into an index before their contract with Vanguard (and if they did, it might be proprietary and not available free of charge)."}
{"id": "286461", "text": "Yes, there is a profession that does exactly what you're looking for.  It's called a fee-only financial advisor. These are professionals who (in the United States) enter into a fiduciary relationship with a client, meaning they are legally required to put your financial interests above all other considerations (such as any behind-the-scenes incentives to promote certain products).  Between that requirement and the fact that they are paid for their time (and not on commission), they have zero incentive to try to sell you anything that you do not need.  Their only job is to help you with your financial situation.  (Of course, some of them may be better than others.) See the profession's website here to find such an advisor near you. (Credit to Marketplace Money, the old name for Marketplace Weekend, for mentioning fee-only advisors at least 87 times per show.)"}
{"id": "286654", "text": "\"In most jurisdictions, both the goods (raw materials) and the service (class) are being \"\"sold\"\" to the customer, who is the end user and thus the sale is subject to sales tax. So, when your friend charges for the class, that $100 is subject to all applicable sales taxes for the jurisdiction and all parent jurisdictions (usually city, county and state). The teacher should not have to pay sales tax when they buy the flowers from the wholesaler; most jurisdictions charge sales tax on end-user purchases only. However, they are required to have some proof of sales tax exemption for the purchase, which normally comes part and parcel with the DBA or other business entity registration paperwork in most cities/states.  Wholesalers deal with non-end-user sales (exempt from sales tax) all the time, but your average Michael's or Hobby Lobby may not be able to deal with this and may have to charge your friend the sales tax at POS. Depending on the jurisdiction, if this happens, your friend may be able to reduce the amount the customer is paying that is subject to sales tax by the pre-tax value of the materials the customer has paid for, which your friend already paid the tax on.\""}
{"id": "286689", "text": "The withholding tax is considerred income tax that is submitted early. Note that the above withholding tax amounts are only estimates, which you will show on your tax return as taxes already remitted. Taxtips website"}
{"id": "286746", "text": "You can put them in a 5 years CD and getting a maximum of %2.5 APY if you're lucky. If you put 15k now, in 5 years you'll have $1.971. If it sounds good then take a look at the current inflation rate (i'm in usa)... If you want to think about retirement then you should open a Roth IRA. But you won't be able to touch the money without penalties (10% of earnings) before you get 59 1/2 years old. Another option would be to open a regular investment account with an online discounted broker. Which one? Well, this should be a totally separate question... If you decide to invest (Roth IRA or regular account) and you're young and inexperienced then go for a balanced mutual fund. Still do a lot of research to determine your portfolio allocation or which fund is best suited for you. Betterment (i never used it) is a no brainer investment broker.  Please don't leave them in a generic checking or low interest savings account because you'll save nothing (see inflation again)..."}
{"id": "287085", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/18/business/dealbook/car-loan-subprime.html) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; These are people desperate enough to take on thousands of dollars of debt at interest rates as high as 24 percent for one simple reason: Without a car, they have no way to get to work or to doctors.  &gt; When all the interest and fees of a subprime loan are added up, even a used car with mechanical defects and many miles on the odometer can end up costing more than a new car.  &gt; Instead, Ms. Robinson, a Staten Island resident who is physically disabled and was desperate for a car to get to her doctors&amp;#039; appointments, was told to pick a different car from the lot.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6iqtv0/the_car_was_repossessed_but_the_debt_remains/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~149861 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **car**^#1 **loan**^#2 **lender**^#3 **subprime**^#4 **auto**^#5\""}
{"id": "287092", "text": "It basically only affects the company's dealings with its own stock, not with operational concerns.  If the company were to offer more stock for sale, it would get less cash.  If it had a stock buy-back program, it could buy more shares for the same money.  If it was to offer to acquire another company in exchange for its own stock, the terms would be less attractive to the other company's owners.  Employee stock remuneration, stock options, and so forth would be affected, so there might be considerations and tax consequences for the company."}
{"id": "287348", "text": "\"Owning more than 50%  of a company's stock normally gives you the right to elect a majority, or even all of a company's (board of) directors. Once you have your directors in place, you can tell them who to hire and fire among managers. There are some things that may stand in the way of your doing this. First, there may be a company bylaw that says that the directors can be replaced only one \"\"class\"\" at a time, with three or four \"\"classes.\"\" Then it could take you two or three years to get control of the company. Second, there may be different classes of shares with different voting rights, so if e.g. \"\"A\"\" shares controlled by the founding family gives them ten votes, and \"\"B\"\" shares owned by the other shareholders, you may have a majority of total shares and be outvoted by the \"\"A\"\" shares.\""}
{"id": "287501", "text": "You buy a $100k sport car, but don't buy any insurance. You take a curve too fast and jump out just in time to see your car go off a cliff, like a chase movie. The value went from $100k to zero in seconds. Where did the $100k go?"}
{"id": "287558", "text": "I am trying to learn about Collateralized Loan Obligation (CLO) and I was wondering how the tranches are created in terms of priority. When an investor comes to CLO manager to buy a stake or a tranch, do they get to decide what type of tranch they want? Less risky one that gets paid first or higher risky one that gets paid last but more? Or is it like first come first serve basis?"}
{"id": "287630", "text": "Personally I solve this by saving enough liquid capital (aka checking and savings) to cover pretty much everything for six months. But this is a bad habit. A better approach is to use budget tracking software to make virtual savings accounts and place payments every paycheck into them, in step with your budget. The biggest challenge you'll likely face is the initial implementation; if you're saving up for a semi-annual car insurance premium and you've got two months left, that's gonna make things difficult. In the best case scenario you already have a savings account, which you reapportion among your various lumpy expenses. This does mean you need to plan when it is you will actually buy that shiny new Macbook Pro, and stick to it for a number of months. Much more difficult than buying on credit. Especially since these retailers hate dealing in cash."}
{"id": "287693", "text": "\"I'll take an alternate route: honesty + humor. Say something like this with a smile and a laugh, like you know they're crazy, but they maybe don't know it yet. \"\"Are you crazy? Co-signing a loan can put us both in a lot of potential danger. First, you shouldn't get a loan that you can't afford/attain on your own, and second, I'd be crazy to agree to be liable for a loan that someone else can't get on their own. You want something bad enough, you get your credit rating in order, or you save up the money - that's how I bought (my car/house/trip to Geneva). I'd be happy to point you in the right direction if you want to put a plan together.\"\" You're offering help, but not the kind that puts you in danger. Declining to co-sign a loan can't damage your relationship with this person as much as failure to pay will.\""}
{"id": "287711", "text": "cost of carry is a confusing term to use but this is what i was given to work with   then again, once you factor in interest rate risk and default risk (if you do), what is a better term?  it's not just cost of capital at that pt"}
{"id": "287716", "text": "Are you trolling? It's been declining for 100 years. It's called inflation, and the guys in charge of the currency supply seem to think it's a good thing. Further the only way the government is ever going to pay this debt off is if we continue to see inflation for decades."}
{"id": "288145", "text": "*Disclaimer: I am a tax accountant , but I am not your professional accountant or advocate (unless you have been in my office and signed a contract). This communication is not intended as tax advice, and no tax accountant / client relationship results. *Please consult your own tax accountant for tax advise.** A foreign citizen may form a limited liability company. In contrast, all profit distributions (called dividends) made by a C corporation are subject to double taxation. (Under US tax law, a nonresident alien may own shares in a C corporation, but may not own any shares in an S corporation.) For this reason, many foreign citizens form a limited liability company (LLC) instead of a C corporation A foreign citizen may be a corporate officer and/or director, but may not work/take part in any business decisions in the United States or receive a salary or compensation for services provided in the United States unless the foreign citizen has a work permit (either a green card or a special visa) issued by the United States. Basically, you should be looking at benefiting only from dividends/pass-through income but not salaries or compensations."}
{"id": "288268", "text": "1. you want /r/personalfiance  2. 1 payment or 4-5 makes no difference 3. what makes the difference are a) interest rate b) pay as much as possible every month 4. pay as much as you can into the credit card with the highest interest rate, and the minimum payment on the rest; as you pay off a credit card, make as big of a payment to the one that has the highest interest rate 5. stop charging anything on any credit card and stop getting into any kind of debt 6. as you pay off a credit card, call the company and cancel it."}
{"id": "288376", "text": "All else constant, yes. It's one more reason rates aren't being raised quickly. The housing market is very delicate. Before the crash, a lot of homes in my area were 25% cheaper than after the rates dropped to historic lows. My area wasn't heavily affected by the recession, but homeowners still greatly benefitted from the increase in housing values which led to a lot more investment, though the houses aren't actually worth anything more.   To raise rates dramatically now would be to trap a lot of homebuyers in homes that aren't worth what they owe."}
{"id": "288409", "text": "You could certainly look at the holdings of index funds and choose index funds that meet your qualifications.  Funds allow you to see their holdings, and in most cases you can tell from the description whether certain companies would qualify for their fund or not based on that description - particularly if you have a small set of companies that would be problems. You could also pick a fund category that is industry-specific. I invest in part in a Healthcare-focused fund, for example.  Pick a few industries that are relatively diverse from each other in terms of topics, but are still specific in terms of industry - a healthcare fund, a commodities fund, an REIT fund.  Then you could be confident that they weren't investing in defense contractors or big banks or whatever you object to. However, if you don't feel like you know enough to filter on your own, and want the diversity from non-industry-specific funds, your best option is likely a 'socially screened' fund like VFTSX is likely your best option; given there are many similar funds in that area, you might simply pick the one that is most similar to you in philosophy."}
{"id": "288438", "text": "I typed my information into both last year, and while they were not exactly the same, they were within $10 of each other. For my simple 2009 taxes they were not different in any meaningful way."}
{"id": "288537", "text": "Be ruthlessly meticulous about the IRS regulations for deducting a home office.  If it's allowed, it's allowed."}
{"id": "288604", "text": "Should be noted that pacoverflow's answer is wrong. Yahoo back-adjusts all the previous (not current or future) values based on a cumulative adjustment factor. So if there's a dividend ex-date on December 19, Yahoo adjusts all the PREVIOUS (December 18 and prior) prices with a factor which is: 1 - dividend / Dec18Close"}
{"id": "288860", "text": "Something like cost = a \u00d7 avg_spreadb + c \u00d7 volatilityd \u00d7 (order_size/avg_volume)e. Different brokers have different formulas, and different trading patterns will have different coefficients."}
{"id": "289073", "text": "\"Buying (or selling) a futures contract means that you are entering into a contractual agreement to buy (or sell) the contracted commodity or financial instrument in the contracted amount (the contract size) at the price you have bought (or sold) the contract on the contract expire date (maturity date).  It is important to understand that futures contracts are tradeable instruments, meaning that you are free to sell (or buy back) your contract at any time before the expiry date. For example, if you buy 1 \"\"lot\"\" (1 contract) of a gold future on the Comex exchange for the contract month of December 2016, then you entering into a contract to buy 100 ounces (the contract size) of gold at the price at which you buy the contract - not the spot price on the day of expiry when the contract comes to maturity.  The December 2016 gold futures contract has an expiry date of 28 December.  You are free to trade this contract at any time before its expiry by selling it back to another market participant.  If you sell the contract at a price higher than you have purchased it, then you will realise a profit of 100 times the difference between the price you bought the contract and the price you sold the contract, where 100 is the contract size of the gold contract.  Similarly, if you sell the contract at a price lower than the price you have purchased it, then you will realise a loss. (Commissions paid will also effect your net profit or loss). If you hold your contract until the expiry date and exercise your contract by taking (or making) delivery, then you are obliged to buy (or sell) 100 ounces of gold at the price at which you bought (or sold) the contract - not the current spot price. So long as your contract is \"\"open\"\" (i.e., prior to the expiry date and so long as you own the contract) you are required to make a \"\"good faith deposit\"\" to show that you intend to honour your contractual obligations.  This deposit is usually called \"\"initial margin\"\".  Typically, the initial margin amount will be about 2% of the total contract value for the gold contract.  So if you buy (or sell) one contract for 100 ounces of gold at, say, $1275 an ounce, then the total contract value will be $127,500 and your deposit requirement would be about $2,500.  The initial margin is returned to you when you sell (or buy) back your futures contract, or when you exercise your contract on expiry. In addition to initial margin, you will be required to maintain a second type of margin called \"\"variation margin\"\".  The variation margin is the running profit or loss you are showing on your open contract. For the sake of simplicity, lets look only at the case where you have purchased a futures contract.  If the futures price is higher than your contract (buy) price, then you are showing a profit on your current position and this profit (the variation margin) will be used to offset your initial margin requirement. Conversely, if the futures price has dropped below your contracted (buy) price, then you will be showing a loss on your open position and this loss (the variation margin) will be added to your initial margin and you will be called to put up more money in order to show good faith that you intend to honour your obligations.  Note that neither the initial margin nor the variation margin are accounting items.  In other words, these are not postings that are debited or credited to the ledger in your trading account.  So in some sense \"\"you don't have to pay anything upfront\"\", but you do need to put up a refundable deposit to show good faith.\""}
{"id": "289291", "text": "\"The name of the Gilt states the redemption date, but not the original issue date. A gilt with 8.75% yield and close to its redemption date may have been issued at a time when interest rates were indeed close to 8.75%. For example in the early 1990s, the UK inflation rate was about 8%. One reason for preferring high or low coupon gilts is the trade off between capital gains and income, and the different taxation rules for each. If you buy a gilt and hold it to its maturity date, you know in advance the exact price that it will be redeemed for (i.e. \u00a3100). You may prefer to take a high level of income now, knowing you will make a capital loss in future (which might offset some other predictable capital gain for tax purposes) or you may prefer not to take income that you don't need right now, and instead get a guaranteed capital gain in future (for example, when you plan to retire from work). Also, you can use the change in the market value of gilts as a gamble or a hedge against your expectation of interest rate changes in future, with the \"\"government guaranteed\"\" fallback position that if your predictions are wrong, you know exactly what return you will get if you hold the gilts to maturity. The same idea applies to other bond investments - but without the government guarantee, of course.\""}
{"id": "289342", "text": "Adding to what others have said, if the mortgage for the new house is backed by the federal government (e.g., through FHA or is to be sold to Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) you would be violating 18 USC \u00a7 1001, which makes making intentionally false statements to any agent or branch of the federal government a crime punishable by up to 5 years' imprisonment. The gift letter you are required to sign will warn you of as much. Don't do it, it's not worth the risk of prison time."}
{"id": "289526", "text": "I was able to request a modest advance on my salary when I started my first job out of college, for essentially the same reason. Alternatively, you might consider requesting a small personal loan from friends or family. If you have a credit card that can cover things like grocery expenses for that period, this may also be the appropriate time to use it. Buy cheap food, like lentils and beans. :P In the future, once you earn some money, you should keep around a few months' worth of essential expenses in a saving account to avoid this situation. :)"}
{"id": "289582", "text": "Use a limited company. Use the HMRC website for help on limited companies and get a good accountant for doing your taxes. Mixing your website income and personal income  may make you pay a higher tax rate. You can take out expenses from the limited company, which are tax deductible. But if you group it in personal income it wouldn't be tax deductible. In a personal capacity you are 100% liable if your business goes bust and you owe debt. But for a limited company you are only liable for what you own i.e %age of shares. You can take on an investor if your business booms and it is easier if you do it through a limited company rather than through a personal endeavour."}
{"id": "290045", "text": "You should get a 1099-MISC for the $5000 you got.  And your broker should send you a 1099-B for the $5500 sale of Google stock. These are two totally separate things as far as the US IRS is concerned. 1) You made $5000 in wages. You will pay income tax on this as well as FICA and other state and local taxes. 2) You will report that you paid $5000 for stock, and sold it for $5500 without holding it for one year. Since this was short term, you will pay tax on the $500 in income you made. These numbers will go on different parts of your tax form.  Essentially in your case, you'll have to pay regular income tax rates on the whole $5500, but that's only because short term capital gains are treated as income.  There's always the possibility that could change (unlikely).  It also helps to think of them separately because if you held the stock for a year, you would pay different tax on that $500.  Regardless, you report them in different ways on your taxes."}
{"id": "290110", "text": ""}
{"id": "290317", "text": "As JoeTaxpayer illustrated, yes you can.  However, one thing to remember is that unless you live in a state with no state income tax, there may be state tax to pay on those gains.  Even so, it's likely a good idea if you expect either your income (or the federal capital gains tax rate) to rise in the future."}
{"id": "290468", "text": "Technically yes, in most cases you'll probably get all the AMT you pay for exercising in-the-money incentive stock options (ISOs) credited back to you. Practically, however, inflation could significantly reduce the value of the money when you get it back. Remember you can only recover the differential between regular income tax and the tentative minimum tax (TMT) each year. Depending on your situation, that could be a few thousand dollars or less, in which case $50k of AMT credit would take a while to use up. However, as you point out, if you end up selling your shares you'll likely use up all your AMT credit that year. So yes, you'd probably get your $50k of AMT back, but a lot of people don't have that much to tie up in taxes for an extended period of time."}
{"id": "290508", "text": "\"As far as I can recall, savings and chequing accounts exist due to regulations on the banking industry that put were into effect after the depression to prevent a \"\"run\"\" on the bank.   A chequing account is a \"\"demand\"\" account, meaning you can go and demand your money, and they have to pay immediately, by means of a withdrawal or a cheque.  Banks used to get out of hand and loan out pretty much all the money they had on deposit, and of course those people with loans just put the money they borrowed into another chequing account and the bank loaned that out to someone else.  The money that people believed they had access to multiplied indefinitely.  However, when everyone goes to take that money out at the same time, you have a run on the bank.  Therefore, government regulations stipulate a % that the bank must have on-hand.  The typical number is 5%.  That effectively limits the money multiplier to 19 times. Savings accounts get around this restriction by putting limits on how much and how quickly you can withdraw the amounts.  They pay you more interest because the money in a savings account is worth more to them, because it's not subject to those restrictions. Some chequing accounts pay interest, but you have to maintain a minimum balance.  Some savings accounts allow you to write cheques, but I assume the withdrawal limitations probably still apply. There's also something to do with deposit insurance (as in, the chequing accounts are covered by government deposit insurance, but savings accounts are not).  I'm not 100% certain of that though.\""}
{"id": "290631", "text": "Morpheus, I think you are approaching this question the wrong way. The interest rate is not the most important consideration; you also need to consider the other characteristics of the investment. Money in a bank account is very liquid; you can do anything you want with it. Equity in a house is very illiquid; it is hard and expensive to access. Let's say you have $25,000 to either go towards a bigger downpayment or to invest. What happens if you lose your job? If you have $25,000 in the bank, you have a lot of flexibility; you can pay a mortgage for a number of months, or you could use it to relocate. If you put the money in the house, you cannot access it at all; without a job you can't refi or get a home equity loan. Your only recourse would be to sell the house, which might not be possible if there are systemic issues (such as the ones in the real estate crash). Even if you can refi or get a home equity loan, you will have to pay fees. My advice is to put the money somewhere else. If your term is long (say, 10 years or so), I would put the money in an index fund."}
{"id": "290691", "text": "\"I'm guessing since I don't know the term, but it sounds like you're asking about the technique whereby a loan is used to gather multiple years' gift allowance into a single up-front transfer. For the subsequent N years, the giver pays the installments on the loan for the recipient, at a yearly amount small enough to avoid triggering Gift Tax. You still have to pay income tax on the interest received (even though you're giving them the money to pay you), and you must charge a certain minimum interest (or more accurately, if you charge less than that they tax you as if the loan was earning that minimum). Historically this was used by relatively wealthy folks, since the cost of lawyers and filing the paperwork and bookkeeping was high enough that most folks never found out this workaround existed, and few were moving enough money to make those costs worthwhile. But between the \"\"Great Recession\"\" and the internet, this has become much more widely known, and there are services which will draw up standard paperwork, have a lawyer sanity-check it for your local laws, file the official mortgage lien (not actually needed unless you want the recipient to also be able to write off the interest on their taxes), and provide a payments-processing service if you do expect part or all of the loan to be paid by the recipient. Or whatever subset of those services you need.  I've done this. In my case it cost me a bit under $1000 to set up the paperwork so I could loan a friend a sizable chunk of cash and have it clearly on record as a loan, not a gift. The amount in question was large enough, and the interpersonal issues tricky enough, that this was a good deal for us. Obviously, run the numbers. Websearching \"\"family loan\"\"  will find much more detail about how this works and what it can and can't do, along with services specializing in these transactions. NOTE: If you are actually selling something, such as your share of a house, this dance may or may not make sense. Again, run the numbers, and if in doubt get expert advice rather than trusting strangers on the web. (Go not to the Internet for legal advice, for it shall say both mu and ni.)\""}
{"id": "290900", "text": "It is a lot easier to make money when you are not in debt. If you can sell the apartment, get rid of your existing mortgage and buy the new house outright, that is probably the best course of action."}
{"id": "291079", "text": "There are too many qualifying questions like martial status, dependent status, annual income, etc. Your answer is most likely in the Form Pub 970 you referenced: Adjustments to Qualified Education Expenses If you pay qualified education expenses with certain tax-free funds,   you cannot claim a deduction for those amounts If the grant is tax free, you can not claim deductions up to that amount. Even if you were able to expense all the educational expenses you list, I doubt you can exceed the grant disbursement disbursement amount. I'm not a tax professional, so take my advice for what it is worth."}
{"id": "291749", "text": "No, thanks to the principle of corporate personhood.  The legal entity (company C) is the owner and parent of the private company (sub S).  You and C are separate legal entities, as are C and S. This principle helps to legally insulate the parties for purposes such as liability, torts, taxes, and so forth.  If company C is sued, you may be financially at stake (i.e. your investment in C is devalued or made worthless) but you are not personally being sued.  However, the litigant may attach you as an additional litigant if the facts of the suit merit it.  But without legal separateness of corporations, then potentially all owners and maybe a number of the employees would be sued any time somebody sued the business - which is messy for companies and messy for litigants.  It's also far cleaner for lenders to lend to  unified business entities rather than a variety of thousands of ever-shifting shareholders. Note that this is a separate analysis that assumes the companies are not treated as partnerships or disregarded entities (tax nothings) for tax purposes, in which case an owner may for some purposes be imputed to own the assets of C.  I've also ignored the consolidated tax return, which would allow C and S to file a type of corporate joint return that for some purposes treats them similarly to common entity. For the simplest variation of your question, the answer is no.  You do not own the assets of a corporation by virtue of owning a few of its shares. Edit:  In light of your edit to include FB and Whatsapp, and the wrinkle about corporate books.  If sub S is 100% owned by company C, then you do not have any inspection rights to S because you are not a shareholder.  You also do not have virtual corporation inspection rights through company C.  However, if a person has inspection rights to company C, and sub S appears on the books and financial records of C, then your C rights will do the job of seeing S information. However, Facebook is a public company, so they will make regular public filings and disclosures that should at least partly cover Whatsapp.  So I hedge and clear my throat by averring that my securities training is limited, but I believe that the SEC filings of a public company will as a practical matter (maybe a matter of law?) moot the inspection rights.  At the very least, I suspect you'd need a proper purpose (under DGCL, for example), to demand the inspection, and they will have already made extensive disclosures that I believe will be presumptively sufficient.  I defer to more experienced securities experts on that question, but I don't believe inspection rights are designed for public companies."}
{"id": "291931", "text": "Congratulations! I would start with an attorney. As a 17 year old, you legally cannot sign contracts, so you're going to have to setup some sort of structure with your parents first. Get attorney references -- your parents can ask around at work, if you're friendly with any business owners, ask them, etc. Talk to a few and pick someone who you are comfortable with. Ask your attorney for advice re: sole proprietor/S-Corp/LLC. You have assets, and your parents presumably have some assets, so you need advice about isolating your business from the rest of your life. Do the same thing for accountant references, but ask your attorney for a reference as well."}
{"id": "291949", "text": "This is called imputed income, which is generally not taxed in the US."}
{"id": "292045", "text": "\"When the strike price ($25 in this case) is in-the-money, even by $0.01, your shares will be sold the day after expiration if you take no action. If you want to let your shares go,. allow assignment rather than close the short position and sell the long position...it will be cheaper that way. If you want to keep your shares you must buy back the option prior to 4Pm EST on expiration Friday. First ask yourself why you want to keep the shares. Is it to write another option? Is it to hold for a longer term strategy? Assuming this is a covered call writing account, you should consider \"\"rolling\"\" the option. This involves buying back the near-term option and selling the later date option of a similar or higher strike. Make sure to check to see if there is an upcoming earnings report in the latter month because you may want to avoid writing a call in that situation. I never write a call when there's an upcoming ER prior to expiration. Good luck. Alan\""}
{"id": "292065", "text": "The buyer of such an account is likely treating it as an asset, and if they ever resell it capital gains (or loss) would be realized. I don't see why this would be any different for the person that created the account initially, except that the basis starts at $0 making the entire sale price taxable. How you figure the value of the account before the initial sale would be more difficult, but fortunately you may not ever need to know the value (for tax purposes) until you actually sell it."}
{"id": "292572", "text": "I was in a similar situation and my method was this: since I already had a fidelity 401k account it was pretty easy to open a individual account through the website.  From there you can just put the money into a general market mutual fund or exchange traded fund. I prefer low expense ratio funds like passive indexed funds since studies show that there isn't much benefit to actively traded funds.  So I just put my money into the popular, low fee fund SPY which tracks to the S&P 500.  I  plan on leaving the money there for at least a year, if not several years, so I can pay the lower capital gains tax rate on any gains and avoid paying the commissions too many times. In your situation you might want to consider using the extra cash to max out you and your wife's 401k this year, since you aren't already taking full advantage of that. Often people recommend saving 10% or 15% of gross income throughout their career for retirement, so you're on the low side and maybe have a small bit of catch up to do. Finally you could also start a 529 education saving plan to save for kid's future college cost."}
{"id": "292602", "text": "Because the distribution date was APR 21, 2011, THAT should be the correct date for ascertainng the stock prices of the GM stock and warrants.  The subsequent distributions after April should also be allocated in accordance with their distribution dates, with tax basis being reduced from the original APR 21st date's allocations, and reallocated to those subsequent distributions, taking into account any interim sales you might have made."}
{"id": "292762", "text": "Yes. On December 10, you have a wash sale. As long as you don't buy the stock back for 30 days after that, the wash is of no consequence. In other words, you don't have a wash issue if you don't own the stock for 30 days."}
{"id": "292769", "text": "\"As ApplePie discusses, \"\"tax bracket\"\" without any modifiers refers to a single jurisdiction's marginal tax rate.  In your case, this is either your California's \"\"tax bracket\"\" or your Federal \"\"tax bracket\"\" (not including marginal Social Security and Medicare taxes).  But if someone says \"\"combined state and federal tax bracket\"\", they probably mean the combination of your state and federal income tax brackets (again, lot including sales taxes, business and occupational taxes, social security taxes, and medicare taxes).  The math to combine the state and federal marginal tax rates is a bit tricky, because most people can deduct either their state and local income taxes, or their state and local general sales taxes when computing their income for federal income tax purposes.  (The federal \"\"alternative minimum tax\"\" restricts this deduction for some people.) For a single person earning $ 100,000 of salaries and wages in California, whose state income taxes are close to their standard deduction, the calculations for the combined marginal income tax rate look something like this: As mentioned above, this understates the tax bite on marginal \"\"earned income\"\".  To find the true marginal rate, we need to add in Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, sales taxes, and business & occupation taxes.  The Social Security and Medicare taxes are sometimes called \"\"self employment taxes\"\".  This math omits unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance, because those taxes are typically capped well below $ 100,000 per year of income.  This math also omits B & O taxes, because this question is California specific. If an employer wishes to increase an employee's pay by $ 1,076.50, the first $ 76.50 will go to the employer's share of Social Security and Medicare taxes.  The remaining $ 1,000.00 will be subject to the combined marginal income tax rate discussed above, plus will have $ 76.50 go to the employee's share of Social Security and Medicare taxes.  The employee might buy some extra things with some of their extra money, and pay sales tax on them. In 2016, a 9 % sales tax rate was common in California's largest cities. The IRS estimated that (for a single person with no dependents making $ 100,000 per year who did not buy a boat, RV, motor vehicle, or major home construction), about 9 % of their marginal gross income was subject to sales tax.\""}
{"id": "292937", "text": "A rollover IRA is a traditional IRA.  Your rollover contributions are not taxed and rollover or counted against your annual limit, which is income dependent. A Roth IRA is one where your contributions will be taxed going into the IRA.  Note that there are adjusted gross income maximums for contribution to a Roth IRA (see here), and as far as I can tell those income maximums also determine whether or not you can rollover to a Roth IRA."}
{"id": "293122", "text": "\"First, there are not necessarily two accounts involved.  Usually the receiving party can take the check to the bank on which it is drawn and receive cash.  In this case, there is only one bank, it can look to see that the account on which the check is drawn has sufficient funds, and make an (essentially irrevocable) decision to pay the bearer.  (Essentially irrevocable precisely because the bearer did not necessarily have to present account information.) The more usual case is that the receiving party deposits the check into an account at their own bank.  The receiving party's bank then (directly or indirectly - in the US via the Federal Reserve) presents the check to the paying party's bank.  At that point if the there are insufficient funds, the check \"\"bounces\"\" and the receiving party's account will be debited.  The receiving party's bank knows that account number because, in this case, the receiving party is a customer of the bank.  This is why funds from check deposits are typically not available for immediate withdrawal.\""}
{"id": "293310", "text": "Assuming the US, if a human assessor audited you, could you show a future profit motive or will they conclude you are expensing a hobby? If you answer yes, you are likely to only be deducting limited expenses this year, carrying forward losses to your profitable years.  See the examples in pub 535: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p535/ch01.html#en_US_2014_publink1000208633"}
{"id": "293389", "text": "\"This is the sad state of US stock markets and Regulation T. Yes, while options have cleared & settled for t+1 (trade +1 day) for years and now actually clear \"\"instantly\"\" on some exchanges, stocks still clear & settle in t+3.  There really is no excuse for it. If you are in a margin account, regulations permit the trading of unsettled funds without affecting margin requirements, so your funds in effect are available immediately after trading but aren't considered margin loans.  Some strict brokers will even restrict the amount of uncleared margin funds you can trade with (Scottrade used to be hyper safe and was the only online discount broker that did this years ago); others will allow you to withdraw a large percentage of your funds immediately (I think E*Trade lets you withdraw up to 90% of unsettled funds immediately). If you are in a cash account, you are authorized to buy with unsettled funds, but you can't sell purchases made on unsettled funds until such funds clear, or you'll be barred for 90 days from trading as your letter threatened; besides, most brokers don't allow this.  You certainly aren't allowed to withdraw unsettled funds (by your broker) in such an account as it would technically constitute a loan for which you aren't even liable since you've agreed to no loan contract, a margin agreement.  I can't be sure if that actually violates Reg T, but when I am, I'll edit. While it is true that all marketable options are cleared through one central entity, the Options Clearing Corporation, with stocks, clearing & settling still occurs between brokers, netting their transactions between each other electronically. All financial products could clear & settle immediately imo, and I'd rather not start a firestorm by giving my opinion why not. Don't even get me started on the bond market... As to the actual process, it's called \"\"clearing & settling\"\". The general process (which can generally be applied to all financial instruments from cash deposits to derivatives trading) is: The reason why all of the old financial companies were grouped on Wall St. is because they'd have runners physically carting all of the certificates from building to building.  Then, they discovered netting so slowed down the process to balance the accounts and only cart the net amounts of certificates they owed each other.  This is how we get the term \"\"bankers hours\"\" where financial firms would close to the public early to account for the days trading.  While this is all really done instantly behind your back at your broker, they've conveniently kept the short hours.\""}
{"id": "293404", "text": "\"This is what this sounds like to me: https://www.thebalance.com/having-a-garage-sale-or-yard-sale-what-to-do-first-399030 also: http://blogs.hrblock.com/2012/07/25/garage-sale-money-does-the-irs-need-to-know/ Selling a personal item at a loss is generally not a taxable event. You cannot report it as a loss, and the IRS can't tax a transaction like that. If you really want to include these as sales as part of your LLC, you'll probably have to pay tax if you list it as income. I'm just confused as to why you'd want to do that, if you know that you're selling these particular items at a loss, and you also know that you have no documentation for them. I just wouldn't report anything you sold at a loss and treat it as \"\"garage sale items\"\" separate from your business.\""}
{"id": "293464", "text": "\"The other answers are talking about seller financing.  There is another type of arrangement that might be described as \"\"writing your own mortgage,\"\" where the buyer arranges his (or her) own financing.  Instead of using a bank, a buyer might find his own investor to hold the mortgage for him. An example would be if I were to buy a house that needs fixing up.  I might be able to buy a house for $40,000, but after I fix it up, I believe it will sell for $100,000.  Instead of going through a traditional mortgage bank, I find an investor with cash that agrees the house is a good deal, and we arrange for the investor to provide funds for the purchase of the house on a short-term basis (perhaps interest-only), during which I fix up the house and sell it.  Just like a regular mortgage, the loan is backed by the house itself. I am not recommending this type of arrangement by any means, but this article does a good job of describing how this would work.  It is written by a real-estate guru with lots of training courses and coaching materials that she would like to sell you.  :)\""}
{"id": "293484", "text": "The first statement is talking about a sudden sharp increase in volume (double or more of average volume) with a sudden increase in price. In other words, there has been a last rush to buy the stock exhausting all the current bulls (buyers), so the bears (sellers) take over, at least temporarily. Whilst the second statement is talking about a gradual increase in volume as the price up trends (thus the use of a volume oscillator). In other words (in an uptrend), the bulls (buyers) are gradually increasing in numbers sending the price higher, and new buyers keep entering the market. (The opposite is the case for a down-trend)."}
{"id": "293531", "text": "\"Agree with Randy, if debt and debt reduction was all about math, nobody would be in debt.  It is an emotional game. If you've taken care of the reasons you're in debt, changed your behaviors, then start focusing on the math of getting it done faster.   Otherwise, if you don't have a handle on the behaviors that got you there, you're just going to get more rope to hang yourself with.  I.e., makes sense to take a low-interest home equity loan to pay off high-interest credit card debt, but more likely than not, you'll just re-rack up the debt on the cards because you never fixed the behavior that put you into debt. Same thing here, if you opt not to contribute to \"\"pay off the cards\"\" without fixing the debt-accumulating behaviors, what you're going to do is stay in debt AND not provide for retirement. Take the match until you're certain you have your debt accumulation habits in check.\""}
{"id": "293605", "text": "\"The traditional E-mini S&P500 options (introduced on 09/09/97) already expire on the 3rd Friday, so there's no need for another \"\"weekly\"\" option that expires at the same time.\""}
{"id": "293624", "text": "\"Jack \"\"The Mortgage Professor\"\" Guttentag provides a thorough analysis of a similar-sounding system: In addition, I had the feeling that customers of Mortgage Relief should have gotten a spreadsheet for their $45, and wondered why they hadn\u2019t? So I set out to develop a spreadsheet of my own that could quantify the benefits \u2013 if there were any. The major question I wanted the spreadsheet to answer was, how large is the benefit of using the Mortgage Relief scheme if you don\u2019t have any surplus income but only just enough to make the scheduled payment? This is the critical question because we know that if you use surplus income to make extra payments to principal, you pay down the mortgage more quickly. This is so whether you apply the income directly to the mortgage, as most borrowers do, or whether you follow the Mortgage Relief procedure where you use a credit line to pay down the mortgage and current income to pay down the credit line. I spent much of my air time between Philadelphia and San Francisco on this project, and finally gave it up. Once I removed surplus income from the equation, I could not find a way to make the Mortgage Relief scheme work. You may also want to read related articles by Guttentag:\""}
{"id": "293626", "text": "\"I just looked at a fund for my client, the fund is T Rowe Price Retirement 2015 (TRRGX).  As stated in the prospectus, it has an annual expense ratio of 0.63%.  In the fine print below the funds expenses, it says  \"\"While the fund itself charges no management fee, it will indirectly bear its pro-rata share of the expenses of the underlying T. Rowe Price funds in which it invests (acquired funds). The acquired funds are expected to bear the operating expenses of the fund.\"\"  One of it's acquired funds is TROSX which has an expense ratio of 0.86%.  So the total cost of the fund is the weighted average of the \"\"acquired funds\"\" expense ratio's plus the listed expense ratio of the fund.  You can see this at http://doc.morningstar.com/docdetail.aspx?clientid=schwab&key=84b36f1bf3830e07&cusip=74149P796 and its all listed in \"\"Fees and Expenses of the Fund\"\"\""}
{"id": "293652", "text": "\"You are considered a Canadian resident if you have \"\"significant residential ties to Canada\"\". Because your wife lives in Canada, you therefore are a resident. Even by working temporarily in the US, you are still considered a \"\"factual resident\"\" of Canada. Due to that, your second question is irrelevant.\""}
{"id": "293679", "text": "Googling vanguard target asset allocation led me to this page on the Bogleheads wiki which has detailed breakdowns of the Target Retirement funds; that page in turn has a link to this Vanguard PDF which goes into a good level of detail on the construction of these funds' portfolios. I excerpt: (To the question of why so much weight in equities:) In our view, two important considerations justify an expectation of an   equity risk premium. The first is the historical record: In the past,   and in many countries, stock market investors have been rewarded with   such a premium.  ... Historically, bond returns have lagged equity returns by about 5\u20136   percentage points, annualized\u2014amounting to an enormous return   differential in most circumstances over longer time periods.   Consequently, retirement savers investing only in \u201csafe\u201d assets must   dramatically increase their savings rates to compensate for the lower   expected returns those investments offer. ... The second strategic principle underlying our glidepath   construction\u2014that younger investors are better able to withstand   risk\u2014recognizes that an individual\u2019s total net worth consists of both   their current financial holdings and their future work earnings. For   younger individuals, the majority of their ultimate retirement wealth   is in the form of what they will earn in the future, or their \u201chuman   capital.\u201d Therefore, a large commitment to stocks in a younger   person\u2019s portfolio may be appropriate to balance and diversify risk   exposure to work-related earnings (To the question of how the exact allocations were decided:) As part of the process of evaluating and identifying an appropriate   glide path given this theoretical framework, we ran various   financial simulations using the Vanguard Capital Markets Model. We   examined different risk-reward scenarios and the potential   implications of different glide paths and TDF approaches. The PDF is highly readable, I would say, and includes references to quant articles, for those that like that sort of thing."}
{"id": "293897", "text": "\"Let me run some simplistic numbers, ignoring inflation. You have the opportunity to borrow up to 51K. What matters (and varies) is your postgraduation salary. Case 1 - you make 22K after graduation. You pay back 90 a year for 30 years, paying off at most 2700 of the loan. In this case, whether you borrow 2,800 or 28,000 makes no difference to the paying-off. You would do best to borrow as much as you possibly can, treating it as a grant. Case 2 - you make 100K after graduation. You pay back over 7K a year. If you borrowed the full 51, after 7 or 8 years it would be paid off (yeah, yeah, inflation, interest, but maybe that might make it 9 years.) In this case, the more you borrow the more you have to pay back, but you can easily pay it back, so you don't care. Invest your sponsorships and savings into something long term since you know you won't be needing to draw on them. Case 3 - you make 30K after graduation. Here, the payments you have to make actually impact how much disposable income you have. You pay back 810 a year, and over 30 years that's about 25K of principal. It will be less if you account for some (even most) of the payment going to interest, not principal. Anything you borrow above 25K (or the lower, more accurate amount) is \"\"free\"\". If you borrow substantially less than that (by using your sponsorship, savings, and summer job) you may be able to stop paying sooner than 30 years. But even if you borrow only 12K (or half the more accurate number), it will still be 15 years of payments. Running slightly more realistic versions of these calculations where your salary goes up, and you take interest into account, I think you will discover, for each possible salary path, a number that represents how much of your loan is really loan: everything above that is actually a grant you do not pay back. The less you are likely to make, the more of it is really grant. On top of that, it seems to me that no matter the loan/grant ratio,  \"\"borrow as much as you can from this rather bizarre source\"\" appears to be the correct answer. In the cases where it's all loan, you have a lot of income and don't care much about this loan payment. Borrowing the whole 51K lets you invest all the money you get while you're a student, and you can use the returns on those investments to make the loan payments.\""}
{"id": "293959", "text": "\"Unless you want to own the actual shares, you should simply sell the call option.By doing so you actual collect the profits (including any remaining time-value) of your position without ever needing to own the actual shares. Please be aware that you do not need to wait until maturity of the call option to sell it. Also the longer you wait, more and more of the time value embedded in the option's price will disappear which means your \"\"profit\"\" will go down.\""}
{"id": "294043", "text": "Car and health insurance, etc would be budgeted.  Most people know what their monthly nut is and how long they can spend on a job search.  If you really feel that your boss is treating you poorly, sometimes the best thing to do is to tighten your belt, start saving and look for new opportunities.   It is not easy.  Nothing worse doing is.     I know people generally have difficulty saving money, but like I said, ultimately, you are responsible for your own happiness."}
{"id": "294076", "text": "Keep in mind the number of months or years before you break even. You pay money to lower the interest rate, and lower the monthly cost. But it takes a number of months, using your numbers $7,000 to save $160 a month will take ~43 months. That is before figuring in the future or present value. If you sell or refinance the mortgage, the initial points to lower the rate is gone."}
{"id": "294123", "text": "Having 401k or HSA is not income and doesn't trigger filing requirements. Withdrawing from 401k or HSA does. Also, in some States, HSA gains are taxed as investment income, so if you have gains in an HSA and you're a resident of such a State - you'll need to file a State tax return and pay taxes on the gains."}
{"id": "294128", "text": "\"&gt; Every credit card has a space on the back for a signature. And for decades, retailers would check the signature on your ID ... This worked for a long time, until retailers ...  For decades, retailers never compared signatures on credit cards to the person's signature. Impractical and not even worth it as anyone can copy a signature on a card.  Neither do banks bother to check for signature. They don't even have a \"\"signature on-file\"\" anymore.   Try it! Deposit a check or buy with a credit card and scribble something unrelated as a signature! The deposit or credit card transaction will go through. I guarantee you that! **Please try it! Let me know if it did not work!**  I know what I am talking about because I deal with credit cards a lot, professionally, in IT.  The only sure thing is to ask for a PIN. But, alas, credit cards use a chip, so if I steall your card, I can buy with it with no problems. But not if I still your ATM card - I don't know your PIN. The PIN is in your head and I can't get it.  The credit card companies don't really care.\""}
{"id": "294152", "text": "It depends solely on the risk your willing to take. For example, few years back one of the leading banks in my country was offering 25% interest rate for 5 year fixed deposits and the lending rate in the market was around 12%. So people borrowed money from other banks and invested in the high return fixed deposits. After 6 months the bank filed for bankruptcy and people lost their money. Later investigations revealed that abnormal high return was offered because the bank had a major liquidity problem. So all depends on the risk associated with return on your investment. Higher the risk, higher the return."}
{"id": "294621", "text": "This is correct. The most rapidly expanding areas in finance resemble computer science more than they resemble traditional finance. The compliance and legal side of things, however, is only getting more and more complicated. At my firm, the compliance personnel outnumber the traders three to one."}
{"id": "294753", "text": "I'm not certain I understand what you're trying to do, but it sounds like you're trying to create a business expense for paying off your personal debt. If so - you cannot do that. It will constitute a tax fraud, and if you have additional partners in the LLC other than you and your spouse - it may also become an embezzlement issue. Re your edits: Or for example, can you create a tuition assistance program within   your company and pay yourself out of that for the purposes of student   loan money. Explicitly forbidden. Tuition assistance program cannot pay more than 5% of its benefits to owners. See IRS pub 15-B. You would think that if there was a way to just incorporate and make your debts pre-tax - everyone would be doing it, wouldn't you?"}
{"id": "294810", "text": "I remember my Finance Professor at b-school answering this question:   The next moment the dividend is paid the total market cap is decreased by the amount paid   This makes sense as cash leaves company, the value of the company is decreased by exactly the same amount. To summarise: the moment you paid dividend, the value of the stock is decreased by the same amount."}
{"id": "294855", "text": "\"I separate them out, simply because they're for different purposes, with different goals and time-frames, and combining them may mask hidden problems in either the retirement account or the regular account. Consider an example: A young investor has been working on their retirement planning for a few years now, and has a modest amount of retirement savings (say $15,000) allocated carefully according to one of the usually recommended schemes. A majority exposure to large cap U.S. stocks, with smaller exposures to small cap, international and bond markets. Years before however, they mad an essentially emotional investment in a struggling manufacturer of niche personal computers, which then enjoyed something of a renaissance and a staggering growth in shareholder value. Lets say their current holdings in this company now represent $50,000. Combining them, their portfolio is dominated by large cap U.S. equities to such an extent that the only way to rebalance their portfolio is to pour money into bonds and the international market for years on end. This utterly changes the risk profile of their retirement account. At the same time, if we switch the account balances, the investor might be reassured that their asset allocation is fine and diversified, even though the assets they have access to before retirement are entirely in a single risky stock. In neither case is the investor well served by combining their funds when figuring out their allocation - especially as the \"\"goal\"\" allocations may very well be different.\""}
{"id": "294985", "text": "The real problem is the international bubble. China for one pegs their currency against the dollar and it's banks use even more leverage than ours do. There is no safe haven for money, because everyone is printing the shit out of their money."}
{"id": "294997", "text": "\"What do you mean \"\"There are no convenient ways to create a debit card in my area\"\"? Of course there is. At any post office.\""}
{"id": "295082", "text": "Dividends indicate that a business is making more profit than it can effectively invest into expansion or needs to regulate cash-flow. This generally indicates that the business is well established and has stabilized in a dominant market position. This can be contrasted against businesses that: Dividends are also given preferential tax treatment. Specifically, if I buy a stock and sell it 30 days later, I will be taxed on the capital gains at the regular income rate (typically 25-33%), but the dividends would be taxed at the lower long-term capital gains rate (typically 15%)."}
{"id": "295085", "text": "I dunno.  Borrow $65,000 with zero collateral, string the lender along for 20+ years, then die?  Sounds like a great decision to me.  I wonder why a bank would ever take the other end of that lemon of a deal?  Oh, right..."}
{"id": "295121", "text": "Well, consult with a CPA, but I guess you don't have to pay taxes on 2012 with a correct accounting system since this is the money you are going to completely earn within 2013 so you can record it as future earning which is called deferred revenue or advance payments or unearned revenue."}
{"id": "295159", "text": "Your math is not wrong. That's why banks want these points. They did the same math too. There may be some immediate tax advantages for points though, in that case you can get return of your tax rate for the year of the points (which may make it worth it, if you don't want to keep the mortgage for more than, say, 10 years). Check here for details."}
{"id": "295250", "text": "set up a US company (WY is cheap and easy), go south and open a personal and business bank account, ask for the itin form. file for the itin. set up your EIN for the company. get a credit card for both. pay some mail forwarding service with it. file for taxes in the next year using your itin. prepaid cards do not link to your tax id"}
{"id": "295750", "text": "\"I know many people who would recommend joining a credit union. They're typically local and are not-for-profit entities (not non-profit like a charity). The \"\"customers\"\" are actually members who cooperatively provide financial services to the other members. Oftentimes if there's a surplus of profits at the end of the year, they divvy them up to the members based on how many accounts they have, what their balances are, loans, etc.\""}
{"id": "295993", "text": "ETFs are legally required to publicly disclose their positions at every point in time. The reason for this is that for an ETF to issue shares of ETF they do NOT take cash in exchange but underlying securities - this is called a creation unit. So people need to know which shares to deliver to the fund to get a share of ETF in exchange. This is never done by retail clients, however, but by nominated market makers. Retail persons will normally trade shares only in the secondary market (ie. on a stock exchange), which does not require new shares of the ETF to be issued. However, they do not normally make it easy to find this information in a digestible way, and each ETF does it their own way. So typically services that offer this information are payable (as somebody has to scrape the information from a variety of sources or incentivise ETF providers to send it to them). If you have access to a Bloomberg terminal, this information is available from there. Otherwise there are paid for services that offer it. Searching on Google for ETF constituent data, I found two companies that offer it: See if you can find what you need there. Good luck. (etfdb even has a stock exposure tool freely available that allows you to see which ETFs have large exposure to a stock of your choosing, see here: http://etfdb.com/tool/etf-stock-exposure-tool/). Since this data is in a table format you could easily download it automatically using table parsing tools for your chosen programming language. PS: Don't bother with underlying index constituents, they are NOT required to be made public and index providers will normally charge handsomely for this so normally only institutional investors will have this information."}
{"id": "296342", "text": "Recurring deposit means you put aside a sum every month to go into your RD account. Fixed deposit means you put aside a lump sum to go into your FD account. If we take investing 12,000 for RD, means 1,000 a month, and 12,000 for FD, means putting in 12,000 straightaway, we will definitely earn more from FD. However, if you do not have a lot of capital at the start, an RD is a good way to start saving in a disciplined manner."}
{"id": "296405", "text": "\"Many employees don't contribute enough to maximize the match, so the cost to the employer is not the same.  Under the 50% of 6% strategy an employee contributing 5% would get a 2.5% match not a 3% and that saves the company 0.5%. @TTT provided an excellent link in the comments below to a study titled \"\"How much employer 401(k) matching contributions do employees leave on the table?\"\" performed by Financial Engines, an independent financial advisory service.  The information meaningful to this answer is on Page 5 (Page 7 of the PDF): 4,378,445 eligible employees were included in the study 1,077,775 of the eligible employees did not contribute enough for the full match; of them, 285,386 Received zero match funds 792,389 Received some match funds, but not the full match available So 792,389 or 18% of the employees studied contributed in to employer 401(k) plans but not enough to maximize their available match.\""}
{"id": "296808", "text": "\"&gt; Oh, I've gotten the \"\"massive upside\"\" in writing - you get 10,000 shares of this thing!  Don't ask for 10,000 shares. Ask for $10,000. Or $100,000. Or whatever you think is a fair payment for the time you invest. You could even pull a cash figure from the income projection in the business plan you asked to see. You did ask for that, right? As well as the resumes from the founders and the name of the VC company so that you can check them out?  &gt; The fact that it's a pretty sophisticated game is not always obvious,   It isn't sophisticated at all. It's very, very simple. IF you're asked to work below your market rate, you're an **investor**. You're investing time, and you need to see it paid back in the form of money. You need to be sure to get a contract that covers your investment, so that even if the company tanks you can still get paid. Or at the very least, you can sue the VC company for your back pay.  If you're new to it, you need to ask for advice from someone who isn't. This isn't rocket science, guys.\""}
{"id": "296980", "text": "As well as credit risk there's also interest risk. If a bond has a face value of $100, pays 1% and matures in 20 years' time then you expect to receive a total of $120 from buying it now -- $1 per year for 20 years and $100 at the end. But if you can get a 3% return elsewhere, then if you invest your $80 there instead you will get $2.40 per year for 20 years and then $80 at the end, making a total of $128 (and you also get more of the money sooner). So even $80 for the $100 bond is a bad buy, and you should invest elsewhere."}
{"id": "296989", "text": "\"You are effectively 'making' 3.8% right now. By maintaining a loan at 0% vs the 3.8% you'd otherwise pay, you are ahead by that percent.  Now, if you borrowed at 3.8%, and made 7.6% on your investments, taxes aside, you'd break even. you are exactly ahead by the same 3.8%.  It seems to me that with a break-even of 7.6%, you'd be taking a risk based on the market return over the next few years. In a sense, that's true for any of us, but in your case, you are not deciding where to put idle cash, you already have the 3.8% option of \"\"leave well enough alone.\"\" This is where I'd quote Harry Callahan - 'you've gotta ask yourself one question: \"\"Do I feel lucky?\"\" Well, do ya, punk?'\""}
{"id": "297013", "text": "Cashiers check is as good as cash. I use them all the time as banks don't carry over 2-3k anymore. I can bring the cashiers check anywhere and thus cash it for u without an account. It's basically a piece of paper that says these funds are set aside from the issuers account just for and only for the check. That's why it's accepted anywhere. It's a gurantee from one bank to another that the funds are there waiting to be transferred. The whole point of the check is so the funds are available immediately. The bank will call the issuing bank verify the Check is real and than cash it immediately. You don't pay a fee to buy the cashiers check just to wait for it to clear like a normal free check. Its immediate and just as good as cash. I use them weekly/monthly for amounts from 5k up to over 100k."}
{"id": "297102", "text": "For big values the loss becomes negligible. Say you have a 10% chance to get 10 million $/\u20ac/Whatever, expected value 1m. You sell that chance for 990k, which loses you 10k of expected income. Why would you throw away 10k? Because in the face of getting almost 1m the 10k are insignificant, 1m and 990k will make you roughly equally rich. Also the richness increase from 1m to 10m is less than 10x since 1m gives you maybe 90% of the freedom that 10m does (depending on how well you can make 10m work for you, most people will just let it rot in the bank). Another way to look at it is to look at bankruptcy risk. Say I have 10k in the bank, which is nice. Those 10k cannot pay for a new house or 2 cars (mine and the one I hit), so I have a small risk of significant loss. If I buy an insurance I reduce my chance of going bankrupt from maybe 0.001% to 0% for a fairly small price. Usually you can buy insurance fairly cheap if you raise your deductible to maybe 5k (both for the house and the car) so that you shoulder the risk you can (shouldering risk = gaining money) and paying an insurance to shoulder the rest for you. That way you minimize the cost to remove the risk of bankruptcy. It makes sense to shoulder as much risk as you can (unless a fixed fee of the insurance makes in unfeasible) before paying others to do it for you so you can optimize your income while removing fatal risks."}
{"id": "297274", "text": "\"I would recommend putting it on a credit card, just not your current credit card. Run a Google search for \"\"credit cards with good signup bonuses\"\" and you will potentially come across these links: http://www.cardrates.com/advice/11-best-signup-bonus-credit-cards/ https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/top-credit-cards/best-credit-card-offers/ There are cards out there which can qualify you to: The $150 back on a $500 purchase is an instant 30% ROI. The best stock options couldn't guarantee you that kind of return. You will instantly meet the criteria and get $150 + $25 (1% cash back on the full $2,500) The only stipulation is that in order to fully benefit from the rewards, you must pay off the card in full when your bill comes in or else you will pay steep interest. After a year or so you can cancel the card. If you want, sign up for two or three cards and split the payment. Reap the rewards from multiple credit cards. I wish I had done this with my college tuition; it was a tough pill to swallow when I forked over $3,000 at the registrar's office for one semester :-( I had the potential to realize a savings of $900 in one semester alone. Would have been nice to apply such a kickback against buying my books. If you work things out correctly then you can save 30% ($750) on your total purchase. That's one way to not run yourself dry. Disclaimer: By following these steps you will be triggering at least one hard inquiry against your credit. Each hard inquiry has the potential to lower your credit rating. If you do not plan to use your score to apply for any major loans (e.g. car or house) then this reduction in credit will have basically no impact on your day-to-day life. Assuming you continue using your credit responsibly then your credit should just bounce right back to where it was in no time. I know there are many people out there that cherish their score and relish in the fact that it is so high but it's for moments like these that make it worthwhile to \"\"spend\"\" your credit score. It's an inanimate number whose sole purpose is to be \"\"spent\"\" in times like these.\""}
{"id": "297288", "text": "\"Thirty thousand in credit card debt is a \"\"big elephant to eat\"\" so to speak.  But you do it by taking a bite at a time.  One positive is that you do not want to borrow from your 401K.  Doing so is a horrible idea. The first question you have to ask yourself and understand, is how you accumulated 30K in credit card debt in the first place?  Most people get there by running up a relatively small amount, say 5K, and playing the zero transfer game a few times.  Then add in a late payment, and a negative event or two (like the car breaking down or a trip to the emergency room) and poof a large amount of credit card debt.   Obviously, I have no idea if this is how you got there, and providing some insight might help.   Also, your age, approximate income, and other debts might also help provide more insight.  I assume you are still working and under age 59.5 as you are talking about borrowing from your 401K. Where I come from is that my wife (then girlfriend) found ourselves under stifling debt a few years ago.  When we married, we became very intentional and focused on ridding ourselves of debt and now sit completely debt free (including the house).  During our debt payoff time, we lived off of less than 25% of our salary.  We both took extra jobs when we were able.  Intensity was our key.     If I were you, I would not refi the house.  There are costs associated with this and why would you put more debt on your home? I might cash out the annuity provided that there are no negative tax consequences and depending on how much you can get for it.  Numbers are the key here.  However, I feel like doing so will not retire this debt. The first thing you need to do is get on a written budget.  A game plan for spending and stick to it.  If you are married, your spouse has to be part of this process.  The budget has to be fresh each month, and each month you and your wife should meet.  To deviate from the budget, you will also need to have a meeting.  My wife and I still do this despite being debt free and enjoying very healthy incomes. Secondly, it is about cutting expenses.  Cable: off.  No eating out or vacations.  Cut back on cell phone plans, only basic clothing.  Gift giving is of the $5 variety and only for those very close to you.  Forget lattes, etc.  Depending on your income I would cut 401K contributions to zero or only up to the company match (if your household income is above 150K/year). Third, it is about earning more.  Ebay, deliver pizzas, cut grass, overtime, whatever.   All extra dollars go to credit card balance reduction.  At a minimum, you should find an extra $1000/month; however, I would shoot for 2K.  If you can find 2K, you will be done with this in 13 months.  I know the math doesn't work out for that, but once you get momentum, you find more. How good will it feel to be out from under this oppression next March?  I know you can do this without cashing in the annuity or refinancing.  Do you believe it?\""}
{"id": "297290", "text": "\"There is a lot of interesting information that can be found in a fund's prospectus. I have found it very helpful to read books on the issue, one I just finished was \"\"The Boglehead's Guide to Investing\"\" which speaks mostly on mutual and index funds. Actively managed funds mean that someone is choosing which stocks to buy and which to sell. If they think a stock will be \"\"hot\"\" then they buy it. Research has shown that people cannot predict the stock market, which is why many people suggest index based funds. An index fund generally tracks a group of companies. Example: an index fund of the S&P 500 will try to mimic the returns that the S&P 500 has. Overall, managed funds are more expensive than index funds because the fund manager must be paid to manage it. Also, there is generally more buying and selling so that also increases the tax amount you would owe. What I am planning on doing is opening a Roth IRA with Vanguard, as their funds have incredibly low fees (0.2% on many). One of the most important things you do before you buy is to figure out your target allocation (% of stocks vs % of bonds). Once you figure that out then you can start narrowing down the funds that you wish to invest in.\""}
{"id": "297427", "text": "First, determine the workload he will expect.  Will you have to quit your other work, either for time or for competition?  How much of your current business will be subsumed into his business, if any?  Make sure to understand what he wants from you.  If you make an agreement, set it in writing and set some clear expectations about what will happen to your business (e.g. it continues and is not part of your association with the client).  Because he was a client for your current business, it can blur the lines. Second, if you join him, make sure there is a business entity.  By working together for profit, you will have already formed a partnership for tax purposes.  Best to get an entity, both for the legal protection and also for the clarity of law and accounting.  LLCs are simplest for small ventures; C corps are useful if you have lots of early losses and owners that can't use them personally, or if you want to be properly formed for easy consumption by a strategic.  Most VCs and super-angels prefer everybody be a straight C.  Again, remember to define, as necessary, what you are contributing to be an owner and what you are retaining (your original business, which for simplicity may already be in an entity).  As part of this process, make sure he defines the cap table and any outstanding loans.  Auntie June and Cousin Steve might think their gifts to him were loans or equity purchases; best to clear this issue up early before there's any more money in it. Third, with regard to price, that is an intensely variable question.  It matters what the cap table looks like, how early you are, how much work he's already done, how much work remains to be done, and how much it will pay off.  Also, if you do it, expect to be diluted by other employees, angels, VCs, other investors, strategics, and so on.  Luckily, more investors usually indicates a growing pie, so the dilution may not be at all painful.  But it should still be on your horizon.  You also need to consider your faith in your prospective partner's ability to run the business and to be a trustworthy partner (so you don't get Zuckerberg'd), and to market the business and the product to customers and investors. If you don't like the prospects, then opt for cash.  If you like the business but want to hedge, ask for compensation plus equity.  There are other tricks you could use to get out early, like forced redemption, but they probably wouldn't help either because it'd sour your relationship or the first VC or knowledgeable angel to come along will want you to relinquish that sort of right. It probably comes down to a basic question of your need for cash, his willingness to let you pursue outside work (hopefully high) and your appraisal of the business' prospects."}
{"id": "297467", "text": "Most corporate policies strictly prohibit the card's use for personal use, even if the intent is to re-pay in full, on or before the due date.  I'm certain it has something to do with limitation of liability, i.e. the monetary risk the company is willing to put itself at, in order to offer a corporate card program. In my experience, AMEX Corporate Card Services is the most widely-used card, and in my experience, it is your employer that determines and administers the policy that outlines the card's appropriate use, not the credit card provider, so you're best to check with your employer for a definitive answer to this."}
{"id": "297589", "text": "You need a mixture of real estate, funds, and cash in the bank. Putting all your eggs in one basket is never wise.  I would also stay away from land-banking period... Like you had mentioned, scam after scam after scam... Here in Tokyo, Royal Siam Trust (White Sands Beach?) is the token land-banking scam... funny enough it was hosted by the OP..."}
{"id": "297652", "text": "Ditto Rocky. Also: Break the sale up over several tax years so that you don't have a spike in your income pushing you into a higher tax bracket. Don't sell it until you retire, when you're probably in a lower tax bracket. (If you're 20, this may be impractical.) Get some other deductions, like medical expenses, charity, etc. Failing that, maybe a couple of other ideas that neither of us thought of, I think the real answer is: suck it up and pay the taxes. If there was a way to reduce your taxes just by checking the right box on a tax form or some such, everybody would do it and the government wouldn't collect any taxes."}
{"id": "297836", "text": "\"No, it doesn't really matter at all.  This guy can spend $5 million a year for the rest of his life and still die being worth nine figures.  I guarantee you that tiny things like \"\"losing out on a couple of months interest\"\" will _never_ be a problem for him.\""}
{"id": "297841", "text": "How do I account for this in the bookkeeping? Here is an example below:  This is how you would accurately depict contributions made by an owner for a business. If you would want to remove money from your company, or pay yourself back, this would be called withdrawals. It would be the inverse of the first journal entry with cash on the credit side and withdrawals on the debited side (as it is an expense).  You and your business are not the same thing. You are two different entities. This is why you are taxed as two different entities. When you (the owner) make contributions, it is considered to be the cash of the business. From here you will make these expenses against the business and not yourself.  Good luck,"}
{"id": "298009", "text": "\"VAT = Value Added Tax (as an Aussie think \"\"GST\"\") This is applicable in Britain. Basically, if you were in Britain, and if you could claim VAT as a deduction, that invoice is not sufficient proof to make the claim. But you're in Oz so it doesn't apply to you in any case. For work-related deductions like book purchases, see http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.asp?doc=/content/00216829.htm&pc=001/002/068/001/002&mnu=&mfp=&st=&cy=1  Issues such as the books being second hand or purchased online are not cited in the instructions as relevant/limiting factors. In fact, if you really want to get into the nitty gritty, you could claim the work-related proportion of your internet access fees as a deduction (question D5 instructions, above, cover that as well).\""}
{"id": "298352", "text": "Ownership of the debt is irrelevant if Puerto Rico tells the investors to kick rocks. Which it already has.   Puerto Rico created the debt by accepting the loans it couldn't pay and under terms that caused full repayment in the event of one default. Which, spoiler alert, happens when you accrue $70bn in debt, with $50bn in unsecured pension liabilities created by bloated government pensions.   They also gave the middle finger to the investors whose money they happily took when things were good, only to flush it down the toilet and cry foul after they ran out of free money. The teacher's union and police officers unions opted out of SS so that they could reap these pension benefits.   The reality is that Puerto Rico buried itself in social programs that never really got an economy, that never had much going on, to experience any growth. It doesn't matter who owns the debt, this guy (from the article) sees a potential payday if the US swoops in and saves them from their crisis.   https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/business/dealbook/puerto-rico-teacher-pensions.html"}
{"id": "298367", "text": "i've been waiting for the MOVE to get off its butt for a while now but as long as we stay goldilocks and yellen vacillates between hawkish and dovish its hard for it to climb meaningfully.   The MOVE is at 52 now - for some context, the traditional view was that below 70 was complacent, above 100 was panic but since the era of unprecedented central bank intervention that hardly holds."}
{"id": "298563", "text": "Answering this question is a great way to gauge how you're doing towards saving for retirement now. But of course what matters more than this snapshot in time is how much you contribute down the line.  It may be wise to try to estimate how much you will want saved by the time you retire. Then try to calculate how much you would need to save in order to hit that mark."}
{"id": "298737", "text": "\"How Italians have a general mistrust in the euro and the ECB makes me crazy.  The country with over 2000 billion in debt, that got its ass saved by quantitative easing done by the European Central Bank (iirc, 46% of bonds bought were of the Italian debt). No politicians says he wants to reduce the debt, no, the problem is again something \"\"outside\"\". How about reforming Italian banks and their infamous credits they're still not writing off as losses because of politics? How about reducing the debt?  How each and everyone who has a bank account in Italy isn't grateful to Draghi is a mystery to me.  The consequences of driving a G8 country, the 3rd largest economy in the EU, to the ground because of moronic politicians who can't for the love of their life plan long term are horrible.  It's not like the fucks given by politicians are hidden in this new currency system. FFS.  Quick edit: problem number 1, 2 and 3 of Italy is to reduce its debt. Il resto \u00e8 noia, everything else is boredom.\""}
{"id": "298779", "text": "Ok - what's your starting point?  Are you starting with equity value and then working your way back to an enterprise value?  Then yes, you must subtract cash and add debt.  If you're doing a DCF, you don't have to make any changes to the values at the end if you're looking for an enterprise value.  If you're looking for an equity value, you would need to add cash and subtract debt.  If you're simply applying a enterprise value multiple (such as EV / EBITDA) you don't need to make any changes.  Just multiply the Company's EBITDA by the multiple in question.  Enterprise values are supposed to be capital structure independent because they are only valuing the company on metrics that occur before the impact of the Company's capital structure."}
{"id": "298785", "text": "\"I apologize for not investigating the skeezy world of finance more than I have to, but the major banks invented derivatives that allow them to essentially make a \"\"bet\"\" on whether a company will perform well or poorly.  This then allows them to make a shitload of cash by manipulating the market in their favor unfairly and that is wrong.  That is my argument, if you want to get caught up in the semantics of acronyms be my guest but my argument is very real and shared by many so the real question is why are you so blind to the chicanery of major financial institutions?\""}
{"id": "298908", "text": "\"Here's the issue as I see it. The fact that one has high interest debt says a lot about the potential borrower. Odds are very good that person will not pay the zero card off before the rate expires, and will likely charge more along the way.  I'd love to be able to say \"\"great idea, borrowing at a low rate to pay off a high rate card will be the first step to getting you all paid off\"\" but chances are in a year's time you will not be better off.  You said you know a lot of people that have done this. Have they all been successful? It's possible, but I'd heed the warnings of those here and first think how you got into the credit card debt.\""}
{"id": "299002", "text": "IRS Publication 463 is a great resource to help you understand what you can and can't deduct.  It's not a yes/no question, it depends on the exact company use, other use, and contemporaneous record keeping."}
{"id": "299690", "text": "\"As other people have indicated, traditional IRAs are tax deductable for a particular year. Please note, though, that traditional IRAs are tax deferred (not tax-free) accounts, meaning that you'll have to pay taxes on any money you take out later regardless of why you're making the withdrawal. (A lot of people mistakenly call them tax free, which they're not). There is no such thing as a \"\"tax-free\"\" retirement account. Really, in terms of Roth vs. Traditional IRAs, it's \"\"pay now or pay later.\"\" With the exception of special circumstances like this, I recommend investing exclusively in Roth IRAs for money that you expect to grow much (or that you expect to produce substantial income over time). Just to add a few thoughts on what to actually invest in once you open your IRA, I strongly agree with the advice that you invest mostly in low-cost mutual funds or index funds. The advantage of an open-ended mutual fund is that it's easier to purchase them in odd increments and you may be able to avoid at least some purchase fees, whereas with an ETF you have to buy in multiples of that day's asking price. For example, if you were investing $500 and the ETF costs $200 per share, you could only purchase 2 shares, leaving $100 uninvested (minus whatever fee your broker charged for the purchase). The advantage of an ETF is that it's easy to buy or sell quickly. Usually, when you add money to a mutual fund, it'll take a few days for it to hit your account, and when you want to sell it'll similarly take a few days for you to get your money; when I buy an ETF the transaction can occur almost instantly. The fees can also be lower (if the ETF is just a passive index fund). Also, there's a risk with open-ended mutual funds that if too many people pull money out at once the managers could be forced to sell stocks at an unfavorable price.\""}
{"id": "299703", "text": "I'd listen to the person who doesn't want tax deferral.  S/he is wise. I'd do it in a taxable account.  Talk about the investments all you want, pool your knowledge, but invest privately and separately. Pay your taxes and be done with them."}
{"id": "299819", "text": "How old are you? With $15k, I assume late twenties.  Do you still use your credit cards? or is this just past accumulated debt? (paying them off will do you no good if you just run them back up again.)  Does your employer match you contributions? How much? Are you fully vested in their contributions?    In general, it is not a good idea, but under the right circumstances it isn't a bad idea."}
{"id": "299840", "text": "\"You are correct.  Credit card companies charge the merchant for every transaction.  But the merchant isn't necessarily going to give you discount for paying in cash.  The idea is that by providing more payment options, they increase sales, covering the cost of the transaction fee.  That said, some merchants require a minimum purchase for using a credit card, though this may be against the policies of some issuers in the U.S. (I have no idea about India.) Also correct.  They hope that you'll carry a balance so that they can charge you interest on it.  Some credit cards are setup to charge as many fees as they possibly can.  These are typically those low limit cards that are marketed as \"\"good\"\" ways to build up your credit.  Most are basically scams, in the fact that the fees are outrageous. Update regarding minimum purchases: Apparently, Visa is allowing minimum purchase requirements in the U.S. of $10 or less.  However, it seems that MasterCard still does not allow them, for the most part.  Moral of the story: research the credit card issuers' policies.  A further update regarding minimum purchases: In the US, merchants will be allowed to require a minimum purchase of up to $10 for credit card transactions.  (I am guessing that prompted the Visa rule change mentioned above.) More detail can be found here in this answer, along with a link to the text of the bill itself.\""}
{"id": "300104", "text": "\"It depends on the volatility of the underlying stock. But for \"\"normal\"\" levels of volatility, the real value of that option is probably $3.50! Rough estimates of the value of the option depending on volatility levels: Bottom line: unless this is a super volatile stock, it is trading at $3.50 for a reason. More generally: it is extremely rare to find obvious arbitrage opportunities in the market.\""}
{"id": "300121", "text": "You don't have to create a PayPal account in order to buy from a merchant that uses PayPal for processing their payments.  You can use your credit card just like with any other purchase. Creating a PayPal business account is, as you say, mainly for businesses wanting to accept payments, not make them.  PayPal doesn't require you, the customer, to have an account just to make a payment to a merchant.  We have dozens of customers a day make purchases through us using our PayPal account (we're small), and for them the main attraction to using PayPal to pay us is that PayPal has pretty good security and offers some very good customer protections against fraud.  They don't have to create a PayPal account just to pay us, though. When you create a PayPal business account, you link a bank account to it that they verify, then they issue you a PayPal MasterCard, which is a debit card that links to your PayPal account.  When you make purchases, if the funds are in your PayPal account (because, for instance, you're using PayPal as your merchant processor) then the payment is deducted from that.  If there's no money in your PayPal account then PayPal simply debits the bank account you linked with them, no differently than if you were to use your bank's debit card. In this instance, if you don't plan to use PayPal for merchant processing then there's no real reason to open a business account.  It doesn't have any advantages over your bank's debit card and, IMHO, just adds another layer of complexity and paperwork to your accounting for no identifiable benefit. I hope this helps. Good luck!"}
{"id": "300133", "text": "Both states will want to tax you. Your tax home is where you maintain a domicile, are registered to vote, etc. and you will probably want to keep this as MA since you state that MA is your permanent residence and you are staying in a rented place in PA. But be careful about voter registration; that is one of the items that can be used to determine your state of residence.  OK, so if you and your spouse are MA residents,  you should file jointly as residents in MA and as nonresidents in PA. Do the calculations on the nonresident return first, and then the calculations on the resident  return. Typically, on a nonresident tax return, the calculations are effectively the following: Report all your income (usually AGI from the Federal return).  Call this $X. Compute the PA state tax due on $X.  Note that you follow the rules for nonresidents in doing this, not the calculations used by PA residents. Call the amount of tax you computed as $Y. What part of the total income $X is attributable to PA sources? If this amount is $Z, then you owe PA $Y times (Z/X). On the resident return in MA, you will likely get some credit for the taxes paid to PA, and this will reduce your MA tax burden. Usually the maximum credit is limited to the lesser of actual tax paid to PA and what you would have had to pay MA for the same income. As far as withholding is concerned, your employer in PA will withhold PA taxes as if you are a PA resident, but you can adjust the amount via the PA equivalent of IRS Form W4 so as to account for any additional  tax that might be due because you will be filing as a nonresident.  Else you can pay estimated taxes via the PA equivalent of IRS Form 1040ES. Similarly, your wife can adjust her withholding to account for the MA taxes that you will owe on the joint income, or you can pay estimated taxes to MA too. Note that it is unlikely that your employer in Pennsylvania will withhold  Massachusetts taxes (and send them to Massachusetts) for you, e.g. if it is a ma-and-pa store, but there may be special deals available if  your employer does business in both states, i.e. is a MA-and-PA store."}
{"id": "300254", "text": "I suggest you have a professional assist you with this audit, if the issue comes into questioning. It might be that it wouldn't. There are several different options to deal with such situation, and each can be attacked by the IRS. You'll need to figure out the following: Have you paid taxes on the reimbursement? Most likely you haven't, but if you had - it simplifies the issue for you. Is the program qualified under the employers' plan, and the only reason you're not qualified for reimbursement is that you decided to quit your job? If so, you might not be able to deduct it at all, because you can't take tax benefits on something you can be reimbursed for, but chose not to. IRS might claim that you quitting your job is choosing not to get reimbursement you would otherwise get. I couldn't find from my brief search any examples of what happened after such a decision. You can claim it was a loan, but I doubt the IRS will agree. The employer most likely reported it as an expense. If the IRS don't contest based on what I described in #2, and you haven't paid taxes on the reimbursement (#1), I'd say what you did was reasonable and should be accepted (assuming of course you otherwise qualify for all the benefits you're asking for). I would suggest getting a professional advice. Talk to a EA or a a CPA in your area. This answer was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer"}
{"id": "300394", "text": "\"&gt; What if you felt you were cheated by the bank?   I could ask a judge if I were.  My subjective feelings are of no relevance for the validity of the contract.    &gt; What if you had something terrible unexpected happen to you financially?    Then I might get bankrupt as a consequence.  I did try to make certain that I can pay my loan even if something terrible happens to me.  That's why I live in a much smaller house in a less fancy neighbourhood.    &gt; Also a loan is not a promise. A loan is a contract.  Every contract is a binding promise, establishing rights and obligations.  That's the whole point of a contract.    &gt; The contract has outs for all parties.   Under certain conditions, a contract can have termination clauses.  But by far not all contracts have them.  And from a loan contract there is no \"\"out\"\" -- it is just that if you don't have any money to pay, you don't have any money to pay.    The whole concept of bankrupcy is just there to regulate the proceedings if you don't have the money to pay your dues -- not a convenient tool to cheat on your contractual obligations.  If it can be abused to this end, it needs to be reformed.\""}
{"id": "300418", "text": "If the employer provides housing to the employee, the employer has to identify whether it is taxable or not. If it is - the amounts would be added to the taxable income on your W2. All the withholding and FICA tax calculations will be performed based on that taxable income. If the employer fails to do that, and you get audited, you can be left on the hook for the unpaid taxes on the unreported income. In some cases, employee housing is a non-taxable fringe benefit, in others it is taxable. Your tax adviser will help identify which case applies to you. After you added in a comment that you're trying to see if you should be asking your boss to pay your personal expenses vs. giving you a raise - as I said in the comments, your personal expenses are not deductible neither for you nor for anyone else. If your boss pays your rent instead of a raise - its taxable income for you."}
{"id": "300460", "text": "\"I'm not 100% certain on boats, since they aren't typically sold for a gain, but the tax base of an asset is typically the cost of the asset plus the cost of any improvements, so your $15,000 gain looks right (check with a CPA to be certain, though, if you can).  Your \"\"cost basis\"\" would be $50,000 + $25,000 = $75,000, and your net gain would be $90,000 - $75,000 = $15,000.  The result is the same, but the arithmetic is organized a little differently. I am fairly confident you cannot include your time in the \"\"cost of improvements\"\".  If you incorporated and \"\"paid yourself\"\" for the time, then the payment would be considered income (and taxed), if it was even allowed. Depending on your tax bracket that may be a WORSE option for you. You can look at it this way - you only pay the tax on the $15k gain versus paying someone else $15k to do the labor.\""}
{"id": "300489", "text": "\"I will disagree with the other answers. The idea that there is some to establish a \"\"credit history\"\" is largely a myth propagated by loaners who see it as positive propaganda to increase the numbers of their prospective customers. You will find some people who claim they were rejected for a card because they had no \"\"credit history,\"\" but in every case what these people are not telling you is they also had no income (were students, house wives, or others with no steady income). Anyone who has income can get a credit card or other line of credit regardless of their \"\"credit history.\"\" Even people who have gone bankrupt can get credit cards if they have proven income. If your answer to this is that \"\"you have no income, but still want a credit card\"\", I would advise you to re-read that sentence several times and think carefully about it. I have never had a credit card and never missed having one, except when trying to rent cars which was somewhat complex and annoying to do in the 2005-2010 time period without a credit card. Credit cards have a number of disadvantages: I definitely agree with those who will tell you credit cards are convenient, they are, but for someone who wants to be financially prudent and build wealth they are unnecessary and unwise. If you don't believe me, read \"\"The Total Money Makeover\"\" by David Ramsey, one of the most famous and best-selling books ever written on personal finance. He actually will give you much better and detailed reasons to avoid CCs than me. After all, who am I, just some dumb rich schmuck with lots of money and no debt and a happy life. Comment on Culture I think it is pretty funny we have a lot of spendthrift Americans in this thread basically telling the OP to get lots of credit cards as soon as possible. If you asked the same question in Japan you would get completely different answers and votes. In Japan its hard to even use credit cards. The  people there are much more responsible financially than Americans; the average Japanese person has much higher wealth than a person with the same income in the United States. One of the reasons for this, among many, is that the average Japanese person does not use credit cards. A Japanese person, if you translated this question for them, would think the whole thing a typical example of how foolish Americans are.\""}
{"id": "300641", "text": "The capital gain is counted as part of your income. So with a million capital gain you will be in a high tax bracket, and have to pay the corresponding capital gains tax rate on the million."}
{"id": "300721", "text": "This is ideal placement for your allocation to income investments or those with nonqualified dividends: bonds, REITS, MLPS, other partnerships, and so forth.  These are all taxed at income rate, generally throw off more income than capital gains, so you get the deferment without losing the cap gains rate."}
{"id": "300749", "text": "\"I'm assuming you're operating on the cash basis of accounting, based on your comment \"\"Cash, I think that's the only way for a sole propriator (sic)\"\" Consider: There are two distinct but similar-name concepts here: \"\"paid for\"\" (in relation to a expense) and \"\"paid off\"\" (in relation to a debt).  These both occur in the case you describe: Under the cash basis of accounting, when you can deduct an expense is based on when you paid for the expense, not when you eventually pay off any resulting debt arising from paying for the expense. Admittedly, \"\"cash basis\"\" isn't a great name because things don't solely revolve around cash. Rather, it's when money has changed hands \u2013 whether in the form of cash, check, credit card, etc.  Perhaps \"\"monetary transaction basis\"\" might have been a better name since it would capture the paid-for concept whether using cash or credit.  Unfortunately, we're stuck with the terminology the industry established.\""}
{"id": "300855", "text": "\"You can exclude up to $250000 ($500000 for married filing jointly) of capital gains on property which was your primary residence for at least 2 years within the 5 years preceding the sale. This is called \"\"Section 121 exclusion\"\". See the IRS publication 523 for more details. Gains is the difference between your cost basis (money you paid for the property) and the proceeds (money you got when you sold it). Note that the amounts you deducted for depreciation (or were allowed to deduct during the period the condo was a rental, even if you chose not to) will be taxed at a special rate of 25% - this is called \"\"depreciation recapture\"\", and is discussed in the IRS publication 544.\""}
{"id": "301161", "text": "This is a scam, I'm adding this answer because I was scammed in this fashion. The scammer sent me a check with which I was to deposit.  When the money showed up in my account, I would withdraw the scammer's share, and wire the cash to its destination. However, it takes a couple days for a check to clear.  Banks, however, want you to see that money, so they might give it to you on good faith before the check actually clears. That's how the scam works, you withdraw the fake money the bank has fronted before the check clears.  A couple days later, the check doesn't clear, and you wake up with an account far into the negatives, the scammer long gone."}
{"id": "301242", "text": "Why the heck am I paying you when I could've made triple myself for nothing?   That's a familiar line among the redeemers.   They will probably cry when they don't understand why their losses outpace most of the funds once the bear market comes, also."}
{"id": "301547", "text": "\"To my knowledge, there's no universal equation, so this could vary by individual/company.   The equation I use (outside of sentiment measurement) is the below - which carries its own risks: This equations assumes two key points: Anything over 1.2 is considered oversold if those two conditions apply.  The reason for the bear market is that that's the time stocks generally go on \"\"sale\"\" and if a company has a solid balance sheet, even in a downturn, while their profit may decrease some, a value over 1.2 could indicate the company is oversold. An example of this is Warren Buffett's investment in Wells Fargo in 2009 (around March) when WFC hit approximately 7-9 a share.  Although the banking world was experiencing a crisis, Buffett saw that WFC still had a solid balance sheet, even with a decrease in profit.  The missing logic with many investors was a decrease in profits - if you look at the per capita income figures, Americans lost some income, but not near enough to justify the stock falling 50%+ from its high when evaluating its business and balance sheet.  The market quickly caught this too - within two months, WFC was almost at $30 a share. As an interesting side note on this, WFC now pays $1.20 dividend a year.  A person who bought it at $7 a share is receiving a yield of 17%+ on their $7 a share investment. Still, this equation is not without its risks.  A company may have a solid balance sheet, but end up borrowing more money while losing a ton of profit, which the investor finds out about ad-hoc (seen this happen several times).  Suddenly, what \"\"appeared\"\" to be a good sale, turns into a person buying a penny with a dollar.  This is why, to my knowledge, no universal equation applies, as if one did exist, every hedge fund, mutual fund, etc would be using it. One final note: with robotraders becoming more common, I'm not sure we'll see this type of opportunity again.  2009 offered some great deals, but a robotrader could easily be built with the above equation (or a similar one), meaning that as soon as we had that type of environment, all stocks fitting that scenario would be bought, pushing up their PEs.  Some companies might be willing to take an \"\"all risk\"\" if they assess that this equation works for more than n% of companies (especially if that n% returns an m% that outweighs the loss).  The only advantage that a small investor might have is that these large companies with robotraders are over-leveraged in bad investments and with a decline, they can't make the good investments until its too late.  Remember, the equation ultimately assumes a person/company has free cash to use it (this was also a problem for many large investment firms in 2009 - they were over-leveraged in bad debt).\""}
{"id": "301600", "text": "Annuity calculation formulas can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annuity_(finance_theory). In addition, as suggested in the comments, there are many sites that have calculators. Having said that, a simple financial mechanism that is followed by many is to invest a portion of the fund in regular income instruments, for example Govt. or corporate bonds that pay a regular coupon/interest and some in diversified instruments like gold, stock etc. The exact proportion is dependent on may factors, like mortality, inflation, lifestyle, health care requirements, other expenses. The regular income provides the day to day expenses on a monthly/yearly basis, while the other instruments hedge against inflation and provide growth."}
{"id": "301636", "text": "There are two 'dates' relevant to your question: Ex-Dividend and Record. To find out these dates for a specific security visit Dividend.Com. You have to purchase the security prior to the Ex-Dividend date, hold it at least until the Record Date. After the Record Date you can sell the security and still receive the dividend for that quarter.  ---- edit - - - -  I was wrong. If you sell the security after the Ex-div date but before the date of record you still get the dividend.  http://www.investopedia.com/articles/02/110802.asp"}
{"id": "301757", "text": "Simply if your stock is still rising in price keep it. If it is falling in price sell it and pay off your mortgage. To know when to do this is very easy. If it is currently rising you can put a trailing stop loss on it and sell it when it drops and hits your stop loss. A second easy method is to draw an uptrend line under the increasing price and then sell when the price drops down below the uptrend line, as per the chart below.  This will enable you to capture the bulk of the price movement upward and sell before the price drops too far down. You can then use the profits (after tax) to pay down your mortgage. Of course if the price is currently in a downtrend sell it ASAP."}
{"id": "301813", "text": "Investopedia does have tutorials about investments in different asset classes. Have you read them ? If you had heard of CFA, you can read their material if you can get hold of it or register for CFA. Their material is quite extensive and primarily designed for newbies.  This  is one helluva book and advice coming from persons who have showed and proved their tricks. And the good part is loads of advice in one single volume. And what they would suggest is probably opposite of what you would be doing in a hedge fund. And you can always trust google to fish out resources at the click of a button."}
{"id": "301833", "text": "\"If the cheque is crossed (as almost all are these days), it can only be paid into an account in the name of the person it was written out to: it cannot be paid into another's account, nor can it be \"\"cashed\"\"1 \u2013 see the rules on \"\"Crossed\"\" cheques. Note: that while the recipient of the cheque cannot (legally) alter this state of afairs, the writer of a cheque that was printed pre-crossed can \u2013 at least technically \u2013 cancel the crossing (see above link). Probably the best the OP can do is pay in the cheque on the friend's behalf (as described in Ben Millwood's answer) and then either lend the friend some money until they are mobile and can get some cash to repay the OP (or have the friend write one of their own cheques which the OP can pay into their bank account). 1 As mentioned in the last section of the rules on crossed cheques, the only exception is that designated \"\"Cheque cashing shops\"\" have special arrangements to deposit cheques which they have cashed (after deducting a fee). However, they would (should?) require proof of identity (of the original payee) and so are unlikely to be of any help (and probably not worth the cost for \u00a335).  Having said that, I've never used one, so have no idea how strict they are in practice.\""}
{"id": "302209", "text": "One's paycheck typically has a YTD (year to date) number that will end on the latest check of the year. I am paid bi-weekly, and my first 2012 check was for work 12/25 - 1/7. So, for my own balance sheet, brokerage statements and stock valuations end 12/31, but my pay ended 12/24. And then a new sheet starts."}
{"id": "302306", "text": "It's tough to avoid the discussion of taxes. Matthew's answer was excellent but of course, tax was part of the discussion.  In an article I wrote a while back, The 15% solution, I described how one can optimize taxes paid by using Roth (401 or IRA) while at a marginal 15%, and carefully transition to pretax to avoid the 25% bracket. It's possible to effectively save money from a 25% rate and withdraw it at 0%. (Zero is what one pays for the first $20K of a couple's income, this is the combined standard deduction and personal exemptions.) It would take $500K at retirement to produce the $20,000 withdrawal at a 4% rate. Keep in mind, this is a moving target as the numbers edge up each year.  With no match, I'd consider the Roth IRA. But I also agree, paying higher interest debt first is a wise priority."}
{"id": "302448", "text": "$23,000 Student Loans at 4% This represents guaranteed loss. Paying this off quickly is a conservative move, while your other investments may easily surpass 4% return, they are not guaranteed.  Should I just keep my money in my savings account since I want to keep   my money available? Or are there other options I have that are not   necessarily long term may provide better returns? This all depends on your plans, if you're just trying to keep cash in anticipation of the next big dip, you might strike gold, but you could just as easily miss out on significant market gains while waiting. People have a poor track record of predicting market down-turns. If you are concerned about how exposed to market risk you are in your current positions, then you may be more comfortable with a larger cash position. Savings/CDs are low-interest, but much lower risk. If you currently have no savings (you titled the section savings, but they all look like retirement/investment accounts), then I would recommend focusing on that first, getting a healthy emergency fund saved up, and budgeting for your car/house purchases.  There's no way to know if you'd be better off investing everything or piling up cash in the short-term. You have to decide how much risk you are comfortable with and act accordingly."}
{"id": "302616", "text": "There are sites in India that offer this, http://www.intuit.in/ is one such site. Apart from this some banks like ICICI offer this to limited extent."}
{"id": "303112", "text": "\"The answer to your question has to do with the an explanation of \"\"shares authorized, issued and outstanding.\"\" Companies, in their Articles of Incorporation, specify a maximum number of shares they are authorized to issue. For example purposes let's assume Facebook is authorized to issue 100 shares. Let's pretend they have actually issued 75 shares, but only 50 are outstanding (aka Float, i.e. freely trading stock in the market) and stock options total 25 shares. So if someone owns 1 share, what percentage of Facebook do they own? You might think 1/100, or 1%; you might think 1/75, or 1.3%; or you might think 1/50, or 2%.  2% is the answer, but only on a NON-diluted basis. So today someone who owns 1 share owns 2% of Facebook. Tomorrow Facebook announces they just issued 15 shares to Whatsapp to buy the company.  Now there are 65 shares outstanding and 90 issued. Now someone who owns 1 share of Facebook own only 1/65, or 1.5% (down from 2%)! P.S. \"\"Valuation\"\" can be thought of as the price of the stock at the time of the purchase announcement.\""}
{"id": "303193", "text": "As littleadv suggested, you are mixing issues. If you have earned income and are able to deduct an IRA deposit, where those actual dollars came from is irrelevant.  The fact that you are taking proceeds from one transaction to deposit to the IRA is a booking entry on your side, but the IRS doesn't care. By the way, when you get that $1000 gain, the broker doesn't withhold tax, so if you take the entire $1000 and put it in the IRA, you owe $150 on one line, but save $250 elsewhere, and are still $100 to the positive on your tax return."}
{"id": "303325", "text": "\"Volume is really only valuable when compared to some other volume, either from a historical value, or from some other stock.  The article you linked to doesn't provide specific numbers for you to evaluate whether volume is high or low. Many people simply look at the charts and use a gut feel for whether a day's volume is \"\"high\"\" or \"\"low\"\" in their estimation. Typically, if a day's volume is not significantly taller than the usual volume, you wouldn't call it high. The same goes for low volume. If you want a more quantitative approach, a simple approach would be to use the normal distribution statistics: Calculate the mean volume and the standard deviation. Anything outside of 1.5 to 2.0 standard deviations (either high or low) could be significant in your analysis. You'll need to pick your own numbers (1.5 or 2.0 are just numbers I pulled out of thin air.) It's hard to read anything specific into volume, since for every seller, there's a buyer, and each has their reasons for doing so. The article you link to has some good examples of using volume as a basis for strengthening conclusions drawn using other factors.\""}
{"id": "303432", "text": "\"As soon as you specify FDIC you immediately eliminate what most people would call investing. The word you use in the title \"\"Parking\"\" is really appropriate. You want to preserve the value. Therefore bank or credit union deposits into either a high yield account or a Certificate of Deposit are the way to go. Because you are not planning on a lot of transactions you should also look at some of the online only banks, of course only those with FDIC coverage. The money may need to be available over the next 2-5 years to cover   college tuition If needing it for college tuition is a high probability you could consider putting some of the money in your state's 529 plan. Many states give you a tax deduction for contributions. You need to check how much is the maximum you can contribute in a year. There may be a maximum for your state. Also gift tax provisions have to be considered. You will also want to understand what is the amount you will need to cover tuition and other eligible expenses. There is a big difference between living at home and going to a state school, and going out of state. The good news is that if you have gains and you use the money for permissible expenses, the gains are tax free. Most states have a plan that becomes more conservative as the child gets closer to college, therefore the chance of losses will be low. The plan is trying to avoid having a large drop in value just a the kid hits their late teens, exactly what you are looking for.\""}
{"id": "303685", "text": "You could talk to them, but (assuming you're in the U.S.), it's highly doubtful any bank would honor a check from 26 years ago.  Most checks in the U.S. are only valid for 180 days, mainly to help companies and banks keep accounting simple. I would suggest talking to your late husband's former employer.  Explain the situation and ask if they'd be willing to research it and perhaps honor his memory and contribution to their company by issuing a new check.  They might do it as a gesture of good will. Are they legally bound to do this?  To my knowledge, the answer is no.  The check was issued and never cashed, which is not all that unusual for companies in business for a long time.  A good example of this would be rebate checks, which (you'd be surprised) quite frequently end up in a drawer and forgotten about.  There has to be some closure for the issuing company in its accounting, else they'd have money in their bank accounts that doesn't properly show in their ledgers. This is an interesting question, though.  I hope others will reply, and perhaps they have a more informed take than me.  I'm going to upvote it simply because I'd like to see this discussion continue. Good luck!"}
{"id": "303724", "text": "\"In my view, it's better to sell when there's a reason to sell, rather than to cap your gains at 8%. I'm assuming you have no such criteria on the other side - i.e. hold your losses down to 8%. That's because what matters is how much you make overall in your portfolio, not how much you make per trade. Example: if you own three stocks, equal amounts - and two go up 20% but one falls 20%. If you sell your gains at 8%, and hold the loser, you have net LOST money. So when do you actually sell? You might say a \"\"fall of 10%\"\" from the last high is good enough to sell. This is called a \"\"trailing\"\" stop, which means if a stock goes from 100 to 120, I'll still hold and sell if it retraces to 108. Needless to say if it had gone from 100 to 90, I would still be out. The idea is to ride the trend for as long as you can, because trends are strong. And keep your trailing stops wide enough for it to absorb natural jiggles, because you may get stopped out of a stock that falls 4% but eventually goes up 200%. Or sell under other conditions: if the earnings show a distinct drop, or the sector falls out of favor.  Whenever you decide to sell, also consider what it would take for you to buy the stock back - increased earnings, strong prices, a product release, whatever. Because getting out might seem like a good thing, but it's just as important to not think of it as saying a stock is crappy - it might just be that you had enough of one ride. That doesn't mean you can't come back for another one.\""}
{"id": "303878", "text": "Focus on the economics of it.  If you have a contract do deliver energy at some price P in the future, and you know your current operating margins. If your job is to hedge, you want to lock in your profits and let the market go whereever it goes.  Basically, the goal of hedging in these markets is to lock in your operating margins by creating a spread between your production, the market and the consumer's prices."}
{"id": "304011", "text": "Absolute shit negotiating skills from the guy that thinks he can start a business too. I can get being a cash strapped start-up, but he could have at least countered with a mix of cash and equity. Exposure is bullshit. If the idea is good enough someone will take a cash/equity mix or even all equity"}
{"id": "304023", "text": "\"ETF Creation and Redemption Process notes the process: While ETF trading occurs on an exchange like stocks, the process by   which their shares are created is significantly different. Unless a   company decides to issue more shares, the supply of shares of an   individual stock trading in the marketplace is finite. When demand   increases for shares of an ETF, however, Authorized Participants (APs)   have the ability to create additional shares on demand. Through an \"\"in kind\"\" transfer mechanism, APs create ETF units in the   primary market by delivering a basket of securities to the fund equal   to the current holdings of the ETF. In return, they receive a large   block of ETF shares (typically 50,000), which are then available for   trading in the secondary market. This ETF creation and redemption   process helps keep ETF supply and demand in continual balance and   provides a \"\"hidden\"\" layer of liquidity not evident by looking at   trading volumes alone. This process also works in reverse. If an investor wants to sell a   large block of shares of an ETF, even if there seems to be limited   liquidity in the secondary market, APs can readily redeem a block of   ETF shares by gathering enough shares of the ETF to form a creation   unit and then exchanging the creation unit for the underlying   securities. Thus, the in-kind swap to the underlying securities is only done by APs so the outflow would be these individuals taking a large block of the ETF and swapping it for the underlying securities.  The APs would be taking advantage of the difference between what the ETF's trading value and the value of the underlying securities.\""}
{"id": "304081", "text": "If you don't have the time or interest to manage investments, you need a financial advisor.  Generally speaking, you're better served by an advisor who collects an annual fee based on a percentage of your account value. Advisors who are compensated based on transactions have a vested interest to churn your account, which is often not in your best interest. You also need to be wary of advisors who peddle expensive mutual funds with sales loads (aka kick-backs to the advisor) or annuities. Your advisor's compensation structure should be transparent as well."}
{"id": "304304", "text": "The trades after that date were Ex-DIV, meaning after 5 pm Dec 12, new trades did not include the shares that were to be spun out.  The process is very orderly, no one pays $60 without getting the spinoff, and no one pays $30 but still gets it. The real question is why there's that long delay nearly three weeks to make the spinoff shares available. I don't know.  By the way, the stock options are adjusted as well. Someone owning a $50 put isn't suddenly in the money on 12/13. Edit - (I am not a hoarder. I started a fire last night and realized I had a few Barron's in the paper pile) This is how the ABT quote appeared in the 12/24 issue of Barron's. Both the original quote, and the WI (when issued) for the stock less the spin off company."}
{"id": "304851", "text": "You are asking about what happens when an ETF/mutual fund company goes bankrupt. If you were asking about a bank account you would be asking about FDIC coverage.  Investment funds are different, the closest thing to FDIC protection is provided by  Securities Investors Protection Corporation (SIPC) SIPC was created under the Securities Investor Protection Act as a   non-profit membership corporation. SIPC oversees the liquidation of   member broker-dealers that close when the broker-dealer is bankrupt or   in financial trouble, and customer assets are missing. In a   liquidation under the Securities Investor Protection Act, SIPC and the   court-appointed Trustee work to return customers\u2019 securities and cash   as quickly as possible. Within limits, SIPC expedites the return of   missing customer property by protecting each customer up to $500,000   for securities and cash (including a $250,000 limit for cash only). SIPC is an important part of the overall system of investor protection   in the United States. While a number of federal and state securities   agencies and self-regulatory organizations deal with cases of   investment fraud, SIPC's focus is both different and narrow: restoring   customer cash and securities left in the hands of bankrupt or   otherwise financially troubled brokerage firms. SIPC was not chartered by Congress to combat fraud. Although created   under a federal law, SIPC is not an agency or establishment of the   United States Government, and it has no authority to investigate or   regulate its member broker-dealers. It is important to understand that   SIPC is not the securities world equivalent of the Federal Deposit   Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which insures depositors of insured   banks."}
{"id": "305179", "text": "Since making loans isn't 'casino banking', I'm going to start a small, regional lending institution that just lends money to people to buy homes.  I really want to open up home ownership to a larger group of people, maybe those who wouldn't qualify for traditional loans.  I'm just not sure whether to call it Washington Federal or Countrywide Financial."}
{"id": "305287", "text": "Something very similar to this was extremely popular in the UK in the late 1980s.  The practice has completely vanished since the early 2000s.  Reading up on the UK endowment mortgage scandals will probably give you an excellent insight into whether you should attempt your plan. Endowment mortgages were provided by banks and at their peak were probably the most popular mortgage form.  The basic idea was that you only pay the interest on your mortgage and invest a small amount each month into a low fee endowment policy.  Many endowment policies were simply index tracking, and the idea being that by the end of your mortgage you would have built up a portfolio sufficient to pay off your mortgage, and may well have extra left over. In the late 1990s the combination of falling housing market and poor stock performance meant that many people were left with both the endowment less than their mortgage and their house in negative equity."}
{"id": "305509", "text": "Co-signing is not the same as owning. If your elderly lady didn't make any payments on the loan, and isn't on the ownership of the car, and there was no agreement that you would pay her anything, then you do not owe either her or her daughter any money. Also the loan is not affecting the daughter's credit, and the mother's credit is irrelevant (since she is dead). However you should be aware that the finance company will want to know about the demise of the mother, since they can no longer make a claim against her if you default. I would start by approaching the loan company, telling them about the mother's death, and asking to refinance in your name only. If you've really been keeping up the payments well this could be OK with them. If not I would find someone else who is prepared to co-sign a new loan with you, and still refinance. Then just tell the daughter that the loan her mother co-signed for has been discharged, and there is nothing for her to worry about."}
{"id": "305604", "text": "\"No, Skiffbug is not English.   Second, it's very clear that the type of method considered \"\"special\"\" by the tax code is clearly not labor, but capital gains and gains from \"\"carried interest\"\".  If you actually take 3 seconds to read my comment, I am saying both should be treated in exactly the same way, and taxed at the same progressive scale.\""}
{"id": "305676", "text": "\"In general there are two types of futures contract, a put and call.  Both contract types have both common sides of a transaction, a buyer and a seller.  You can sell a put contract, or sell a call contract also; you're just taking the other side of the agreement.  If you're selling it would commonly be called a \"\"sell to open\"\" meaning you're opening your position by selling a contract which is different from simply selling an option that you currently own to close your position. A put contract gives the buyer the right to sell shares (or some asset/commodity) for a specified price on a specified date; the buyer of the contract gets to put the shares on someone else.   A call contract gives the buyer the right to buy shares (or some asset/commodity) for a specified price on a specified date; the buyer of the contract gets to call on someone for shares. \"\"American\"\" options contracts allow the buyer can exercise their rights under the contract on or before the expiration date; while \"\"European\"\" type contracts can only be exercised on the expiration date. To address your example.  Typically for stock an option contract involves 100 shares of a stock.  The value of these contracts fluctuates the same way other assets do.  Typically retail investors don't actually exercise their contracts, they just close a profitable position before the exercise deadline, and let unprofitable positions expire worthless.  If you were to buy a single call contract with an exercise price of $100 with a maturity date of August 1 for $1 per share, the contract will have cost you $100.  Let's say on August 1 the underlying shares are now available for $110 per share.  You have two options: Option 1: On August 1, you can exercise your contract to buy 100 shares for $100 per share.  You would exercise for $10,000 ($100 times 100 shares), then sell the shares for $10 profit per share; less the cost of the contract and transaction costs. Option 2: Your contract is now worth something closer to $10 per share, up from $1 per share when you bought it.  You can just sell your contract without ever exercising it to someone with an account large enough to exercise and/or an actual desire to receive the asset or commodity.\""}
{"id": "305742", "text": "Wow, very amused by some of the answers. I will comment on those later. To directly answer your question, here is a link to a brochure that explains the three basic typs and is written in straightforward language. link text That is step one. Step 2 is a question, cheapest when, initially or for long term? Without a doubt term initially is the cheapest. However every 10 years or 20 years it increases in price. As the name term implies it is temporary. Coverage will end at some point, 75, or 80 depending upon plan design chosen. It is possible that if you choose Term you can outlive your coverage and all you have are a bunch of cancelled cheques. Young people with a mortgage, children and other debts should buy a lot of term as the mortgage will be paid off, the kids will no longer be dependent. These needs are temporary. However some needs are permanent. What about leaving a Legacy at Death to a Charity? Insurance is a good solution and can provide a tax deduction too. Term isn't a good fit. Or a business owner wishing to transfer his/her business at death to their children. Taxes will be due and permanent insurance such as Whole Life and Universal Life can be arranged to provide cash to pay tax whenever this happens.  Let me ask you who received 10% in the last ten years on their equity portfolio. Almost zero people did. However a Whole Plan would have generated a guaranteed return of 3.0% plus a non-guaranteed return via dividends that the combined internal rate of return  on a combined basis would be about 5.6% AFTER TAXES. Life a bond portfolio yield. (Internal rate of return is dependent on age at buying, years of investing. All insurance comany software can show you the internal rate of return.) IRR is essesntially: what is the return after tax that you must get to equal the equity or death benefit from a permanent insurance plan. Someone mentioned by Term and Invest the difference. That is what universal life is, Term and Invest the difference except the difference is growing tax sheltered.Outside investments with comparable risk are taxable! There is no easy answer for what type is right, often a combination is. The key question you should ask is How Much Is Enough? Then consider types based upon your needs and budget. Here is a link where you can calculate how much you need. I hope this helps a bit."}
{"id": "306149", "text": "Fully Paid up Partly Paid up: A company may issue stock to you which is only partly paid up, for example, a company may issue a stock of face value 10 to you and ask you to pay 5 now and other 5 will be adjusted later by some other mechanism. This stock shall be partly paid up. Usually, these stocks are issued in different circumstances, for example as part payment for debentures, preference shares or other capital structuring. On the other hand for a fully paid up share no more money needs to be paid by you or no other adjustments need to be made. So, above, the company is issuing you with stocks for which you will need to pay no further money, they are fully paid for. Authorized Capital: Authorized capital of a company is the amount of money a company can raise by selling stock (not debt, equity). This number is registered when the company is incorporated, subsequently, this number can be revised upward by applying to the registrar of companies. Now, this means that at max. the company is authorized to raise this much capital and no more. However, a company may raise less than this, which is called Issued Capital. In your case, the company is raising its authorized capital by applying to the registrar of companies, though in this case they are looking at their full authorized capital to be issued capital, it was not necessary to do so. Increase of Authorized capital: The main benefit is that the company can get more money in form of equity and utilize the same, perhaps, for expansion of business etc., that is the primary benefit. Bonus Share: Usually, companies keep some surplus as reserve, this money comes out of the profit the company makes and is essentially money of the shareholders. This reserve surplus is maintained for situations, when the money may be required for exigencies. However, this surplus grows over a few years and the company usually the company plans for an expansion of business. However, this money cannot be just taken, as it belongs to the shareholder, so shareholders are issued extra equity in proportion to their current holding and this surplus is capitalized i.e. used as part of the company's equity capital. Bonus declaration does not add t o the value of the company and the share prices fall in proportion (but not quite) to the bonus."}
{"id": "306280", "text": "\"There is a ten year statue of limitations on debt collection, bankruptcy, etc. The problem is, if you start paying, even say, $1, you \"\"acknowledge\"\" the debt and the clock starts again. Debt claims fall under the \"\"he said, she said,\"\" rubric. In debt restructuring situations, the debtor is taught to write all their creditors DENYING debts. Some percentage of those creditors won't have the paperwork to back up their claims. Others will, and can press their claims. Then a court decides.  But in any event, a debt more than tens years old is a \"\"stale,\"\" debt. A court is likely to rule in your favor. Unless you \"\"acknowledge\"\" the debt.\""}
{"id": "306430", "text": "\"Give me your money. I will invest it as I see fit. A year later I will return the capital to you, plus half of any profits or losses. This means that if your capital under my management ends up turning a profit, I will keep half of those profits, but if I lose you money, I will cover half those losses. Think about incentives. If you wanted an investment where your losses were only half as bad, but your gains were only half as good, then you could just invest half your assets in a risk-free investment. So if you want this hypothetical instrument because you want a different risk profile, you don't actually need anything new to get it. And what does the fund manager get out of this arrangement? She doesn't get anything you don't: she just gets half your gains, most of which she needs to set aside to be able to pay half your losses. The discrepancy between the gains and losses she gets to keep, which is exactly equal to your gain or loss. She could just invest her own money to get the same thing. But wait -- the fund manager didn't need to provide any capital. She got to play with your money (for free!) and keep half the profits. Not a bad deal, for her, perhaps... Here's the problem: No one cares about your thousands of dollars. The costs of dealing with you: accounting for your share, talking to you on the phone, legal expenses when you get angry, the paperwork when you need to make a withdrawal for some dental work, mailing statements and so on will exceed the returns that could be earned with your thousands of dollars. And then the SEC would probably get involved with all kinds of regulations so you, with your humble means and limited experience, isn't constantly getting screwed over by the big fund. Complying with the SEC is going to cost the fund manager something. The fund manager would have to charge a small \"\"administrative fee\"\" to make it worthwhile.  And that's called a mutual fund. But if you have millions of free capital willing to give out, people take notice. Is there an instrument where a bunch of people give a manager capital for free, and then the investors and the manager share in the gains and losses? Yes, hedge funds! And this is why only the rich and powerful can participate in them: only they have enough capital to make this arrangement beneficial for the fund manager.\""}
{"id": "306460", "text": "No one can advise you on whether to hold this stock or sell it. Your carried losses can offset short or long term gains, but the long term losses have to be applied to offset long term gains before any remaining losses can offset short term gains. Your question doesn't indicate how long you have to hold before the short term gains become long term gains. Obviously the longer the holding period, the greater the risk. You also must avoid a wash sale (selling to lock in the gains/reset your basis then repurchasing within a month). All of those decisions hold risks that you have to weigh. If you see further upside in holding it longer, keep the investment. Don't sell just to try to maximize tax benefits."}
{"id": "306482", "text": "I second CrimsonX's advice to max out Roth then 401k. At your age in what sounds like a similar situation I did the same thing -- thankfully. It's easier to do when you're young and unencumbered. 10 years later with kids, house, changing from double to single income, job changes, etc, it's harder to max out retirement accounts. Not to mention that priorities change, e.g. saving for college."}
{"id": "306533", "text": "Stated plainly... it's a benefit. Companies are not required to offer you any compensation above paying you minimum wage. But benefits attract higher quality employees.  I think a big part of it is that it is the norm. Employees want it because of the tax benefits. Employees expect it because almost all reputable companies of any significant size offer it. You could run a great company, but if you don't offer a 401k plan, you can scare away good potential employees. It would give a bad impression the same way that not offering health insurance would."}
{"id": "306688", "text": "Note that you're asking about withholding, not about taxing.  Withholding doesn't mean this is exactly the tax you'll pay: it means they're withholding a certain amount to make sure you pay taxes on it, but the tax bill at the end of the year is the same regardless of how you choose to do the withholding.  Your tax bill may be higher or lower than the withholding amount. As far as tax rate, that will be the same regardless - you're just moving the money from one place to the other.   The only difference would be that your tax is based on total shares under the plan - meaning that if you buy 1k shares, for example, at $10, so $1,500 discounted income, if you go the payroll route you get (say) $375 withheld.  If you go the share route, you either get $375 worth of stock (so 38 shares) withheld (and then you would lose out on selling that stock, meaning you don't get quite as much out of it at the end) or you would ask them to actually buy rather more shares to make up for it, meaning you'd have a slightly higher total gain.  That would involve a slightly higher tax at the end of it, of course. Option 1:  Buy and then sell $10000 worth, share-based withholding.  Assuming 15% profit, and $10/share at both points, then buy/sell 1000 shares, $1500 in profit to take into account, 38 shares' worth (=$380) withheld.  You put in $8500, you get back $9620, net $1120.   Option 2:  Buy and then sell $13500 worth, share based withholding.  Same assumptions.  You make about $2000 in pre-tax profit, meaning you owe about $500 in tax withholding.  Put in $11475, get back $13000, net $1525.  Owe 35% more tax at the end of the year, but you have the full $1500 to spend on whatever you are doing with it. Option 3:  Buy and then sell $1000 worth, paycheck withholding.  You get the full $10000-$8500 = $1500 up front, but your next paycheck is $375 lighter.  Same taxes as Option 1 at the end of the year."}
{"id": "306874", "text": "The idea is old as dirt, and some millions of people had it before you. Credit card swipes cost you between 2.4 and 4.5%, depending on the cards, the provider, and the amounts, plus potentially a fixed small amount per swipe. Of course, a 2% cash back card cost more than 2% to swipe; and a 3% cash back card cost more than 3% to swipe; those guys are not morons."}
{"id": "306893", "text": "This answer will be US-centric but hopefully most of the information will be applicable to other jurisdictions: Generally speaking:"}
{"id": "306908", "text": "As others have pointed out, post-tax dollars are what you'll use.  Just as a quick note, as you'll be using post-tax dollars; in the past, I've refused to take contractor plans because they almost always are inferior to what I've been able to get off the private exchange ehealthinsurance.  A few people have written excellent articles on Get Rich Slowly here and here about them in detail if you want more information. Generally, contractors (and sometimes employees) are offered a few plans (3-4), and this health exchange gives you a little more freedom to pick your plan, which in your situation may help.  It isn't always cheaper, but depending on your needs, you may obtain a better deal. Forgot to add this: this option has also made switching jobs easy as well since I don't have to pay COBRA.  While it depends on the situation, this can sometimes come out significantly cheaper.  For instance, if I were to take the employer health plan next year, I would lose ~$450 a month, whereas the private exchange option is ~$300.  But, if I were to switch jobs, decide to opt for self-employment, or a layoff, the COBRA would be even higher than ~$450."}
{"id": "307203", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-cashless-businesses-poor-unbanked.html) reduced by 84%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Sweetgreen, a salad food chain, went cashless at locations this year in California, Illinois, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington, D.C. Jetties, which serves salads and sandwiches throughout D.C., went cashless in 2015.  &gt; &amp;quot;We&amp;#039;re not for or against cashless transactions. Our biggest concern isn&amp;#039;t cash or not-cash, it&amp;#039;s banked or not-banked,&amp;quot; says David Rothstein of the Cities for Financial Empowerment Fund, a nonprofit that aims to provide low- and moderate-income people with financial stability.  &gt; An Amsterdam Falafel in Boston briefly went cashless last year but quickly halted the experiment and has no plans to go cashless at any of their locations, says Arianne Bennett, president and CEO of the fast-casual chain.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6oaesl/how_a_cashless_society_would_harm_the_poor/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~170783 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **cashless**^#1 **people**^#2 **bank**^#3 **account**^#4 **cash**^#5\""}
{"id": "307517", "text": "Paying off the student loans slower and investing the rest has some advantages - the interest is tax deductible (essentially lowering that 7% number), and it helps allow you to build up a liquid emergency fund which is more important to financial security than returns."}
{"id": "307518", "text": "\"The stock market is not a zero-sum game.  Some parts are (forex, some option trading), but plain old stock trading is not zero sum. That is to say, if you were to invest \"\"at random\"\", you would on average make money.  That's because the market as a whole makes money - it goes up over time (6-10% annually, averaged over time).  That's because you're not just gambling when you buy a stock; you're actually contributing money to a company (directly or indirectly), which it uses to fund activities that (on average) make money.  When you buy Caterpillar stock, you're indirectly funding Caterpillar building tractors, which they then sell for a profit, and thus your stock appreciates in value.  While not every company makes a profit, and thus not every stock appreciates in true value, the average one does. To some extent, buying index funds is pretty close to \"\"investing at random\"\".  It has a far lower risk quotient, of course, since you're not buying a few stocks at random but instead are buying all stocks in an index; but buying stocks from the S&P 500 at random would on average give the same return as VOO (with way more volatility). So for one, you definitely could do worse than 50/50; if you simply sold the market short (sold random stocks short), you would lose money over time on average, above and beyond the transaction cost, since the market will go up over time on average. Secondly, there is the consideration of limited and unlimited gains or losses. Some trades, specifically some option trades, have limited potential gains, and unlimited potential losses. Take for example, a simple call option.  If you sell a naked call option - meaning you sell a call option but don't own the stock - for $100, at a strike price of $20, for 100 shares, you make money as long as the price of that stock is under $21.  You have a potential to make $100, because that's what you sold it for; if the price is under $20, it's not exercised, and you just get that $100, free.   But, on the other hand, if the stock goes up, you could potentially be out any amount of money.  If the stock trades at $24, you're out $400-100 = $300, right?  (Plus transaction costs.)   But what if it trades at $60?  Or $100?  Or $10000?  You're still out 100 * that amount, so in the latter case, $1 million.  It's not likely to trade at that point, but it could. If you were to trade \"\"at random\"\", you'd probably run into one of those types of situations.  That's because there are lots of potential trades out there that nobody expects anyone to take - but that doesn't mean that people wouldn't be happy to take your money if you offered it to them.   That's the reason your 16.66 vs 83.33 argument is faulty:  you're absolutely right that if there were a consistently losing line, that the consistently winning line would exist, but that requires someone that is willing to take the losing line.  Trades require two actors, one on each side; if you're willing to be the patsy, there's always someone happy to take advantage of you, but you might not get a patsy.\""}
{"id": "307531", "text": "In this situation I would recommend figuring out about what you would need to pay in taxes for the year.  You have two figures (your salary and dependents) , but not others.  Will you contribute to a 401K, do you itemize deductions, etc...  If things are uncertain, I would figure my taxes as if I took the standard deduction.   For argument's sake let's assume that comes out to $7300.  I would then add $500 on to my total to cover potential increases in taxes/fees.  You can adjust this up or down based on your ability to absorb having to pay or the uncertainty in your first calcuation. So now $7800, divide by 26 (the amount of paychecks you receive in a year) = $300 Then I would utilize a payroll calculator to adjust my exemptions and additional witholding so my federal withholding is as close as possible to this number.   Or you can sit with your payroll department and do the same."}
{"id": "308113", "text": "Havoc P's answer is good (+1). Also don't forget the other aspects of business income: state filing fees, county/city filing fees, business licenses, etc.  Are there any taxes you have to collect from your customers? If you expect to make more this year, then you should make estimated quarterly tax payments.  The first one for 2011 is due around the same time as your federal income tax filing."}
{"id": "308150", "text": "\"If I understand correctly, the Traditional IRA, if you have 401k with an employer already, has the following features: Actually, #1 and #2 are characteristics of Roth IRAs, not Traditional IRAs. Only #3 is a characteristic of a Traditional IRA. Whether you have a 401(k) with your employer or not makes absolutely no difference in how your IRAs are taxed for the vast majority of people. (The rules for IRAs are different if you have a very high income, though). You're allowed to have and contribute to both kinds of accounts. (In fact, I personally have both). Traditional IRAs are tax deferred (not tax-free as people sometimes mistakenly call them - they're very different), meaning that you don't have to pay taxes on the contributions or profits you make inside the account (e.g. from dividends, interest, profits from stock you sell, etc.). Rather, you pay taxes on any money you withdraw. For Roth IRAs, the contributions are taxed, but you never have to pay taxes on the money inside the account again. That means that any money you get over and above the contributions (e.g. through interest, trading profits, dividends, etc.) are genuinely tax-free. Also, if you leave any of the money to people, they don't have to pay any taxes, either. Important point: There are no tax-free retirement accounts in the U.S. The distinction between different kinds of IRAs basically boils down to \"\"pay now or pay later.\"\" Many people make expensive mistakes in their retirement strategy by not understanding that point. Please note that this applies equally to Traditional and Roth 401(k)s as well. You can have Roth 401(k)s and Traditional 401(k)s just like you can have Roth IRAs and Traditional IRAs. The same terminology and logic applies to both kinds of accounts. As far as I know, there aren't major differences tax-wise between them, with two exceptions - you're allowed to contribute more money to a 401(k) per year, and you're allowed to have a 401(k) even if you have a high income. (By way of contrast, people with very high incomes generally aren't allowed to open IRAs). A primary advantage of a Traditional IRA is that you can (in theory, at least) afford to contribute more money to it due to the tax break you're getting. Also, you can defer taxes on any profits you make (e.g. through dividends or selling stock at a profit), so you can grow your money faster.\""}
{"id": "308276", "text": "The issuer pays (negative money in this case) to the holder.  The person you sold your borrowed bond to gets this (negative) amount.  The person who you lent you the bond is eligible for that (negative) payment, they were the original holder of the bond.  When you return the bond you thus have to compensate the original holder.  Now turn around the cash flows and you're there. The new holder pays the issuer, the original holder pays you."}
{"id": "308289", "text": "The forward curve for gold says little, in my opinion, about the expected price of gold. The Jan 16 price is 7.9% (or so) higher than the Jan 12 price. This reflects the current cost of money, today's low interest rates. When the short rates were 5%, the price 4 years out would be about 20% higher. No magic there. (The site you linked to was in German, so I looked and left. I'm certain if you pulled up the curve for platinum or silver, it would have the identical shape, that 7.9% rise over 4 years.) The yield curve, on the other hand,  Is said to provide an indication of the direction of the economy, a steep curve forecasting positive growth."}
{"id": "308809", "text": "Problems with shorting  1. The price could become even more insanely high.   2. The stock you borrowed could be recalled leaving you sitting on a loss.  3. High borrowing costs.  4. Potentially limited loss potential e.g. when a takeover is announced, or when the company has a windfall, or fraudulently announces phony good news.  Shorting could still be useful as a niche 10% of your portfolio; the risk is limited that way. Also high short interest tend to make me look a bit harder before buying."}
{"id": "308962", "text": "\"I found this great resource at MarketWatch.com - a listing on online games that help parents teach kids about saving and finance, set up by age group. Here's an example of some of the content: For children six to nine: www.fleetkids.com, sponsored by the Fleet Bank, has great games -- like \"\"Buy lo, Sell hi\"\" and \"\"Chunka Change\"\" -- that teach kids about spending and saving. Kids can compete for prizes such as computers and backpacks for their schools.\""}
{"id": "309037", "text": "You are comparing a risk-free cost with a risky return. If you can tolerate that level of risk (the ups and downs of the investment) for the chance that you'll come out ahead in the long-run, then sure, you could do that.   So the parameters to your equation would be: If you assume that the risky returns are normally distributed, then you can use normal probability tables to determine what risk level you can tolerate. To put some real numbers to it, take the average S&P 500 return of 10% and standard deviation of 18%.  Using standard normal functions, we can calculate the probability that you earn more than various interest rates: so even with a low 3% interest rate, there's roughly a 1 in 3 chance that you'll actually be worse off (the gains on your investments will be less than the interest you pay).  In any case there's a 3 in 10 chance that your investments will lose money."}
{"id": "309134", "text": "&gt;Entire families living in a 2 bedroom apartment, for example.  That's due to the fact that there isn't much land, same problem in hong kong.  However, at the very least 80% of them live in public housing so at least they're not getting gouged on rentals."}
{"id": "309235", "text": "It depends on how much money it is going to save you, how secure your job is and how much risk is acceptable to you. The main problem with taking out a 401k loan for anything is that you have to pay it back within ~60 days of loosing your job which would be precisely when you need your savings the most and then you get the tough choice of using your savings to repay the 401k loan (assuming you have an emergency fund) or possibly not having enough money to live on until you find another job. If you don't have an emergency fund you are going to get stuck with a substantial tax bill 10% penalty plus taxes at your marginal rate. There are definitely advantages to avoiding PMI and you will probably get a pretty decent return on investment (mortgage interest rate + cost of PMI), but there are risks as well."}
{"id": "309393", "text": "\"Maybe a bit off topic, but I suggest reading \"\"Rich Dad Poor Dad\"\" by Robert Kiyosaki. An investment is something that puts money to your pocket. If your properties don't put money to your pocket (and this seems to be the case), then they're not an investment. Instead, they drain money from you pocket. Therefore you should instead turn these \"\"investments\"\" into real investments. Make everything to earn some money using them, not to earn money somewhere else to cover the loses they create. If that's not possible, get rid of them and find something that \"\"puts money into your pocket\"\".\""}
{"id": "309672", "text": "I filed all my tax returns when I was abroad so they know how much I   made (just not how much I saved). I smell problems here. If you were compliant wrt to your filings, you must have filed FBAR forms and form 8938. Even if you were below the threshold for form 8938, you will probably be above it when you move back to the US - the threshold for people living in the US is much lower. Do I still need to declare it, even though I might not intend to use   this money to help my kids through college? I believe so. Here's what they want: Nothing there suggests that it is only limited to the accounts in the US or to the money you intend to use to help your kids through college."}
{"id": "309684", "text": "See if there are any favorable tax treaties between your two countries. (check US state department - or find the nearest PWC, Deloitte, KPMG, these are global auditing firms that deal with international tax and compliance) A tax treaty could have possible goodies such as a lower more favorable tax or even a tax credit from. For instance, if you paid 28% tax in the US then your new country will give you a credit on the taxes owed to them. The point of tax treaties are to prevent double taxation, but in the effort to do so they often create their own new tax rates for transfers between countries. You'll be better off just paying the 28% US income tax on your 401k distribution. And using the post-tax money as you please. US citizens are on the hook for income tax several years after they leave the US."}
{"id": "309758", "text": "If you had an agreement with your friend such that you could bring back a substantially similar car, you could sell the car and return a different one to him.  The nature of shares of stock is that, within the specified class, they are the same.  It's a fungible commodity like one pound of sand or a dollar bill.  The owner doesn't care which share is returned as long as a share is returned.   I'm sure there's a paragraph in your brokerage account terms of service eluding to the possibility of your shares being included in short sale transactions."}
{"id": "309923", "text": "Selling one fund and buying another will incur capital gains tax on the sale for the amount of the gain. I'm not aware of any sort of exemption available due to you moving out of the country. However, long-term capital gains for low-tax-bracket taxpayers is 0%. As long as your total income including the gains fits within the 15% regular tax bracket, you don't pay any long-term capital gains. Options for you that I see to avoid taxes are: Note that even if you do sell it all, it's only the amount of gains that would take your income over the 15% normal tax bracket that would be taxed at the long-term rate of 15%, which may not end up being that much of a tax hit. It may be worth calculating just how bad it would be based on your actual income. Also note that all I'm saying here is for US federal income taxes. The state you most recently lived in may still charge taxes if you're still considered a resident there in some fashion, and I don't know if your new home's government may try to take a cut as well."}
{"id": "310056", "text": "\"The current mortgaged owner would typically not have the right to sell any portion of the house without approval from the bank. The bank doesn't \"\"own\"\" the house through the mortgage, but they do have a series of rights that, in some cases, look similar to ownership.  Remember that a mortgage is just a loan that uses a house as collateral, to reduce the risk to the lender in the event of default. If it was just a personal loan, without collateral, then there would be a much higher risk of default (and therefore the interest rate would be closer to 20% than 2%). But because the loan was taken with collateral, that collateral can't be sold without the bank's permission. If the bank allowed this to happen, then one risk would be exactly as you say - that the mortgagee stops paying the bank, and the bank no longer is able to recover the full value of the loan on selling the remaining 50% of the house owed as collateral.\""}
{"id": "310081", "text": "As mbhunter said, extra payments of principal don't affect your taxes (except to the extent that you'll pay less interest, because the amount you owe interest on - the total balance/principal - is smaller).  If you want to reduce your taxes, you might pay into an IRA instead."}
{"id": "310112", "text": "\"The first consideration for the banking part of your portfolio is safety. In the United States that is FDIC protection, or the equivalent for a Credit Union. The second consideration is does it have the level of service you need. For this I mean the location of branches, ATMs, or its online services meet your needs for speed, accuracy, and ability to access or move the money as you need. The rest are then balanced on the extras. For your situation those extras include the ability to make free trades. For other it might be a discount on their mortgage. For others it is free checking.  In your current situation if the first two things are met, and you are using those extra benefits then don't change. For me the free trades wouldn't be a benefit, so any major degradation in the safety and service would cause me to leave. Keep in mind that free services exist to entice you to make a deposit: which they can then make money by lending it out; or they offer a free service to entice you to use a service they can charge you to use. All Free services come with a cost. I earned a completely paltry $3.33 YTD over the last 9 months on my   savings at my bank presumably in exchange for these \"\"free\"\" trades. Without knowing how much you had deposited in your savings account there is no way to know how much you could have made at the bank across the street. But with the low rates of the last decade there is not big money to be made off the emergency savings of a typical american family.\""}
{"id": "310326", "text": "\"The short answer is that the exchange of the stock in exchange for the elimination of a debt is a taxable exchange, and gains or losses are possible for the stock investor as well as the bank.   The somewhat longer answer is best summarized as noting that banks don't usually accept stocks as collateral, mostly because stock values are volatile and most banks are not equipped to monitor the risk involved but it is very much part of the business of stock brokers.   In the USA, as a practical matter I only know of stock brokerages offering loans against stock as part of the standard services of a \"\"margin account\"\". You can get a margin account at any US stock broker. The stockholder can deposit their shares in the margin account and then borrow around 50% of the value, though that is a bit much to borrow and a lower amount would be safer from sudden demands for repayment in the form of margin calls. In a brokerage account I can not imagine a need to repay a margin loan if the stocks dividends plus capital appreciation rises in value faster than the margin loan rate creates interest charges...  Trouble begins as the stock value goes down.  When the value of the loan exceeds a certain percentage of the stock value, which can depend on the stock and the broker's policy but is also subject to federal rules like Regulation T, the broker can call in the loan and/or take initiative to sell the stock to repay the loan.   Notice that this may result in a capital gain or loss, depending on the investor's tax basis which is usually the original cost of the stock.  Of course, this sale affects the taxes of the investor irregardless of who gets the money.\""}
{"id": "310361", "text": "It has to do with return. I don't know if Canada has a matching feature on retirement accounts, but in the US many companies will match the first X% you put in. So for me, my first $5000 or so is matched 100%. I'll take that match over paying down any debt. Beyond that, of course it's a simple matter of rate of return. Why save in the bank at 2% when you owe at 10-18%?  One can make this as simple or convoluted as they like. My mortgage is a tax deduction so my 5% mortgage costs me 3.6%. I've continued to invest rather than pay the mortgage too early, as my retirement account is with pre-tax dollars. So $72 will put $100 in that account. Even in this last decade, bad as it was, I got more than 3.6% return."}
{"id": "310601", "text": "Not really. You can have two bonds that have identical duration but vastly different convexity.   Pensions and insurance portfolio managers are most common buyers as they're trying to deal with liability matching and high convexity allows them to create a barbell around their projected liabilities."}
{"id": "310639", "text": "For local retailers you will need to visit the store. For national retail chains you will need to get in contact with their purchasing departments. Either way, have a solid product with a good presentation. A lot of cold calls and sales presentations are ahead of you so master your elevator pitch as well as your 10-15 minute presentation. Best of luck to you!"}
{"id": "310683", "text": "It depends on what your investment goals are.  Are you investing for the short-term or the long-term?  What was your reason for investing in these stocks in the first place?  Timing short-term fluctuations in the market is very difficult, so if that's your goal, I wouldn't count on being able to sell and buy back in at exactly the right time.  Rather, I think you should think about what your investment rationale was in the first place, and whether or not that rationale still holds.  If it does, then hold on to the stocks.  If it doesn't, then sell."}
{"id": "310837", "text": "\"I look for buying a call option only at the money, but first understand the background above: Let's suppose X stock is being traded by $10.00 and it's January The call option is being traded by $0.20 with strike $11.00 for February. (I always look for 2% prize or more) I buy 100 stocks by $10.00 each and sell the option, earning $0.20 for each X stock. I will have to deliver my stocks by $11.00 (strike value agreed). No problem for me here, I took the prize plus the gain of $1.00. (continuing from item 3) I still can sell the option for the next month with strike equal or higher than that I bought. For instance, I can sell a call option of strike $10.00 and it might be worth to deliver stocks by $10.00 and take the prize. (continuing from item 3) Probably, it won't be possible to sell a call option with strike at the price that I paid for the stock, but that's not a problem. At the end of the option life (in February), the strike was $11.00 but the stock's price is $8.00. I got the $0.20 as prize and my stocks are free for trade again. I'll sell the call option for March with strike $9.00 (taking around 2% of prize). Well, I don't want to sell my stocks by $9.00 and make loss, right? But I'm selling the call option anyway. Then I wait till the price of the stock gets near the strike value (almost ATM) and I \"\"re-buy\"\" the option sold (Example: [StockX]C9 where C means month = March) and sell again the call option with higher strike to April (Example [StockX]D10, where D means month = April) PS.: At item 9 there should be no loss between the action of \"\"re-buy\"\" and sell to roll-out to the next month. When re-buying it with the stock's price near the strike, option value for March (C9) will be lower than when selling it to April (D10). This isn't any rule to be followed, this is just a conservative (I think they call it hedge) way to handle options and stocks. Few free to make money according to your goals and your style. The perfect rule is the one that meet your expectation, don't take the generalized rules too serious.\""}
{"id": "310973", "text": "Now I'm trying to decide whether to find a managed fund, or use Vanguard ETFs. With a new trading account I can keep at least the initial move free of transaction charges, but ongoing additions would cost me the standard fee. I may want to move half of those funds into a mortgage deposit in a year. (maybe?) Most ETFs, like the stock market, exhibit significant volatility and, over short periods of time, substantial down-side risk. In other words, there is a significant chance that the value of your investment will be worth substantially less in a year from now. The likelihood of this being the case in, say, 10 years from now is much lower, and vanishingly small for a diversified portfolio. If you aren't confident you'll at least have the option of keeping most of your money invested for over a year, consider that the stock market may not be right for you, at least not as an investment vehicle. Regarding the things you'd like to learn; as the commenter said - that's a huge topic and I think you need to clarify your questions."}
{"id": "311011", "text": "What are your goals in life?   If one of them is to appear wealthy then buying a high price import is a great place to start.  You certainly have the salary for it (congratulations BTW). If one of your goals is to build wealth, then why not buy a ~5000 to ~6000 car and have a goal to zero out that student loan by the end of the year?  You can still contribute to your 401k, and have a nice life style living on ~60K (sending 30 to the student loan). Edit: I graduated with a CS degree in '96 and have been working in the industry since '93.  When I started, demand was like it is now, rather insane.  It probably won't always be like that and I would prepare for some ups and downs in the industry. One of the things that encouraged me to lead a debt free lifestyle happened in 2008.  My employer cut salaries by 5%...no big deal they said.  Except they also cut support pay, bonuses, and 401K matching.  When the dust cleared my salary was cut 22%, and I was lucky as others were laid off.  If you are in debt a 22% pay cut hurts bad."}
{"id": "311117", "text": "If it's money you can lose, and you're young, why not?  Another would be motifinvesting where you can invest in ideas as opposed to picking companies. However, blindly following other investors is not a good idea.  Big investors strategies might not be similar to yours, they might be looking for something different than you.  If you're going to do that, find someone with similar goals. Having investments, and a strategy, that you believe in and understand is paramount to investing.  It's that belief, strategy, and understanding that will give you direction.  Otherwise you're just going to follow the herd and as they say, sheep get slaughtered."}
{"id": "311214", "text": "To follow up on Quid's comment, the share classes themselves will define what level of dividends are expected. Note that the terms 'common shares' and 'preferred shares' are generally understood terms, but are not as precise as you might believe.  There are dozens/hundreds of different characteristics that could be written into share classes in the company's articles of incorporation [as long as those characteristics are legal in corporate law in the company's jurisdiction]. So in answering your question there's a bit of an assumption that things are working 'as usual'. Note that private companies often have odd quirks to their share classes, things like weird small classes of shares that have most of the voting rights, or shares with 'shotgun buyback clauses'. As long as they are legal clauses, they can be used to help control how the business is run between various shareholders with competing interests. Things like parents anticipating future family infighting and trying to prevent familial struggle. You are unlikely to see such weird quirks in public companies, where the company will have additional regulatory requirements and where the public won't want any shock at unexpected share clauses. In your case, you suggested having a non-cumulative preferred share [with no voting rights, but that doesn't impact dividend payment]: There are two salient points left related to payout that the articles of incorporation will need to define for the share classes: (1) What is the redemption value for the shares? [This is usually equal to the cost of subscribing for the shares in the first place; it represents how much the business will need to pay the shareholder in the event of redemption / recall] (2) What is the stated dividend amount? This is usually defined at a rate that's at or a little above a reasonable interest rate at the time the shares are created, but defined as $ / share. For example, the shares could have $1 / share dividend payment, where the shares originally cost $50 each to subscribe [this would reflect a rate of payment of about 2%]. Typically by corporate law, dividends must be paid to preferred shares, to the extent required based on the characteristics of the share class [some preferred shares may not have any required dividends at all], before any dividends can be paid to common shares. So if $10k in dividends is to be paid, and total preferred shares require $15k of non-cumulative dividends each year, then $0 will be paid to the common shares. The following year, $15k of dividends will once again need to be paid to the preferred shares, before any can be paid to the common shares."}
{"id": "311442", "text": "The simplest way is just to compute how much money you'd have to have invested elsewhere to provide a comparable return. For example, if you assume a safe interest rate of 2.3% per year, you would need to have about $520,000 to get $1,000/month."}
{"id": "311495", "text": "&gt;Not to mention that Japan has a very good savings rate.   Remember they buy a lot of bonds with their savings, Japanese bonds. This shows up as debt on the ledger.  People really need to learn about government debt in general."}
{"id": "311630", "text": "Just for op's reference. A deferred wage entry would be something along the lines of the following scenario: you contract with a worker to perform some work at some point in the future, you would then book deferred wages for the amount to liabilities and deferred labor for that amount to assets, which would increase both and leave equity unchanged."}
{"id": "311642", "text": "Emergency funds, car funds etc tend to have to be accessible quickly (which tends to rule out CDs unless you have the patience to work something like a monthly CD ladder, an I don't) and you'll want your principal protected. The latter pretty much rules out any proper investment (ETFs, mutual funds, stock market directly, Elbonian dirt futures etc). It's basically a risk-vs-return calculation. Not much risk, not much return but at least you're not losing from a nominal standpoint). Another consideration is that you normally aren't able to decide freely if and when you want to pull money out of an emergency fund. If it is an emergency, waiting three weeks to see if the stock market goes up a little further isn't an option so you might end up having to take a hit that would be irrelevant if you were investing long term but might hurt badly because you're left with no choice. I'd stick that sort of money into a money market account and either add to it if necessary to keep up with inflation or make sure that my non-retirement investments over and above these funds are performing well, as those will and should become a far bigger part of your wealth in the longer run."}
{"id": "311688", "text": "The DLOM maybe different if the bond is more or less marketable than the equity. However, the ratio itself would be the same. So while this might affect the interest at which you are willing to lend, it would not affect the intrinsic value of the firm."}
{"id": "311782", "text": "If so, are there ways to reduce the amount of taxes owed? Given that it's currently December, I suppose I could sell half of what I want now, and the other half in January and it would split the tax burden over 2 years instead, but beyond that, are there any strategies for tax reduction in this scenario? One possibility is to also sell stocks that have gone down since you bought them.  Of course, you would only do this if you have changed your mind about the stock's prospects since you bought it -- that is, it has gone down and you no longer think it will go up enough to be worth holding it.  When you sell stocks, any losses you take can offset any gains, so if you sell one stock for a gain of $10,000 and another for a loss of $5,000, you will only be taxed on your net gain of $5,000. Even if you think your down stock could go back up, you could sell it to realize the loss, and then buy it back later at the lower price (as long as you're not worried it will go up in the meantime).  However, you need to wait at least 30 days before rebuying the stock to avoid wash sale rules.  This practice is known as tax loss harvesting."}
{"id": "311786", "text": "\"Do you need the capital? If you not, are you considering taking it to help you grow faster? To lower your downside risk?   In terms of deal structure start with your financial model  and evaluate  your payback period and IRR... Think if you were investor how much of a split would you need to compensate the risk you are taking.  Generally the investor will want to get 100% of their original investment paid back plus a annual  8%  \"\"preferred\"\", return and after they are made whole 80% of proceeds, but I've seen restaurant deals at 50/50 splits and no preferred return.   I'd try to ensure you get a salary and/or management fee.   Make sure you retain control and rights!  Don't sign anything without legal review.\""}
{"id": "311951", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/a-new-way-to-learn-economics) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; A group of economists from both sides of the Atlantic, part of a project called CORE Econ, has put together a new introductory economics curriculum, one that is modern, comprehensive, and freely available online.  &gt; In many countries, groups of students demanded an overhaul in how economics was taught, with less emphasis on free-market doctrines and more emphasis on real-world problems.  &gt; In his highly popular &amp;quot;Principles of Economics,&amp;quot; Harvard&amp;#039;s N. Gregory Mankiw begins by listing a set of ten basic principles, which include &amp;quot;Rational people think at the margin,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;Trade can make everybody better off,&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;Markets are usually a good way to organize economic activity.\"\"   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6zkgmk/a_new_way_to_learn_economics/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~208302 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **economic**^#1 **students**^#2 **CORE**^#3 **more**^#4 **curriculum**^#5\""}
{"id": "312038", "text": "But virtually all Americans pay some form of tax, whether it's sales, payroll, state income, or property tax.  I'm glad you mentioned this.  When you say something like Romney only paid 14% taxes, I will point you to this as well."}
{"id": "312248", "text": "\"You obviously pay your taxes in Switzerland and are employed (judging from your comments on your maximum possible contribution to the 3. S\u00e4ule). Under these circumstances, your best best may well be to pay into the occupational pension system (\"\"Einkauf in die 2. S\u00e4ule\"\"). Essentially, you can add funds to your pension plan to match non-existent employer contributions from times you spent studying etc. The 2. S\u00e4ule is usually defensively invested in bonds, so it's not a completely secure investment. In addition, it's a pretty fixed investment, since you can only get your money out if you buy a house or leave Switzerland for good. However, your entire payment into the 2. S\u00e4ule is tax deductible, so the tax effect in itself should be a very attractive bit of \"\"interest\"\". Your pension plan can inform you about the maximum possible Einkauf.\""}
{"id": "312349", "text": "Making the company isn't what the fuss is about. Charging yourself 'fees' through that company so that you don't how to pay out the director whose contract is on the *net* of profits is what the fuss is about.  I'm surprised that with millions of dollars on the line they don't sue, setting a precedent for these sham fees for all studios."}
{"id": "312361", "text": "I would suggest talking to your parents about potentially co-signing on the loan with you. Just make sure that you are the primary holder of the loan. Sure, there is some risk for your parents, but they know you better than anyone so let them make the decision if they want to help you or not.  If for some reason they can't help you, such as they've declared bankruptcy, then following the other answers' advice is the way to go."}
{"id": "312406", "text": "This is the chart going back to the first full year of this fund.  To answer your question - yes, a low cost ETF or Mutual fund is fine. Why not go right to an S&P index? VOO has a .05% expense. Why attracted you to a choice that lagged the S&P by $18,000 over this 21 year period?  (And yes, past performance, yada, yada, but that warning is appropriate for the opposite example. When you show a fund that beat the S&P short term, say 5 years, its run may be over. But this fund lagged the S&P by a significant margin over 2 decades, what makes you think this will change?"}
{"id": "312540", "text": "Yeah it's called the Fed buying shit mortgages that the banks invented to make money, then got bailed out on 100 cents on the dollar for, and with an underhanded deal that the banks will then buy Treasury bills with the magically prestidigitated money the Fed creates out of nothing that the banks receive in order to prop up federal debt prices, and thus keep interest rates down, so the dollar can limp along a little while longer until the bottom drops out because they are out of ways to keep the money cheap because at some point government debt will become massively discounted no matter what they do.  Only, how does this bizarre circlejerk process end?  It ends with consumption ramped up consuming things for a large war, is how it ends.  Edit: I'm wasted.  Fuck you."}
{"id": "312600", "text": "If you hold stock in a traditional IRA and sell a covered call against that stock, the premium received for writing that call belongs to the IRA just as would any other gain, dividend, or interest.  It is not a contribution but simply adds to the balance in the IRA.  The nature of the gain (capital or ordinary) is not relevant since all parts of the IRA balance are treated the same when funds are (eventually) withdrawn."}
{"id": "312626", "text": "Use your line of credit (LOC) to purchase more investments (non RRSP). That way, all of your LOC interest use to purchase those investments becomes tax deductible. Then use the money from your tax return to pay down the LOC."}
{"id": "313012", "text": "\"You are not the only one with this problem. When Intuit changed their pricing and services structure in 2015 a lot of people got angry, facing larger fees and having to go through an annoying upgrade just to get the same functionality (such as Schedule D, capital gains). You have several options: (1) Forget Turbo Tax and just use paper forms. That is what I do. Paper is reliable. (2) Use forms mode in Turbo Tax. Of course, that may be even more complicated than simply filing out paper forms. (3) Use a different service. If your income is below $64,000 the IRS has a free electronic filing service. Other online vendors have full taxes services for less than Turbo Tax. (4) Add the amount to ordinary income. Technically, as long as you report the income, you cannot be penalized, so if you add the capital gain to your ordinary income, then you have paid taxes on the income. Even if they send you a letter, you can send an answer that you added it to ordinary income and that will satisfy them. Of course you pay a higher rate on your $26 if you do that. (5) If you are in the 15% or below income bracket you are exempt from capital gains, and you can omit it. Don't believe the nervous Nellies who say the IRS will burn your house down if you don't report $26 in capital gains. Penalties are assessed on the percentage of TAXES you did not pay (0.5% penalty per month). Since 0.5% of $0 is $0 your penalty is $0. The IRS knows this. The IRS does not send out assessment letters for $0. (6) Even if you are above the 15% bracket, there is likelihood it is still a no-tax situation (see 5 above). (7) Worst case scenario: you are making a million dollars per year and you omit your $26 capital gains from your return. The IRS will send you an assessment letter for about $10. You can then send them a separate check or money order to pay it. In all honesty I have omitted documented tax items, like taxable interest, that the IRS knows about many times and never gotten an assessment letter. Once I made a serious math error on my return and they sent me an assessment letter, which I just paid, end of story. And that was for a lot more than $26. The technical verbiage for something like this in IRS lingo is CP-2000, underreported income. As you can see from this official IRS web page, basically what they do is guess how much they think you owe and send you a bill. Then you pay it. If you do so in time, you don't even get a 0.5% interest penalty on your $6.75 owed or whatever it is. (8) Go hog wild. As long as you are risking an assessment on your $26, why not go hog wild and just let the IRS compute all your taxes for you? Make a copy of your income statements, then mail them to the IRS with a letter that says, \"\"Hi, I am Mr. Odinson, my SSN is XXX-XX-XXXX. My address is XYZ. I am unable to compute my taxes due to a confused state of mind. I am hereby requesting a tax assessment for the 2016 tax year.\"\" Make sure you sign and date the letter. In all probability they will compute the full assessment and send you a bill (or refund).\""}
{"id": "313135", "text": "\"You gave your own answer - the 80% is positions, not contracts. Most actors on the option market have no interest in the underlying asset. They want \"\"just\"\" exposure to its price movement. It makes more sense to close your position than to be handed over bushels of wheat or whatever.\""}
{"id": "313372", "text": "\"There are a few other items that you should be aware of when getting options: The strike price is usually determined by an independent valuation of the common shares (called a 409a valuation). This should give you a sense on what the options are worth. Obviously you are hoping that the value becomes many multiple of that. There are two kinds in the US: Non-quals (NQO) and Incentive Stock Options (ISOs).  The big difference is that when you exercise Non-quals, you have to pay the tax on the difference between the \"\"fair\"\" market value on the shares and what you paid for them (the strike price).  This is important because if the company is private, you likely can not sell any shares until it is public. With ISOs, you don't pay any tax (except AMT tax) on the gain until you actually sell the shares.  You should know what kind your getting. Some plans allow for early exercise, essentially allowing you to buy the shares early (and given back if you leave before they vest) which helps you establish capital gains treatment earlier as well as avoid AMT if you have ISOs. This is really complicated direction and you would want to talk to a tax professional.  And always a good idea to know how many total shares outstanding in the Company. Very few people ask this question but it is helpful for you to understand the overall value of the options.\""}
{"id": "313391", "text": "Your capital gain is about $40K, which (assuming your total income is under $250K) is taxed at 15% long term capital gains rate. Additional depreciation recapture of approximately $5K is taxed at 25%. So this gives us rough estimate of $7250 tax. This is Federal tax, AZ rates are somewhere between 2% and 4%, so you'll be looking at some $1.6K additional tax to AZ. If you have accumulated rental losses or other expenses, it will lower the total amount of your gain (and, accordingly, the taxes). This is all very rough estimates, and you shouldn't rely on this but verify on your own or with a professional. I suggest using professional services because while being costly, they will probably save you more in taxes than you'll have to pay them because of the knowledge of what exactly of your expenses can be deducted and how to calculate the cost basis correctly. (edit from JoeT - the home exclusion requires occupancy for 2 of prior 5 years. For the OP, the prorated $125k exclusion 'might' cover the gain, it depends when the increase in value occurred, if the gain was during the time rented, it's taxable, I believe.)"}
{"id": "313397", "text": "Get answers from your equivalent of the IRS, or a local lawyer or accountant who specializes in taxes.  Any other answer you get here would be anectdotal at best.  Never good to rely on legal or medical advice from internet strangers."}
{"id": "313414", "text": "I'm going to have to take you to task for this post. If someone is incapable of determining the implied current P/E in the IPO price then they should not be buying stocks. You cannot blame Wall Street for the greed and stupidity of the public."}
{"id": "313437", "text": "I have been careful here to cover both shares in companies and in ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds). Some information such as around corporate actions and AGMs is only applicable for company shares and not ETFs. The shares that you own are registered to you through the broker that you bought them via but are verified by independent fund administrators and brokerage reconciliation processes. This means that there is independent verification that the broker has those shares and that they are ring fenced as being yours. The important point in this is that the broker cannot sell them for their own profit or otherwise use them for their own benefit, such as for collateral against margin etc..  1) Since the broker is keeping the shares for you they are still acting as an intermediary. In order to prove that you own the shares and have the right to sell them you need to transfer the registration to another broker in order to sell them through that broker. This typically, but not always, involves some kind of fee and the broker that you transfer to will need to be able to hold and deal in those shares. Not all brokers have access to all markets. 2) You can sell your shares through a different broker to the one you bought them through but you will need to transfer your ownership to the other broker and that broker will need to have access to that market. 3) You will normally, depending on your broker, get an email or other message on settlement which can be around two days after your purchase. You should also be able to see them in your online account UI before settlement. You usually don't get any messages from the issuing entity for the instrument until AGM time when you may get invited to the AGM if you hold enough stock. All other corporate actions should be handled for you by your broker. It is rare that settlement does not go through on well regulated markets, such as European, Hong Kong, Japanese, and US markets but this is more common on other markets. In particular I have seen quite a lot of trades reversed on the Istanbul market (XIST) recently. That is not to say that XIST is unsafe its just that I happen to have seen a few trades reversed recently."}
{"id": "313525", "text": "\"There are several brokerages which have lower minimum deposits (often $500) and allow purchase of index ETFs. I won't name them to avoid advertising. The best way to find out is to go to your bank, and ask to see a financial advisor. Then explain your difficulty to the advisor (who should caution you about the issues with investing such a small amount) and ask for advice on where to find a suitable broker. Also, sometimes banks offer services where you can buy shares of a fund through your bank account. This is probably not \"\"as good\"\" as the brokerage (performance may be not as good, fees may come out higher), but especially for small amounts and for convenience, this may be easier. Again, you should inquire at your institution.\""}
{"id": "313885", "text": "Would you borrow money at 3% just to leave it in a savings account?  That's effectively what you're doing by not paying of your student loans.  I would pay of all of the student loans, and consider putting a little toward the car loan.  If you do run into an emergency you still have your $2K/month to help build your savings back up."}
{"id": "313923", "text": "Pay the 401(k) loan back as soon as possible.  To be clear, the money from your 401(k) loan is no longer invested and working for you. It doesn't make sense to pull money out of your 401(k) investments and then invest it in something else. If you want to invest for retirement, pay back the loan and invest that money inside your 401(k).  If you leave your job, the 401(k) loan needs to be paid back in full, or else taxes and penalties will apply. If you have put the funds in an IRA, they won't be available to you should you need to pay back the loan early.  Instead of making a monthly payment to the 401(k) loan, pay off the loan and then make a monthly investment to an IRA."}
{"id": "314008", "text": "\"I'm assuming the question is about how to compare two ETFs that track the same index. I'd look at (for ETFs -- ignoring index funds): So, for example you might compare SPY vs IVV: SPY has about 100x the volume. Sure, IVV has 2M shares trading, so it is liquid \"\"enough\"\". But the bigger volume on SPY might matter to you if you use options: open interest is as much as 1000x more on SPY. Even if you have no interest in options, the spreads on SPY are probably going to be slightly smaller. They both have 0.09% expense ratios. When I looked on 2010-9-6, SPY was trading at a slight discount, IVV was at a slight premium. Looking for any sort of trend is left as an exercise to the reader... Grab the prospectus for each to examine the rules they set for fund makeup. Both come from well-known issuers and have a decent history. (Rather than crazy Uncle Ed's pawn shop, or the Central Bank of Stilumunistan.) So unless you find something in the SPY prospectus that makes you queasy, the higher volume and equal expense ratios would seem to suggest it over IVV. The fact that it is at a (tiny) discount right now is a (tiny) bonus.\""}
{"id": "314056", "text": "This question is indeed rather complicated. Let's simplify it a little bit. Paying down your mortgage makes sense if your expected return in the rest of your portfolio is less than the cost of the mortgage. In many cases, people may also decide to pay down their mortgage because they are risk-averse and do not like carrying debt. There's no tax benefit to doing so, though; Canada doesn't generally allow you to write off mortgage interest, unlike the U.S. As to keeping money in the corporation or not, I'm not going to address that. I don't have a firm enough understanding of corporate taxation. Canadian Couch Potato advises treating all of your investment assets as one large portfolio. That is what you are trying to do here. However, let's consider a different approach. If you do not have enough money to max out your RRSP or TFSA, you may choose to keep your TFSA for an emergency fund, where the money is kept highly liquid. Keep your cash in an interest-bearing TFSA, or perhaps invest it in the money market, inside your TFSA. Then, use your RRSP for the rest of your investment money, split according to your investment goals. This is not the most tax-efficient approach, but it is nice and simple. But you are looking for the most tax-efficient approach. So, let's assume you have enough to more than max out your TFSA and RRSP contributions, and all of your investments are going toward your retirement, which is at least a decade away. Because you are not taxed on your investment income from RRSPs (until you withdraw the money) or TFSA, it makes sense to hold the least tax-efficient investments there. Tax-advantaged investments such as Canadian equities should be held in your investment accounts outside of TFSA and RRSPs. Again, the Canadian Couch Potato has a great article on where to put your investment assets. That article covers interest, dividends, foreign dividends, and capital gains, as well as RRSPs, RESPs, and TFSAs. That article recommends holding Canadian equities in a taxable account, REITs in a tax-sheltered account (TFSA or RRSP), bonds, GICs, and money-market funds in a tax-sheltered account (as these count as interest). The article goes into rather more detail than this, and is worth checking out. It mentions the 15% withholding tax on US-listed ETFs, for example. In addition to that website, I recommend the following three books: The above three resources strongly advocate passive indexed investments, which I like but not everyone agrees with. All three specifically discuss tax implications, which is why I include them here."}
{"id": "314279", "text": "You're creating more liabilities for yourself in the future, although yes this could definitely be a profitable move for you. However, some small mistakes you made, from what I can see using the tools at Hargreaves Lansdown. The first, is that the government relief would only be 20%, not 60%. The second is that the tax relief goes directly into the SIPP, it's not something you get given back to you in cash. In order for this to be worthwhile, you need to be sure that you can make a post-tax gain of more than 3.4% on this money per year - which should be very feasible. It sounds like you have enough security that you could afford to take this risk."}
{"id": "314300", "text": "If you have been putting savings away for the longer term and have some extra funds which you would like to take some extra risk on - then I say work yourself out a strategy/plan, get yourself educated and go for it. If it is individual shares you are interested then work out if you prefer to use fundamental analysis, technical analysis or some of both. You can use fundamental analysis to help determine which shares to buy, and then use technical analysis to help determine when to get into and out of a position. You say you are prepared to lose $10,000 in order to try to get higher returns. I don't know what percentage this $10,000 is of the capital you intend to use in this kind of investments/trading, but lets assume it is 10% - so your total starting capital would be $100,000. The idea now would be to learn about money management, position sizing and risk management. There are plenty of good books on these subjects. If you set a maximum loss for each position you open of 1% of your capital - i.e $1,000, then you would have to get 10 straight losses in a row to get to your 10% total loss. You do this by setting stop losses on your positions. I'll use an example to explain: Say you are looking at a stock priced at $20 and you get a signal to buy it at that price. You now need to determine a stop price which if the stock goes down to, you can say well I may have been wrong on this occasion, the stock price has gone against me so I need to get out now (I put automatic stop loss conditional orders with my broker). You may determine the stop price based on previous support levels, using a percentage of your buy price or another indicator or method. I tend to use the percentage of buy price - lets say you use 10% - so your stop price would be at $18 (10% below your buy price of $20). So now you can work out your position size (the number of shares to buy). Your maximum loss on the position is $2 per share or 10% of your position in this stock, but it should also be only 1% of your total capital - being 1% of $100,000 = $1,000. You simply divide $1,000 by $2 to get 500 shares to buy.  You then do this with the rest of your positions - with a $100,000 starting capital using a 1% maximum loss per position and a stop loss of 10% you will end up with a maximum of 10 positions. If you use a larger maximum loss per position your position sizes would increase and you would have less positions to open (I would not go higher than 2% maximum loss per position). If you use a larger stop loss percentage then your position sizes would decrease and you would have more positions to open. The larger the stop loss the longer you will potentially be in a position and the smaller the stop loss generally the less time you will be in a position. Also as your total capital increases so will your 1% of total capital, just as it would decrease if your total capital decreases. Using this method you can aim for higher risk/ higher return investments and reduce and manage your risk to a desired level. One other thing to consider, don't let tax determine when you sell an investment. If you are keeping a stock just so you will pay less tax if kept for over 12 months - then you are in real danger of increasing your risk considerably. I would rather pay 50% tax on a 30% return than 25% tax on a 15% return."}
{"id": "314455", "text": "didn't pay the extra underpayment penalty on the grounds that it was   an honest mistake. You seem to think a penalty applies only when the IRS thinks you were trying to cheat the system.  That's not the case. A mistake (honest or otherwise) still can imply a penalty. While you can appeal just about anything, on any grounds you like, it's unlikely you will prevail."}
{"id": "314556", "text": "Do you know how SoFi's business model works? They're usually pretty conservative with their loans and refinancing. But I guess if they were looking to expand into riskier loans then it sounds like they've got some red tape that'd hold them back. Thank you for the explanation, much appreciated."}
{"id": "314691", "text": "\"You should absolutely have a contract between you and your client stipulating the quid-pro-quos of the arrangement. They get the product, you get the money. First off, this contract should specify what you must do, and what they must do, for the contract to be \"\"satisfied\"\". This isn't necessarily just product for money; your client may be under deadlines to approve the product in various stages of work in process. Depending on the product, the client may be required to provide starting materials (like existing logos/slogans for advertising/marketing graphics), information on or access to computer systems (for software or infrastructure consulting, or accounting auditing), etc. Second, if you provide a tangible product like graphics or software, the contract should clearly state that \"\"intellectual property transfers on satisfaction of contract\"\"; they don't own what you have made until they have accepted it and paid you accordingly. If they try to stiff you by taking what you made them and using it before you've been paid, you can take them to the cleaner's for copyright violations. Third, you should structure a payment schedule; don't do too much for free. You can get the money in thirds, for instance; a third up front, a third at some defined halfway point and a third on final delivery and acceptance. Lastly, you should stipulate that the client is responsible for all expenses incurred by you as a result of their failure to pay as stipulated, up to and including attorney's fees. Definitely have a lawyer draft these agreements; contract law is a many-layered area of law with hundreds of years of case law and slightly different nuances in every state. A competent lawyer will know things that can and can't be stipulated in a contract, and if you try to do it alone you'll wish you hadn't when the contract's tossed out by a judge because of some technicality. If they refuse to pay, get the lawyer on the phone and file suit. A well-written contract drafted by a competent lawyer, which you have lived up to on your end, will give your client no loopholes to slip through. As far as recovering damages, it shouldn't matter whether he's in the U.S. or not; if he does business in the U.S. then he very probably has money in banks that have to listen to U.S. courts (or at least court orders).\""}
{"id": "314745", "text": "He didn't lock in a growth rate of 4%. He locked in a yield of 4%. That's the amount the bond pays in interest on his original investment each year. If he just spends that money the bond will continue to pay 4% each year, but there's no growth. In order to get growth he has to reinvest the interest as it comes in; if he puts it into bonds, the return on that new money, and hence the growth, depends on the prevailing interest rate at the time that the interest is paid. That interest rate can be higher or lower than the original 4%; there's no connection between the two."}
{"id": "314806", "text": "Here's my view, as a 38yr old NZer who grew up in Auckland: When you purchase a residential property, whether or not you intend to live in it, you're essentially counting on the possibility that one of the following will occur: This report by the NZ Royal Society (going by memory from a presentation I attended) predicts ongoing population growth in NZ, mainly driven by immigration, and mostly in Auckland. Building of new housing isn't keeping up with population growth, so my bet would be that the property values, especially in Auckland, are going to continue to climb.  Other factors that might influence your decision are things only you can know, such as where you might be likely to settle down, how much risk you're willing to take, how much capability you have to look after a rental property, and how much knowledge you have about the property market. Bear in mind that government schemes and world events may change the outlook for number of houses being built and immigration levels, both of which heavily affect property values. My personal view is that the government isn't doing nearly enough to provide affordable housing for our young adults in NZ. Not only that; the govt is essentially responsible for the problem in the first place, as zoning rules for local authorities artificially inflate land prices which prevent the building of affordable houses. Furthermore, foreign investment in rental properties is unregulated and unmeasured. Both these problems could be resolved with appropriate legislation, though central city prices are unlikely to be relieved as much as other areas simply because prices are also inflated due to the desirability to live centrally. The problem is a severe one, and high housing prices for even the smallest dwellings are going to make inequality, and the social problems that go with it, far worse. I'd like to see new cities or towns being planned and built from scratch, such as Pegasus and Canberra."}
{"id": "315017", "text": "It depends on the bank - In some cases(mine included :) ) the bank allowed for this but Emma had to sign on a document waiving the rights for the house in case the bank needs to liquidate assets in to recover their mortgage in case of delays or non-payment of dues in time. This had to be signed after taking independent legal advice from a legal adviser."}
{"id": "315086", "text": "Is the business an S-Corp, LLC or Sole Prop? I am going to guess based on the question that it is an LLC that you never closed with the state and you live in a state (NY) that charges a fee for having an LLC in the state in which case you owe those fees to the state. I am not aware of any taxes on the mere existence of a business by the IRS. I think you are going to find out that the are no taxes owed to the IRS for this nonexistent activity."}
{"id": "315205", "text": "\"Depends on your account. If you have a margin account, then you can \"\"withdraw\"\" the margin, and it will get paid off/settled on T+3. However if it's a cash account then you will most likely need to wait. Call your broker and ask, each broker has different rules.\""}
{"id": "315304", "text": "\"You're supposed to be filling form 433-A. Vehicles are on line 18. You will fill there the current fair value of the car and the current balance on the loans. The last column is \"\"equity\"\", which in your case will indeed be a negative number. The \"\"value\"\" is what the car is worth. The \"\"equity\"\" is what the car is worth to you. IRS uses the \"\"equity\"\" value to calculate your solvency. Any time you fill a form to the IRS - read the instructions carefully, for each line and line. If in doubt - talk to a professional licensed in your state. I'm not a professional, and this is not a tax advice.\""}
{"id": "315345", "text": "The price of a share of a mutual fund is its Net Asset Value (nav). Before the payout of dividends and capital gain distribution, the fund was holding both stock shares and cash that resulted from dividends and capital gains. After the payout, a share only holds the stock. Therefore once the cash is paid out the NAV must drop by the same amount as was paid out per share. Thus of course assumes no other activity or valuation changes of the underlying assets. Regular market activity will obscure what the payout does to the NAV."}
{"id": "315552", "text": "Sounds you need to read up on S corp structures. I think this would benefit you if you generate income even after you physically stopped working which is incomes from membership fees, royalties % of customer revenue, middle man etc...  Under the Scorp, you as the sole member must earn a wage that fair and at current market value. You pay social security and Medicare on this wage. The interesting thing here is that an Scorp can pay out earning dividends  without having to pay payroll taxes but the catch is that you, as the sole employee must earn a fair wage.   As for paying the other member you may want to look into 1099 contract work plus a finders fee. The 1099 hourly wage does not require you to pay Medicare and SS.   The common fee I'm used to is 5% of gross invoice. Then you would pay her an hourly wage. The company then bills these hours multiplied by 2 or 3 (or whatever you think is fair) to the client. Deduct expenses from this and that's your profit.   Example. Contractor brings Client A which is estimated as a  100 hour project with $100 cost in supplies and requires 2 hours of your time @ $40/hr.   You quote 100 hours @ $50 to client, client agrees and gives you down payment.   You then present the contract work to your contractor, they complete the work in 100 hours and bill you at $25.   You pay your contractor 2500 plus the 5% ($250)  and your company earns $2070 (5000 - 2500 - 100-80)  And you'll earn $80 minus the payroll tax.   Then at the end of the quarter or year or however you want to do earning payouts your LLC- Scorp will write you a check for $2070 or whatever earning % you want to take. This is then taxed at your income tax bracket.   One thing to keep in mind is what is preventing this other person from becoming your competition? A partnership would be great motivation to try and bring in as much work under the LLC. But if you start shafting people then they'll just keep the work and cut you out."}
{"id": "315568", "text": "A cautionary tale:  About 25 years ago I decided that I should try my hand at investing in some technology companies.   I was in the computer biz but decided that I might suffer from myopia there, so I researched some medical startups.  And I did some reasonably good research, given the available resources (the Internet was quite primitive).  I narrowed things down to 4-5 companies, studying their technology plans, then researched their business plans and their personnel. In the end I picked a drug company.  Not only did it have a promising business plan, but it had as it's CEO a hotshot from some other company, and the BOD was populated buy big names from tech companies and the like.  AND the company had like $2 of cash for every $1 of outstanding share value, following their recent IPO. So I sold a bit of stock I had in my employer and bought like $3000 worth of this company. Then, taking the advice I'd seen several places, I forgot about it for about 6 months. When I went back to look their stock value had dropped a little, and the cash reserves were down about 20%.  I wasn't too worried.  6 months later the cash was down 50%.  Worrying a little.  After I'd had the stock for about 2 years the stock price was about 10% of what I'd paid.  Hardly worth selling, so I hung on for awhile longer. The company was eventually sold to some other company and I got maybe $50 in stock in the new company."}
{"id": "315666", "text": "First I'd like to echo msemack's answer. Start by maxing out your 401K and IRA contributions. Not a lot of people just starting their career have the luxury of doing much more outside of that. Here are some additional tips that I learned when I was just getting started:"}
{"id": "315833", "text": "Here's some advice: Never go into business with a friend. Thats a rule that's as old as time. It already seems to me that you're encountering some disparity issues financially. This is a bad idea, man. Stop now, while you still can!"}
{"id": "315925", "text": "\"That works for something like consulting where you are advising the client on specific things but for accounting jobs like Tax and Audit work which have been very commoditized  it's expected to only bill the client for \"\"productive hours\"\" because the project only has a set budget and we need to get the work done. My work hours is seen as a cost to my team because my project needs to make money which the partner/manager/senior are all responsible for keeping man hours down. (Again that's hours chargeable to the client wasted hours in the day don't count).  And then on top of that we need to hit a certain number of chargeable client hours per week.    It's an annoying balance\""}
{"id": "316286", "text": "Yes, provided you're not over the IRA deductibility limit as well. \u2013  JoeTaxpayer\u2666 Aug 4 at 18:02 Note that if you get refunded for excess contributions, it usually happens in the following year, in which case it doesn't affect the year where these contributions occured -- rather, the refund counts as taxable income in the year you received the refund. \u2013  user102008 Aug 11 at 8:11"}
{"id": "316359", "text": "In my experience, you don't need to endorse a check with a signature to deposit it into your account.  You do if you are exchanging the check for cash.  Businesses usually have a stamp with their account number on them.  Once stamped, those checks are only able to be deposited into that account.  Individuals can do the same.   I have had issues depositing insurance and government checks in the past that had both my and my wife's name on them.  Both of us had to endorse the check to be able to deposit them.  I think this was some kind of fraud prevention scheme, so that later one of us couldn't claim they didn't know anything about the check."}
{"id": "316388", "text": "NO Even worse, most BTL(buy to let) lenders will not lend if you are going to be living in the property.    There are very few lenders that will touch something like this.    It is likely you will also need to use bridging for the time the building work takes at something like 1.5% per month! Try posting the question to http://www.propertytribes.com/ as there are a few UK mortgage experts on that site."}
{"id": "316645", "text": "\"Say we are in 'normal times.' Passbook rates are 5% or so. Longer rates, 6-7%. I offer you a product with these terms, for $10,000 I will return a \"\"Guaranteed\"\" $10,000 in 6 years and based on the stock market, 1% for every 2% the S&P is up beyond 10% at maturity. As the seller of this product, I take $6666, and buy a fixed investment, 6 years at 7% in treasuries will return the $10000. Really. I then take the $3334 and buy out of the money calls on the S&P each year to capture the gains, if any, and to deliver on my promise.  This is one example of a structured deposit offering. They can have nearly any terms one can imagine. Tied to any product. S&P, Crude Oil, Gold. Whatever.\""}
{"id": "316651", "text": "These are plans similar to 401k plans. 457(b) plans available for certain government and non-profit organizations, 403(b) available for certain educational, hospital, religious and non-profit organizations. Your school apparently fits into both classes, so it has both. These plans don't have to allow ROTH contributions, but they may, so you have to check if there's an option. The main (but not only) difference from IRA is the limit: for 401(k), 403(b) and 457(b) plans the contribution limit is $17500, while for IRA its $5500 (for 2013). Additional benefit of 457(b) plan is that there's no 10% penalty on early withdrawal, just taxes (at ordinal rates)."}
{"id": "316838", "text": "\"The answer posted by Kirill Fuchs is incorrect according to my series 65 text book and practice question answers. The everyday investor buys at the ask and sells at the bid but the market maker does the opposite. THE MARKET MAKER \"\"BUYS AT THE BID AND SELLS AT THE ASK\"\", he makes a profit form the spread. I have posted a quiz question and the answer created by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). To fill a customer buy order for 800 WXYZ shares, your firm requests a quote from a market maker. The response is \"\"bid 15, ask 15.25.\"\" If the order is placed, the market maker must sell: A)   800 shares at $15.25 per share. B)   800 shares at $15 per share. C)   100 shares at $15.25 per share. D)   800 shares at no more than $15 per share. Your answer, sell 800 shares at $15.25 per share., was correct!. A market maker is responsible for honoring a firm quote. If no size is requested by the inquiring trader, a quote is firm for 100 shares. In this example, the trader requested an 800-share quote, so the market maker is responsible for selling 8 round lots of 100 shares at the ask price of $15.25 per share.\""}
{"id": "316925", "text": "HMRC may or may not find out about it; the risks and penalties involved if they do find out make it unwise not to just declare it and pay the tax on it. Based on the fact you asked the question, I am assuming that you currently pay all your tax through PAYE and don't do a tax return. You would need to register for Self Assessment and complete a return; this is not at all difficult if your tax situation is straightforward, which it sounds like yours is. Then you would owe the tax on the additional money, at whatever applicable rate (which depends on how much you earn in your main job, the rate tables are here: https://www.gov.uk/income-tax-rates/current-rates-and-allowances ). If it truly is a one off you could simply declare it on your return as other income, but if it is more than that then you would need to look at setting up as Self Employed - there is some good advice on the differences here: http://www.brighton-accountants.com/blog/tax-self-employment-still-employed/ :  Broadly, you are likely to be running a business if you have a regular, organised activity with a profit motive, which continues for at least a few months. If the work is one-off, or very occasional (say, a few times per year), or not very organised, or of very low value (say, under \u00a32,000 per year), then it might qualify as casual income. If you think it is beyond the definition of casual income then you would also need to pay National Insurance, as described in the previous link, but otherwise the tax treatment would be the same."}
{"id": "317037", "text": "I would use student loans and avoid credit card debt if debt is your only option.   Here are the advantages I see:   Disadvantages:"}
{"id": "317197", "text": "\"The answer is simple -- your new job pays more than your old one.  As such, you're in a higher tax withholding bracket, even with the same number of deductions as before. Your withholding is computed based on how much you make each pay period, and the number of pay periods in the year.  So, if you were being paid weekly before then it was based on the assumption you made the same amount for every pay period in the calendar year.  This is why tax varies from week to week for hourly employees and people being paid overtime.  In your new job, you're being paid \"\"semi-monthly\"\", which makes for 24 pay periods rather than the 52 pay periods when you were paid weekly, so the amount of withholding (in dollar terms) is going to be much greater than when you were being paid weekly.  Add in the fact you're making $2,000 more (a month, I presume?), so that's $24,000 a year more.  It's definitely going to bump you into a different earning bracket for taxes, so even with the same number of deductions, you're going to pay more now. This isn't to say you won't be able to recoup some of that at the end of the year when you file your taxes, since your current withholding rate may have you over-paying.  As such, you'll see a nice refund. One final note -- You always have the option of changing your withholding if you like.  Many people will do that, claiming minimal deductions for the first few months of the year to let the maximum withholding take place, then they'll adjust their withholding deductions in the second half of the year to capture more in each paycheck.  If done right, it makes no difference in the total amount withheld, but it does allow the checks at the latter part of the year to be bigger than if withholding deductions were kept the same throughout.\""}
{"id": "317666", "text": "tl;dr: The CNN Money and Yahoo Finance charts are wildly inaccurate. The TD Ameritrade chart appears to be accurate and shows returns with reinvested dividends. Ignoring buggy data, CNN most likely shows reinvested dividends for quoted securities but not for the S&P 500 index. Yahoo most likely shows all returns without reinvested dividends. Thanks to a tip from Grade Eh Bacon, I was able to determine that TD Ameritrade reports returns with reinvested dividends (as it claims to do). Eyeballing the chart, it appears that S&P 500 grew by ~90% over the five year period the chart covers. Meanwhile, according to this S&P 500 return estimator, the five year return of S&P 500, with reinvested dividends, was 97.1% between July 2012 to July 2017 (vs. 78.4% raw returns). I have no idea what numbers CNN Money is working from, because it claims S&P 500 only grew about 35% over the last five years, which is less than half of the raw return. Ditto for Yahoo, which claims 45% growth. Even stranger still, the CNN chart for VFINX (an S&P 500 index fund) clearly shows the correct market growth (without reinvesting dividends from the S&P 500 index), so whatever problem exists is inconsistent:  Yahoo also agrees with itself for VFINX, but comes in a bit low even if your assume no reinvestment of dividends (68% vs. 78% expected); I'm not sure if it's ever right.  By way of comparison, TD's chart for VFINX seems to be consistent with its ABALX chart and with reality:  As a final sanity check, I pulled historical ^GSPC prices from Yahoo Finance. It closed at $1406.58 on 27 Aug 2012 and $2477.55 on 28 Aug 2017, or 76.1% growth overall. That agrees with TD and the return calculator above, and disagrees with CNN Money (on ABALX). Worse, Yahoo's own charts (both ABALX and VFINX) disagree with Yahoo's own historical data."}
{"id": "317667", "text": "Sure thing -  Treasuries Bonds/Bills are what the US Gov uses to borrow. However it's slightly different than taking out a loan. It's basically an agreement to give (repay) a set sum of money at a certain time in the future in exchange for a sum of funding that's determined by market forces (supply &amp; demand). The difference between today's price and the payment in the future is the interest.   For example (completely made up numbers):  - Today is 08/05/2017 - The government issues a bond that say it will pay who ever owns this bond $105 on 08/05/**2018** - The market decides that $105 from the US government paid a year from now is worth $100 today.   In other words the US Government is borrowing for one year at a rate of 5%       (105 - 100) / 100 = .05 = 5%  Now consider Saudi Arabia's petroleum company, Aramco.  Because petroleum is traded in dollars, when Aramco makes a sale, its paid in USD. Some of that is going to be reinvested into the company, some paid out in dividends to share holders but inevitably some of that will be saved someplace where it can make interest. Because treasuries are traded/issued in dollars and because Aramco's businesses deals primarily in dollars, treasuries are the natural place to store that savings, especially because the market considers them extremely safe.   If they exchange the USD into the Saudi currency to store the money in Saudi assets, Aramco is subject to  *exchange rate risk*. If the riyal depreciates relative to the dollar, Aramco will lose wealth on the exchange back to dollars when they go to move those funds back into their business. It's in their interest to deal with assets denominated in USD (i.e. T-Bonds) in order to avoid this.  So now because the Saudis want T-Bonds as well, the additional demand pushes the market price of our bond from $100 to $102. And the effective one year borrowing rate for the Government goes from 5% to 2.9%.      (105 - 102)/102 = .029411 = 2.9%  And there you have it, cheaper borrowing. It's also worth noting how this encourages business around the world to deal in dollars which are directly controlled by the federal reserve. This makes the US's position extremely powerful."}
{"id": "317768", "text": "Yes you are right. The cannibalisation comment was for opening up every pricing point.  The article is quite specific to app pricing published by an individual. It doesn't apply to say a food product or a durable being brought to the market.  A thing on the last comment. Wondows may sell three versions but the distinction is there and clear. A light version, a regular version and an enterprise version. They are labelled pretty much the same as Home, Professional and Enterprise. Good marketing or names to distinguish between the products. Different needs for different products. An app is priced much less and uses can be trivial (yet invovled)."}
{"id": "318406", "text": "none of which give a good return if the underlying economy is shit. the underlying economy will be shit if there hasn't been sufficient investment in more productive endeavors. if the underlying economy hasn't been sufficiently capitalized, that will present juicy returns to investors.   it's a complete substance-less threat that if we fail to continue to coddle the rentiers, the economy will collapse because they'll do X with their money (X being something other than maximizing return)"}
{"id": "318479", "text": "Ok well in that case here are my thoughts.  Its been a while since I've done this type of school work so hope it's right/helpful.  AR Oustanding = Avg AR / (credit sales/Operating Cycle*) = 35   *I'm guessing they didn't give you sales for the year or else I would divide by 365 but since you mentioned operating cycle I'm assuming thats the sales number you were given.  So you want to divide the sales by 50 and then times it by the 35.  Should give you the average AR.  Inventory - I really don't remember having to calculate this so I'm just thinking logically here.  You should be able to take COGS divide by the days in the period then times it by In Invetory.  So = (COGS/Operating Cycle)* In Inventory = (COGS/50)*15  Accounts Payable....man, I'm afraid to drive you in the wrong direction on this one.  Avg Accounts Payable/(COGS/Operating Cycle) = 40  Plug in COGS, divide by the operating cycle, 50 then times by 40, the days vendor credit."}
{"id": "318553", "text": "Marketing strategy by far was and continues to be the biggest problem.  Choosing and setting up things like corporate entity, billing, data backup, calendars were a distant second problem.  Labor law is too confusing for me to hire anyone but independent contractors."}
{"id": "318558", "text": "\"You may be thinking about this the wrong way. The yield (Return) on your investment is effectively the market price paid to the investor for the amount of risk assumed for participating. Looking at the last few years, many including myself would have given their left arm for a so-called \"\"meager return\"\" instead of the devastation visited on our portfolios.  In essence, higher return almost always (arguably always) comes at the cost of increased risk.  You just have to decide your risk profile and investment goals.  For example, which of the following scenarios would you prefer? Investment Option A  Treasuries, CD's Worst Case: 1% gain Best Case 5% gain   Investment option B  Equities/Commodities Worst Case: 25% loss Best Case: 40% gain\""}
{"id": "318696", "text": "\"An Xbox currently sells for $200 but you don't have the money right now to buy it.  You think the price of the xbox is going up to $250 next month. Your friend works at BestBuy and says he has a \"\"raincheck\"\" that allows you to buy the Xbox for $200 but the raincheck expires next month.  He offers to sell you the \"\"raincheck\"\" for $5. When you buy his raincheck for $5 you are locking in the right to buy the Xbox for $200. It is like an option because it locks in the purchase price, it has an expiration date, it locks in a purchase price, and it is not mandatory that you redeem it. That's an explanation for a call option in kids terms.  For more easy answers to the question what is a call option click now.  A put can be answered in a similar way.  Suppose you bought the Xbox for $250 and then the price drops back to $200.  If you keep your receipt, you have the right to return (sell the Xbox back) for $250 even though the current price is only $200.  Bestbuy has a 30 day return policy so your receipt is like a put option in that you can sell the Xbox back for a price higher than the current market price.   That's a simple example of a put option in kids terms.  For more easy answers to the question what is a put click now.\""}
{"id": "318873", "text": "One of the things I would suggest looking into is peer-to-peer lending.  I do lendingclub.com, but with a lot less money, and have only done it a short period of time.  Still my return is about 13%. In your case you would probably have to commit to about 3.5 years to invest your money.  Buy 3 year notes, and as they are paid off pull the money out and put into a CD or money market..     They sell notes that are 3 or 5 year and you may not want to tie your money up that long."}
{"id": "318937", "text": "Sales are useless. Profit determines value.  Others made good suggestions, but make sure you don't personally guarantee anthing.  Understand your requirements to continue having the investor involved. Understand who has approval authority and decision making authority, ie are you a hired gun or the managing owner?  Finally, probability of success is low, so do your homework, bust your ass, and understand when you will wall away (ie if you aren't profitable in 3 years, or below $500k in rev, etc)"}
{"id": "319043", "text": "One reason why some merchants in the US don't accept Discover is that the fee the store is charged is higher than the average. Generally a portion of transaction fee for the network and the issuing bank goes to the rewards program. In some cases a portion of the interest can also be used to fund these programs. Some cards will give you more points when you carry a balance from one month to the next. Therefore encouraging consumers to have interest charges. This portion of the program will be funded from the interest charges. Profits: Rewards: Some rewards are almost always redeemed: cash once the amount of charges gets above a minimum threshold. Some are almost never redeemed: miles with high requirements and tough blackout periods.  Credit cards that don't understand how their customers will use their cards can run into problems. If they offer a great rewards program that encourages use, but pays too high a percentage of points earned can lead to problems. This is especially true when a great percentage of users pay in full each month. This hurt Citibank in the 1990's. They had a card with no annual fee forever, and a very high percentage never had to pay interest. People flocked to the card, and kept it as an emergency card, because they knew it would never have a annual fee."}
{"id": "319159", "text": "Ultimately the bank will have first call on the house and you will be the only one on the hook directly to the bank if you don't make the mortgage payments. There's nothing you can do to avoid that if you can't get a joint mortgage. What you could do is make a side agreement that your girlfriend would be entitled to half the equity in the house, and would be required to make half the payments (via you). You could perhaps also add that she would be part responsible for helping you clear any arrears. But in the end it'd just be a deal between you and her. She wouldn't have any direct rights over the house and she wouldn't be at risk of the bank pursuing her if you don't pay the mortgage. You'd probably also need legal advice to make it watertight, but you could also not worry about that too much and just write it all down as formally as possible. It really depends if you're just trying to improve your feelings about the process or whether you really want something that you could both rely on in the event of a later split. I don't think getting married would make any make any real difference day-to-day. In law, with rare exceptions, the finances of spouses are independent from each other. However in the longer term, being married would mean your now-wife would have a stronger legal claim on half the equity in the house in the event of you splitting up."}
{"id": "319331", "text": "TL;DR: The difference is $230. Just for fun, and to illustrate how brackets work, let's look at the differences you could see from changing when you're paid based on the tax bracket information that Ben Miller provided. If you're paid $87,780 each year, then each year you'll pay $17,716 for a total of $35,432: $5,183 + $12,532 (25% of $50,130 (the amount over $37,650)) If you were paid nothing one year and then double salary ($175,560) the next, you'd pay $0 the first year and $42,193 the next: $18,558 + $23,634 (28% of $84,410 (the amount over $91,150)) So the maximum difference you'd see from shifting when you're paid is $6,761 total, $3,380 per year, or about 4% of your average annual salary. In your particular case, you'd either be paying $35,432 total, or $14,948 followed by $20,714 for $35,662 total, a difference of $230 total, $115 per year, less than 1% of average annual salary: $5,183 + $9,765 (25% of $39,060 (the amount $87,780 - $11,070  is over $37,650)) $18,558 + $2,156 (28% of $7,700 (the amount $87,780 + $11,070 is over $91,150))"}
{"id": "319434", "text": "Your logic is not wrong.  But the risk is more significant than you seem to assume.  Essentially you are proposing taking a 2.6% loan to buy stocks. Is that a good strategy?  On average, probably.  But if your stocks crash you might have significant liabilities. In 1929, the Dow Jones dropped 89%.  In 1989, >30%.  In 2008-9, 54%.  This is a huge risk if this is money that you owe in taxes.  If you operate the same system year after year the chance of it going horribly wrong increases."}
{"id": "319458", "text": "I've found you can give the money to charity.  If you text REDCROSS to 90999 for example you can give $10 to the redcross"}
{"id": "319471", "text": "I think the definition of overcollateralization on investopedia will answer this question for you.  Namely this part: For example, in the case of a mortgage backed security, the principal amount of an issue may be $100 million while the principal value of the mortgages underlying the issue may be equal to $120 million. The bond is packed with more mortgages than the face value indicates.  It's effectively sold at a discount to underlying value."}
{"id": "319555", "text": "Option A - you sell the house and then use the money to pay off a portion of your second mortgage. The return on that investment is 5.5% a year, or $1925 net. Option B - you rent it out, that will bring  you $5220 (435 x 12), more than 2.5 times option A. That's not counting any money going towards the principal of the loan. Given that you'll be using a property management company, you can be fairly certain that there won't be any unexpected expenses (credit check, security deposit should take care of that) Option C - you invest the money somewhere else. You'll have to get 15% return in order to beat option B. I don't think that's sustainable.  You should talk to a CPA about the tax implications, but I'm fairly certain that you'll do better tax wise to rent it out, since you can use depreciation to lower your tax bill.  Finally, where do you think real estate prices will be in 4 years? If you think they'll increase that's another reason to hold onto the property and rent it.  Finally finally, if you plan to rent it out long term (over 4 years), it will be a good idea to refinance and lock the current interest rate."}
{"id": "319894", "text": ""}
{"id": "320155", "text": "What is the average daily volume traded? It looks like this stock may have a liquidity problem. If that is the case I would not buy this stock at all as you may have the same problem when you try to sell it. Generally try to stay away from illiquid stocks, if your order size is more than 10% of the average daily volume traded, then don't buy it.  I usually stay away from stocks with an average daily volume of less than 100,000."}
{"id": "320246", "text": "I believe the answer is that to protect yourself it is good to get credit protection so you will be notified when new credit is taken in your name.   Also, you can use http://www.annualcreditreport.com/ to look at your credit report. HINT:  While you do that, and while you are in the TransUnion report, you will have the option to DISPUTE adverse items.   I always suggest that people dispute everything adverse.  That puts the onus on the other parties to produce evidence to TransUnion within 30 days attesting to the validity of the adverse item.   You would be surprised how many will simply drop off your report after doing that.  Everybody should do this Here is a direct address for TransUnion: https://dispute.transunion.com/dp/dispute/landingPage.jsp ==>  Once the disputes are finalized, the results get communicated to the other two bureaus. It is amazing how well it works.  It can raise your credit score significantly. It really helps to watch your credit report yourself, and also to get whatever protection is offered that may help protect you against others opening new accounts in your name."}
{"id": "320579", "text": "\"I think you may have a significant misunderstanding here.  You have been renting your property out for two years, now.  There is no special \"\"roommate\"\" clause in the tax code; roommates are renters, and the rent they pay is rental income.  (If they were roommates in a property you both rented from a third party, that would be different.) See publication 527, chapter 4 for more details on the subject (search on \"\"Renting Part of Property\"\").  You should be: You may also consider \"\"Not renting for profit\"\" section, which may be closer to what you're actually thinking - of changing from \"\"Renting not for profit\"\" to \"\"Renting for profit\"\".  Not rented for profit means you can report on your 1040 as opposed to filing Schedule E, but it does mean you have to actually not make a profit (and remember, some of the money that goes to paying the mortgage is not deductible on this side of things since it's your property and you'll get that money back, presumably, when you sell it). If that is what you're asking about, it sounds like it's just a matter of money.  Are you going to start making money?  Or, are you going to start making enough significant upgrades/etc. to justify the tax deduction?  You should consider the actual, specific numbers carefully, probably with the help of a CPA who is familiar with this sort of situation, and then make the decision that gives you the best outcome (keeping in mind that there may be long-term impacts of switching from not-for-profit to for-profit rental treatment).\""}
{"id": "320675", "text": "You should never take advice from someone else in relation to a question like this. Who would you blame if things go wrong and you lose money or make less than your savings account. For this reason I will give you the same answer I gave to one of your previous similar questions: If you want higher returns you may have to take on more risk. From lowest returns (and usually lower risk) to higher returns (and usually higher risk), Bank savings accounts, term deposits, on-line savings accounts, offset accounts (if you have a mortgage), fixed interest eg. Bonds, property and stock markets.  If you want potentially higher returns then you can go for derivatives like options or CFDs, FX or Futures. These usually have higher risks again but as with any investments some risks can be partly managed. What ever you decide to do, get yourself educated first. Don't put any money down unless you know what your potential risks are and have a risk management strategy in place, especially if it is from advice provided by someone else. The first rule before starting any new investment is to understand what your potential risks are and have a plane to manage and reduce those risks."}
{"id": "320699", "text": "Frederic Mishkin wrote a few text books on financial concepts that are widely used in colleges.  If you're not looking for a textbook - I'd really recommend Khan Academy on YouTube.  He's got some great videos on supply and demand - bonds, exchange rates - monetary policy by the federal reserve. All academically sound. They're very easy to digest and watch over again for reference."}
{"id": "320777", "text": "Strange that they're holding you personally legally liable rather than the company. That's normally a big part of the corporate veil. You need a lawyer, not a stackexchange."}
{"id": "320969", "text": "It depends on your situation. For families with small amounts over the FDIC limit, there's account structures that let you get multiple coverages. Things like holding 100k in an account in joint with your wife, each of you holding 100k in individual accounts etc. For larger sums and institutions, there's CDARS. This system spreads your money out to multiple institutions with an eye to FDIC insurance limits. Some people feel this system is abusing FDIC, so I suppose it's possible it gets outlawed / shut down some day. Alternatively, you can just invest it yourself. Treasury Direct allows small buyers to buy US govt bonds at finished auction rates, or submit a qualified bid at auction. You won't get great rates, but Treasuries are about as good as dollars."}
{"id": "321108", "text": "A Breakdown of Stock Buy Backs has this bottom line on it: Are share buybacks good or bad? As is so often the case in finance, the question may not have a definitive answer. If a stock is undervalued and a buyback truly represents the best possible investment for a company, the buyback - and its effects - can be viewed as a positive sign for shareholders. Watch out, however, if a company is merely using buybacks to prop up ratios, provide short-term relief to an ailing stock price or to get out from under excessive dilution. Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/02/041702.asp#ixzz3ZHdOf2dJ What is the reason that a company like AAPL is buying back its own   shares?  Offsetting dilution would be my main thought here as many employees may exercise options putting more stock out there that the company buys back stock to balance things. Does it have too much cash and it doesn't know what to do with it?  No as it could do dividends if it wanted to give it back to investors. So it is returning the cash back to investors? Not quite. While some investors may get cash from Apple, I'd suspect most shareholders aren't likely to see cash unless they are selling their shares so I wouldn't say yes to this without qualification. At the same time, the treasury shares Apple has can be used to give options to employees or be used in acquisitions for a couple of other purposes."}
{"id": "321120", "text": "No.  Mark-to-market valuation relies on using a competitive market of public traders to determine the share price --- from free-market trading among independent traders who are not also insiders.   Any professional valuation would see through the promotional nature of the share offer. It is pretty obvious that the purchaser of a share could not turn around and sell their share for $10, unless the 'free hosting' that is worth most of the $10 follows it... and that's more of hybrid of stock and bond than pure stock.  It is also pretty obvious that selling a few shares for $10 does not mean one could sell 10,000,000 shares for $10, because of the well known decreasing marginal value effect from economics. While this question seems hypothetical, as a practical matter offering to sell share of unregistered securities in a startup for $10 to the general public,  is likely to run afoul of state or federal securities laws -- irregardless of the honesty of the business or any included promotional offers.   See http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm for more information about the SEC regulations for raising capital for small businesses."}
{"id": "321196", "text": "\"I think it's worth pointing out explicitly that the biggest difference between a credit card (US/Canada) and a debit card (like your French carte de cr\u00e9dit) is that with a credit card, it's entirely possible to not pay the bill or to pay only the \"\"minimum payment\"\" when asked. This results in you owing significantly more money due to interest, which can snowball into higher and higher levels of debt, and end up getting rapidly out of control. This is the reason why you should ALWAYS pay off the ENTIRE balance every month, as attested to in the other answers; it's not uncommon to find people in the US with thousands of dollars of debt they can't pay off from misuse of credit cards.\""}
{"id": "321199", "text": "\"When you buy something with your credit card, the store pays a fee to the credit card company, typically a base fee of 15 to 50 cents plus 2 to 3% of the purchase. At least, that's what it was a few years back when I had a tiny business and I wanted to accept credit cards. Big chain stores pay less because they are \"\"buying in bulk\"\" and have negotiating power. Just because you aren't paying interest doesn't mean the credit card company isn't making money off of you. In fact if you pay your monthly bill promptly, they're probably making MORE off of you, because they're collecting 2 or 3% for a month or less, instead of the 1 to 2% per month that they can charge in interest. The only situation I know where you can get money from a credit card company for free is when they offer \"\"convenience checks\"\" or a balance transfer with no up-front fee. I get such an offer every now and then. I presume the credit card company does that for the same reason that stores give out free samples: they hope that if you try the card, you'll continue using it. To them, it's a marketing cost, no different than the cost of putting an ad on television.\""}
{"id": "321432", "text": "First read mhoran's answer, Then this -  If the company sold nothing but refrigerators, and had 40% market share, that's $4M/yr in sales. If they have a 30% profit margin, $1.2M in profit each year. A P/E of 10 would give a stock value totaling $12M, more than the market size. The numbers are related, of course, but one isn't the maximum of the other."}
{"id": "321619", "text": "This is assuming that you are now making some amount X per month which is more than the income you used to have as a student. (Otherwise, the question seems rather moot.) All figures should be net amounts (after taxes). First, figure out what the difference in your cost of living is. That is, housing, electricity, utilities, the basics that you need to have to have a place in which to live. I'm not considering food costs here unless they were subsidized while you were studying. Basically, you want to figure out how much you now have to spend extra per month for basic sustenance. Then, figure out how much more you are now making, compared to when you were a student. Subtract the sustenance extra from this to get your net pay increase. After that is when it gets trickier. Basically, you want to set aside or invest as much of the pay increase as possible, but you probably have other expenses now that you didn't before and which you cannot really do that much about. This mights be particular types of clothes, commute fares (car keepup, gas, bus pass, ...), or something entirely different. Anyway, decide on a savings goal, as a percentage of your net pay increase compared to when you were a student. This might be 5%, 10% or (if you are really ambitious) 50% or more. Whichever number you pick, make sure it's reasonable giving your living expenses, and keep in mind that anything is better than nothing. Find a financial institution that offers a high-interest savings account, preferably one with free withdrawals, and sign up for one. Each and every time you get paid, figure out how much to save based on the percentage you determined (if your regular case is that you get the same payment each time, you can simply set up an automated bank transfer), put that in the savings account and, for the moment, forget about that money. Try your best to live only on the remainder, but if you realize that you set aside too much, don't be afraid to tap into the savings account. Adjust your future deposits accordingly and try to find a good balance. At the end of each month, deposit whatever remains in your regular account into your savings account, and if that is a sizable amount of money, consider raising your savings goal a little. The ultimate goal should be that you don't need to tap into your savings except for truly exceptional situations, but still keep enough money outside of the savings account to cater to some of your wants. Yes, bank interest rates these days are often pretty dismal, and you will probably be lucky to find a savings account that (especially after taxes) will even keep up with inflation. But to start with, what you should be focusing on is not to make money in terms of real value appreciation, but simply figuring out how much money you really need to sustain a working life for yourself and then walking that walk. Eventually (this may take anywhere from a couple of months to a year or more), you should have settled pretty well on an amount that you feel comfortable with setting aside each month and just letting be. By that time, you should have a decently sized nest egg already, which will help you get over rough spots, and can start thinking about other forms of investing some of what you are setting aside. Whenever you get a net pay raise of any kind (gross pay raise, lower taxes, bonus, whichever), increase your savings goal by a portion of that raise. Maybe give yourself 60% of the raise and bank the remaining 40%. That way, you are (hopefully!) always increasing the amount of money that you are setting aside, while also reaping some benefits right away. One major upside of this approach is that, if you lose your job, not only will you have that nest egg, you will also be used to living on less. So you will have more money in the bank and less monthly expenses, which puts you in a significantly better position than if you had only one of those, let alone neither."}
{"id": "321637", "text": "\"If you need less than $125k for the downpayment, I recommend you convert your mutual fund shares to their ETF counterparts tax-free: Can I convert conventional Vanguard mutual fund shares to Vanguard   ETFs? Shareholders of Vanguard stock index funds that offer Vanguard ETFs   may convert their conventional shares to Vanguard ETFs of the same   fund. This conversion is generally tax-free, although some brokerage   firms may be unable to convert fractional shares, which could result   in a modest taxable gain. (Four of our bond ETFs\u2014Total Bond Market,   Short-Term Bond, Intermediate-Term Bond, and Long-Term Bond\u2014do not   allow the conversion of bond index fund shares to bond ETF shares of   the same fund; the other eight Vanguard bond ETFs allow conversions.) There is no fee for Vanguard Brokerage clients to convert conventional   shares to Vanguard ETFs of the same fund. Other brokerage providers   may charge a fee for this service. For more information, contact your   brokerage firm, or call 866-499-8473. Once you convert from conventional shares to Vanguard ETFs, you cannot   convert back to conventional shares. Also, conventional shares held   through a 401(k) account cannot be converted to Vanguard ETFs. https://personal.vanguard.com/us/content/Funds/FundsVIPERWhatAreVIPERSharesJSP.jsp Withdraw the money you need as a margin loan, buy the house, get a second mortgage of $125k, take the proceeds from the second mortgage and pay back the margin loan. Even if you have short term credit funds, it'd still be wiser to lever up the house completely as long as you're not overpaying or in a bubble area, considering your ample personal investments and the combined rate of return of the house and the funds exceeding the mortgage interest rate.  Also, mortgage interest is tax deductible while margin interest isn't, pushing the net return even higher. $125k Generally, I recommend this figure to you because the biggest S&P collapse since the recession took off about 50% from the top.  If you borrow $125k on margin, and the total value of the funds drop 50%, you shouldn't suffer margin calls. I assumed that you were more or less invested in the S&P on average (as most modern \"\"asset allocations\"\" basically recommend a back-door S&P as a mix of credit assets, managed futures, and small caps average the S&P). Second mortgage Yes, you will have two loans that you're paying interest on. You've traded having less invested in securities & a capital gains tax bill for more liabilities, interest payments, interest deductions, more invested in securities, a higher combined rate of return. If you have $500k set aside in securities and want $500k in real estate, this is more than safe for you as you will most likely have a combined rate of return of ~5% on $500k with interest on $500k at ~3.5%.  If you're in small cap value, you'll probably be grossing ~15% on $500k. You definitely need to secure your labor income with supplementary insurance.  Start a new question if you need a model for that. Secure real estate with securities A local bank would be more likely to do this than a major one, but if you secure the house with the investment account with special provisions like giving them copies of your monthly statements, etc, you might even get a lower rate on your mortgage considering how over-secured the loan would be. You might even be able to wrap it up without a down payment in one loan if it's still legal.  Mortgage regulations have changed a lot since the housing crash.\""}
{"id": "321860", "text": "Lol i work at a major prop shop and it is far from retail trading. Existing relations are important and if used well will result in an increased pnl.  Also, this is why i was referring to risk adjusted pnl to take into account different firms strategies.  Honestly your company might have a different way of doing things but at every prop shop and bank ive worked for my pnl was their primary focus.  Edit: i also wouldnt take such a condescending tone if i were you. You are far from the only person on reddit working in the industry."}
{"id": "322284", "text": "\"You have to calculate the total value of all shares and then ask yourself \"\"Would I invest that amount of money in this stock?\"\"  If the answer is yes, then only sell what you need to sell. Take the $3k loss against your income, if you have no other gains.   If you would not invest that amount of cash in that stock, then sell it all right now and carry forward the excess loss every year. Note at any point you have capital gains you can offset all of them with your loss carryover (not just $3k).\""}
{"id": "322778", "text": "&gt;What I was talking about is personal income tax   Got it, thanks for clarifying.  &gt;That would mean Amazon would need to offer 5k more pay for an equal job vs an employer in another state.  I think cost of living would also be a factor. So I don't know that a state with income tax would automatically not make the cut, as you asserted in your first comment, because the cost of living might be cheaper and even everything out.  &gt;This is just one factor a company this huge would consider when moving.   Agreed, there are numerous factors that Amazon will have to consider so I see no reason why a state that has an income tax should not submit an application."}
{"id": "322806", "text": "\"Diversification is the only real free lunch in finance (reduction in risk without any reduction in expected returns), so clearly every good answer to your question will be \"\"yes.\"\"  Diversification is good.\"\"  Let's talk about many details your question solicits. Many funds are already pretty diversified.  If you buy a mutual fund, you are generally already getting a large portion of the gains from diversification.  There is a very large difference between the unnecessary risk in your portfolio if you only hold a couple of stocks and if you hold a mutual fund.  Should you be diversified across mutual funds as well?  It depends on what your funds are.  Many funds, such as target-date funds, are intended to be your sole investment.  If you have funds covering every major asset class, then there may not be any additional benefit to buying other funds. You probably could not have picked your \"\"favorite fund\"\" early on.  As humans, we have cognitive biases that make us think we knew things early on that we did not.  I'm sure at some point at the very beginning you had a positive feeling toward that fund.  Today you regret not acting on it and putting all your money there.  But the number of such feelings is very large and if you acted on all those, you would do a lot of crazy and harmful things.  You didn't know early on which fund would do well.  You could just as well have had a good feeling about a fund that subsequently did much worse than your diversified portfolio did. The advice you have had about your portfolio probably isn't based on sound finance theory.  You say you have always kept your investments in line with your age.  This implies that you believe the guidelines given you by your broker or financial advisor are based in finance theory.  Generally speaking, they are not.  They are rules of thumb that seemed good to someone but are not rigorously proven either in theory or empirics.  For example the notion that you should slowly shift your investments from speculative to conservative as you age is not based on sound finance theory.  It just seems good to the people who give advice on such things.  Nothing particularly wrong with it, I guess, but it's not remotely on par with the general concept of being well-diversified.  The latter is extremely well established and verified, both in theory and in practice.  Don't confuse the concept of diversification with the specific advice you have received from your advisor. A fund averaging very good returns is not an anomaly--at least going forward it will not be.  There are many thousand funds and a large distribution in their historical performance.  Just by random chance, some funds will have a truly outstanding track record.  Perhaps the manager really was skilled.  However, very careful empirical testing has shown the following: (1) You, me, and people whose profession it is to select outperforming mutual funds are unable to reliably detect which ones will outperform, except in hindsight  (2) A fund that has outperformed, even over a long horizon, is not more likely to outperform in the future. No one is stopping you from putting all your money in that fund. Depending on its investment objective, you may even have decent diversification if you do so.  However, please be aware that if you move your money based on historical outperformance, you will be acting on the same cognitive bias that makes gamblers believe they are on a \"\"hot streak\"\" and \"\"can't lose.\"\"  They can, and so can you. ======== Edit to answer a more specific line of questions =========== One of your questions is whether it makes sense to buy a number of mutual funds as part of your diversification strategy.  This is a slightly more subtle question and I will indicate where there is uncertainty in my answer.   Diversifying across asset classes.  Most of the gains from diversification are available in a single fund.  There is a lot of idiosyncratic risk in one or two stocks and much less in a collection of hundreds of stocks, which is what any mutual fund will hold.  Still,you will probably want at least a couple of funds in your portfolio.  I will list them from most important to least and I will assume the bulk of your portfolio is in a total US equity fund (or S&P500-style fund) so that you are almost completely diversified already. Risky Bonds.  These are corporate, municipal, sovereign debt, and long-term treasury debt funds. There is almost certainly a good deal to be gained by having a portion of your portfolio in bonds, and normally a total market fund will not include bond exposure.  Bonds fund returns are closely related to interest rate and inflation changes.  They are also exposed to some market risk but it's more efficient to get that from equity.  The bond market is very large, so if you did market weights you would have more in bonds than in equity.  Normally people do not do this, though.  Instead you can get the exposure to interest rates by holding a lesser amount in longer-term bonds, rather than more in shorter-term bonds.  I don't believe in shifting your weights toward nor away from this type of bond (as opposed to equity) as you age so if you are getting that advice, know that it is not well-founded in theory.  Whatever your relative weight in risky bonds when you are young is should also be your weight when you are older. International. There are probably some gains from having some exposure to international markets, although these have decreased over time as economies have become more integrated.  If we followed market weights, you would actually put half your equity weight in an international fund.  Because international funds are taxed differently (gains are always taxed at the short-term capital gains rate) and because they have higher management fees, most people make only a small investment to international funds, if any at all. Emerging markets  International funds often ignore emerging markets in order to maintain liquidity and low fees.  You can get some exposure to these markets through emerging markets funds.  However, the value of public equity in emerging markets is small when compared with that of developed markets, so according to finance theory, your investment in them should be small as well.  That's a theoretical, not an empirical result. Emerging market funds charge high fees as well, so this one is kind of up to your taste.  I can't say whether it will work out in the future. Real estate.  You may want to get exposure to real estate by buying a real-estate fund (REIT).  Though, if you own a house you are already exposed to the real estate market, perhaps more than you want to be.  REITs often invest in commercial real estate, which is a little different from the residential market. Small Cap.  Although total market funds invest in all capitalization levels, the market is so skewed toward large firms that many total market funds don't have any significant small cap exposure.  It's common for individuals to hold a small cap fund to compensate for this, but it's not actually required by investment theory.  In principle, the most diversified portfolio should be market-cap weighted, so small cap should have negligible weight in your portfolio.  Many people hold small cap because historically it has outperformed large cap firms of equal risk, but this trend is uncertain.  Many researchers feel that the small cap \"\"premium\"\" may have been a short-term artifact in the data.  Given these facts and the fact that small-cap funds charge higher fees, it may make sense to pass on this asset class.  Depends on your opinion and beliefs. Value (or Growth) Funds.  Half the market can be classed as \"\"value\"\", while the other half is \"\"growth.\"\"  Your total market fund should have equal representation in both so there is no diversification reason to buy a special value or growth fund.  Historically, value funds have outperformed over long horizons and many researchers think this will continue, but it's not exactly mandated by the theory.  If you choose to skew your portfolio by buying one of these, it should be a value fund. Sector funds.  There is, in general, no diversification reason to buy funds that invest in a particular sector.  If you are trying to hedge your income (like trying to avoid investing in the tech sector because you work in that sector) or your costs (buying energy because you buy use a disproportionate amount of energy) I could imagine you buying one of these funds. Risk-free bonds.  Funds specializing in short-term treasuries or short-term high-quality bonds of other types are basically a substitute for a savings account, CD, money market fund, or other cash equivalent.  Use as appropriate but there is little diversification here per se. In short, there is some value in diversifying across asset classes, and it is open to opinion how much you should do.  Less well-justified is diversifying across managers within the same asset class.  There's very little if any advantage to doing that.\""}
{"id": "323015", "text": "\"To put a positive spin on the whole thing, maybe it's a small family shop, and having the check made out to \"\"cash\"\" means that your barber can hand it to someone else without the need to countersign. Or maybe his last name is \"\"Cash\"\" - there was a pretty famous singer who fit that description. Either way, it's not your place to nanny his finances.\""}
{"id": "323228", "text": "In general, the higher the return (such as interest), the higher the risk. If there were a high-return no-risk investment, enough people would buy it to drive the price up and make it a low-return no-risk investment. Interest rates are low now, but so is inflation. They generally go up and down together. So, as a low risk (almost no-risk) investment, the savings account is not at all useless. There are relatively safe investments that will get a better return, but they will have a little more risk. One common way to spread the risk is to diversify. For example, put some of your money in a savings account, some in a bond mutual fund, and some in a stock index fund. A stock index fund such as SPY has the benefit of very low overhead, in addition to spreading the risk among 500 large companies. Mutual funds with a purchase or sale fee, or with a higher management fee do NOT perform any better, on average, and should generally be avoided. If you put a little money in different places regularly, you'll be fairly safe and are likely get a better return. (If you trade back and forth frequently, trying to outguess the market, you're likely to be worse off than the savings account.)"}
{"id": "323310", "text": "&gt; Try it! Deposit a check or buy with a credit card and scribble something unrelated as a signature! The deposit or credit card transaction will go through.  About that you are correct, however during any sort of forensic investigation they are going to ask to see a signature receipt if one is available.  &gt; For decades, retailers never compared signatures on credit cards to the person's signature.  No that isn't true. Retailers are required by many card processing vendors to send in a signed receipt. This is changing, because employees are lazy, and retailers don't care about their customers at all so they don't bother enforcing any standards on their minimum wage register jockeys. However many of them are still required to send signed receipts in. When I was younger I worked at a store that would not get paid by the bank if it did not send in a signed receipt for every transaction.  Go on, try walking away without signing your credit card receipt at stores where they present it for signature, and see what happens.  &gt; I know what I am talking about because I deal with credit cards a lot, professionally, in IT.  You and everyone else. Big deal. Different credit card processors have different requirements for their customers (merchants).  &gt; The credit card companies don't really care.  I think the real lesson here is **nobody cares**. Not the banks, not the credit card companies, and not the merchants. The only thing any of them give a fuck about is keeping the money flowing, especially into their own wallets, and if that means customers get ripped off sometimes because of inadequate protections, so what.  My only point is, if I have one at all, **merchants _should_ care** about protecting the customer, and **customers _should_ care** about what protections are in place to prevent fraud. **PIN numbers are fine** as an authentication method, **but they should be completely shielded from view** by people standing in line or cameras overhead."}
{"id": "323731", "text": "If you are planning this as a tax avoidance scheme, well it is not. The gains will be taxable in your hands and not in the Banks hands. Banks simply don't cash out the stock at the same price, there will be quite a bit of both Lawyers and others ... so in the end you will end up paying more. The link indicates that one would pay back the loan via one's own earnings. So if you have a stock worth USD 100, you can pledge this to a Bank and get a max loan of USD 50 [there are regulations that govern the max you can get against 100]. You want to buy something worth USD 50. Option1: Sell half the stock, get USD 50, pay the captial gains tax on USD 50. Option2: Pledge the USD 100 stock to bank, get a loan of USD 50. As you have not sold anything, there is no tax. Over a period pay the USD 50 loan via your own earnings. A high valued customer may be able to get away with a very low rate of intrest and very long repayment period.   The tax implication to your legal hier would be from the time the stock come to his/her hands to the time she sold. So if the price increase to 150 by the time Mark dies, and its sold at 160 later, the gain is only of USD 10. So rather than paying 30% or whatever the applicable tax rate, it would be wise to pay an interest of few percentages."}
{"id": "323768", "text": "\"(See also the question How many stocks I can exercise per stock warrant? and my comments there). Clearly, at the prices you quote, it does not seem sensible to exercise your warrants at the moment, since you can still by \"\"units\"\" (1 stock + 1/3 warrant) and bare stock at below the $11.50 it would cost you to exercise your warrant.  So when would exercising a warrant become \"\"a sensible thing to do\"\"? Obviously, if the price of the bare stock (which you say is currently $10.12) were to sufficiently exceed $11.50, then it would clearly be worth exercising a warrant and immediately selling the stock you receive (\"\"sufficiently exceed\"\" to account for any dealing costs in selling the newly-acquired stock). However, looking more closely, $11.50 isn't the correct \"\"cut-off\"\" price. Consider three of the units you bought at $10.26 each. For $30.78 you received three shares of stock and one warrant. For an additional $11.50 ($42.28 in total) you can have a total of four shares of stock (at the equivalent of $10.57 each). So, if the price of the bare stock rises above $10.57, then it could become sensible to exercise one warrant and sell four shares of stock (again allowing a margin for the cost of selling the stock). The trading price of the original unit (1 stock + 1/3 warrant) shouldn't (I believe) directly affect your decision to exercise warrants, although it would be a factor in deciding whether to resell the units you've already got. As you say, if they are now trading at $10.72, then having bought them at $10.26 you would make a profit if sold. Curiously, unless I'm missing something, or the figures you quote are incorrect, the current price of the \"\"unit\"\" (1 stock + 1/3 warrant; $10.72) seems overpriced compared to the price of the bare stock ($10.12). Reversing the above calculation, if bare stock is trading at $10.12, then four shares would cost $40.48. Deducting the $11.50 cost-of-exercising, this would value three \"\"combined units\"\" at $28.98, or $9.66 each, which is considerably below the market price you quote. One reason the \"\"unit\"\" (1 stock + 1/3 warrant) is trading at $10.72 instead of $9.66 could be that the market believes the price of the bare share (currently $10.12) will eventually move towards or above $11.50. If that happens, the option of exercising warrants at $11.50 becomes more and more attractive. The premium presumably reflects this potential future benefit. Finally, \"\"Surely I am misunderstand the stock IPO's intent.\"\": presumably, the main intent of Social Capital was to raise as much money as possible through this IPO to fund their future activities. The \"\"positive view\"\" is that they expect this future activity to be profitable, and therefore the price of ordinary stock to go up (at least as far as, ideally way beyond) the $11.50 exercise price, and the offering of warrants will be seen as a \"\"thank you\"\" to those investors who took the risk of taking part in the IPO. A completely cynical view would be that they don't really care what happens to the stock price, but that \"\"offering free stuff\"\" (or what looks like \"\"free stuff\"\") will simply attract more \"\"punters\"\" to the IPO. In reality, the truth is probably somewhere between those two extremes.\""}
{"id": "324012", "text": "Nowhere. To back up a bit, mutual funds are the stock market (and the bond market). That is, when you invest in a mutual fund, your money is ultimately buying stocks on the open market. Some of it might be buying bonds. The exact mix of stocks and bonds depends on the mutual fund. But a mutual fund is just a basket of stocks and/or bonds (and/or other, more exotic investments). At 25, you probably should just be investing your Roth IRA in index stock mutual funds and index bond mutual funds. You probably shouldn't even be doing peer-to-peer lending (unless you're willing to think of any losses as the cost of a hobby); the higher interest rate you're getting is a reflection of the risk that your borrowers will default. I'm not even sure if peer-to-peer lending is allowed in Roth IRA's.  Investing in just stocks, bonds, and cast is boring, but these are easy investments to understand. The harder the investment is to understand, the easier it is for it to be a scam (or just a bad investment). There's not necessarily anything wrong with boring."}
{"id": "324066", "text": "\"You could end up with nothing, yes.  I imagine those that worked at Enron years ago if their 401(k) was all in company stock would have ended up with nothing to give an example here.  However, more likely is for you to end up with less than you thought as you see other choices as being better that with the benefit of hindsight you wish you had made different choices. The strategies will vary as some people will want something similar to a \"\"set it and forget it\"\" kind of investment and there may be fund choices where a fund has a targeted retirement date some years out into the future.  These can be useful for people that don't want to do a lot of research and spend time deciding amongst various choices.  Other people may prefer something a bit more active.  In this case, you have to determine how much work do you want to do, do you want to review fund reviews on places like Morningstar, and do periodic reviews of your investments, etc.  What works best for you is for you to resolve for yourself. As for risks, here are a few possible categories: Time - How many hours a week do you want to spend on this?  How much time learning this do you want to do in the beginning?  While this does apply to everyone, you have to figure out for yourself how much of a cost do you want to take here. Volatility - Some investments may fluctuate in value and this can cause issues for some people as it may change more than they would like.  For example, if you invest rather aggressively, there may be times where you could have a -50% return in a year and that isn't really acceptable to some people. Inflation - Similarly to those investments that vary wildly there is also the risk that with time, prices generally rise and thus there is something to be said for the purchasing power of your investment.  If you want to consider this in more detail consider what $1,000,000 would have bought 30 years ago compared to now. Currency risk - Some investments may be in other currencies and thus there is a risk of how different denominations may impact a return. Fees - How much do your fund's charge in the form of annual expense ratio?  Are you aware of the charges being taken to manage your money here?\""}
{"id": "324070", "text": "I'm going to go out on a limb and say the issue isn't so much construction productivity as it is financial security. It's not uncommon for large projects to start off the belief that the money will show up by the time the project is over, look at the US, major road projects are started off the assumption that tax receipts will pay for the roads if the receipts don't then everything gets back logged which just costs even more money as nothing is done."}
{"id": "324564", "text": "I have held an in the money long position on an option into expiration, on etrade, and nothing happened.   (Scalping expiring options - high risk) The option expired a penny or two ITM, and was not worth exercising, nor did I have the purchasing power to exercise it. (AAPL) From etrade's website: Here are a few things to keep in mind about exercises and assignments: Equity options $0.01 or more in the money will be automatically   exercised for you unless you instruct us not to exercise them. For   example, a September $25 call will be automatically exercised if the   underlying security's closing price is $25.01 or higher at expiration.   If the closing price is below $25.01, you would need to call an   E*TRADE Securities broker at 1-800-ETRADE-1 with specific instructions   for exercising the option. You would also need to call an E*TRADE   Securities broker if the closing price is higher than $25.01 at   expiration and you do not wish to exercise the call option. Index   options $0.01 or more in the money will be automatically exercised for   you unless you instruct us not to exercise them. Options that are out   of the money will expire worthless. You may request to exercise   American style options anytime prior to expiration. A request not to   exercise options may be made only on the last trading day prior to   expiration. If you'd like to exercise options or submit   do-not-exercise instructions, call an E*TRADE Securities broker at   1-800-ETRADE-1. You won't be charged our normal fee for   broker-assisted trades, but the regular options commission will apply.   Requests are processed on a best-efforts basis.  When equity options are exercised or assigned, you'll receive a Smart   Alert message letting you know. You can also check View Orders to see   which stock you bought or sold, the number of shares, and the strike   price.  Notes: If you do not have sufficient purchasing power in your account   to accept the assignment or exercise, your expiring options positions   may be closed, without notification, on the last trading day for the   specific options series. Additionally, if your expiring position is   not closed and you do not have sufficient purchasing power, E*TRADE   Securities may submit do-not-exercise instructions without   notification. Find out more about options expiration dates."}
{"id": "324661", "text": "\"Making these difficult portfolio decisions for you is the point of Target-Date Retirement Funds.  You pick a date at which you're going to start needing to withdraw the money, and the company managing the fund slowly turns down the aggressiveness of the fund as the target date approaches.  Typically you would pick the target date to be around, say, your 65th birthday.  Many mutual fund companies offer a variety of funds to suit your needs. Your desire to never \"\"have to recover\"\" indicates that you have not yet done quite enough reading on the subject of investing.  (Or possibly that your sources have been misleading you.)  A basic understanding of investing includes the knowledge that markets go up and down, and that no portfolio will always go up.  Some \"\"recovery\"\" will always be necessary; having a less aggressive portfolio will never shield you completely from losing money, it just makes loss less likely. The important thing is to only invest money that you can afford to lose in the short-term (with the understanding that you'll make it back in the long term).  Money that you'll need in the short-term should be kept in the absolute safest investment vehicles, such as a savings account, a money market account, short-term certificates of deposit, or short-term US government bonds.\""}
{"id": "324874", "text": "Pre-qualification is only a step above what you can do with a rate/payment calculator.  They don't check your credit history and credit score; they don't ask for verification of your income; or verify that you have reported your debts correctly. They also don't guarantee the interest rate. But if you answer truthfully, and completely, and nothing else changes you have an idea of how much you can afford factoring in the down payment, and estimates of other fees, taxes and insurance. You can get pre-quaified by multiple lenders; then base your decision on rates and fees.  You want to get pre-approved. They do everything to approve you. You can even lock in a rate. You want to finalize on one lender at that point because you will incur some fees getting to that point. Then knowing the maximum amount you can borrow including all the payments, taxes, insurance and fees; you can make an offer on a house. Once the contract is accepted you have a few days to get the appraisal and the final approval documents from the lender. They will only loan you the minimum of what you are pre-approved for and the appraisal minus down-payment. Also don't go with the lender recommended by the real estate agent or builder; they are probably getting a kick-back based on the amount of business they funnel to that company."}
{"id": "324878", "text": "&gt;However, you would have to pay income taxes on that wage and could end up with less money overall to spend on healthcare.   That's not truth tho. You can open IRA and 401k and now you have more money to put into them that won't get tax and it help you save for the retirement."}
{"id": "324914", "text": "\"Without knowing anything else about you, I'd say I need more information. If all of your investments are in stocks, then that's not really diversified, regardless of how many stocks you own.  There are other things to invest in besides stocks (and bonds, for that matter). What countries?  \"\"International\"\" is pretty broad, and some countries are better bets than others at the moment. If you're old, I'd say very little of your money should be in stocks anyway. I'd also seek financial advice that is tailored to your goals, sophistication, etc.\""}
{"id": "324921", "text": "Tax Deducted at source is applicable to Employee / Employer [contract employee] relations ... it was also made applicable for cases where an Indian company pays for software products [like MS Word etc] as the product is not sold, but is licensed and is treated as Royalty [unlike sale of a consumer product, that you have, say car] ... Hence it depends on how your contract is worded with your India clients, best is have it as a service agreement. Although services are also taxed, however your contract should clearly specify that any tax in India would be borne by your Indian Client ... Cross Country taxation is an advanced area, you will not find good advice free :)"}
{"id": "324946", "text": "\"Is it possible to profit from some of this money in the short term before I need to access it? Sure, it's possible.  But if the stock market decides to \"\"correct\"\" (or even crashes), you'll be in a world of hurt. Thus, since it's so important that you not lose this money, just stick it in an online bank earning 1.2%, and withdraw \"\"enough\"\" twice a month. EDIT: by \"\"withdraw\"\", I mean to transfer to your checking account.\""}
{"id": "324968", "text": "\"The actual increase in the cost of living for one month over the previous month cannot be calculated from the annualized increase in cost over the entire previous year. Consider the hypothetical case of a very stable economy, where prices stay constant for decades.  Nevertheless, the authorities issue monthly statements, reporting that the change in the cost of living, for the last month, year over year, is 0.00%.  Then they go back to sleep for another month. Then, something happens, say in August, 2001.  It causes a permanent large increase in the cost of many parts of the cost of living components. So, in September, the authorities announce that the cost of living for the end of August, 2001, compared to August a year ago, was up 10%. Great consternation results.  Politicians pontificate, unions agitate on behalf of their members, etc... The economy returns to its customary behavior, except for that one-time permanent increase from August, 2001.  So for the next eleven months, each month, the authorities compare the previous months prices to the prices from exactly a year ago, and announce that inflation, year over year, is still 10%.   Finally, we reach September, 2002.  The authorities look at prices for the end of August, 2002, and compare them to the prices from the end of August, 2001 (post \"\"event\"\").  Wonder of wonders, the inflation rate is back to 0.00%!!  Absolutely nothing happened in August 2002, yet the rate of inflation dropped from 10% to 0%.\""}
{"id": "325332", "text": "Credit card companies charge merchants for accepting their cards.  They'll take their cut and give you some of the fee back as a reward.   So, in reality merchants have increased their prices to accommodate for the credit card processing fees. The credit card takes a bit of their fee and gives you back some of the money you wouldn't have spent if there were no fees for using a credit card."}
{"id": "325426", "text": "\"Previously (prior to Capital One acquisition -- it's kind of like K-Mart buying Sears) Sharebuilder offered 12 automatic (i.e. pre-scheduled) stock purchases per month if you subscribed to their $12/mo \"\"Advantage\"\" plan. So, 12 trades for $1 a trade. Great deal. Except then they flattened their pricing to everyone's acclaim (that is, everyone except for the non-millionaire casual investors) and jacked it up to $4 per automatic investment. As far as I know, Sharebuilder's 12 no-fee investments for $12/mo was rather unique in the online trading world -- and now it's very sadly extinct. They do have no-fee mutual fund investing, however, for what it's worth.\""}
{"id": "325818", "text": "There are a number of ways this can result. In a broad ETF, such as SPY, the S&P 500 spider, the S&P index will have 500 stocks no matter what, so a buyout would simply result in a re-shuffling of the index makeup. No buyout will happen so quickly that there's no time to choose the next stock to join the index. In your case, if the fund manager (per the terms of the prospectus) wishes to simply reallocate the index to remove the taken-over stock that's probably how he handle it.  Unless of course, the prospectus dictates otherwise. In which case, a cash dividend is a possible alternative."}
{"id": "326019", "text": "I'm surprised nobody else has suggested this yet: before you start investing in stocks or bonds, buy a house. Not just any house, but the house you want to live in 20 years from now, in a place where you want to live 20 years from now - but you also have to be savvy about which part of the country or world you buy in. I'm also assuming that you are in the USA, although my suggestion tends to apply equally anywhere in the world. Why? Simple: as long as you own a house, you won't ever have to pay rent (you do have to pay taxes and maintenance, of course). You have a guaranteed return on investment, and the best part is: because it's not money you earn but money you don't have to spend, it's tax free. Even if the house loses value over time, you still come out ahead. And if you live abroad temporarily, you can rent out the house and add the rent to your savings (although that does make various things more complicated). You only asked for options, so that is mine. I'll add some caveats. OK, now here are the caveats:"}
{"id": "326020", "text": "\"If you look at the biotech breakdown, you'll find a lot of NAs when it comes to P/E since there are many young biotech companies that have yet to make a profit.  Thus, there may be something to be said for how is the entire industry stat computed. Biotechnology can include pharmaceutical companies that can have big profits due to patents on drugs. As an example, look at Shire PLC which has a P/E of 1243 which is pretty high with a Market Capitalization of over a billion dollars, so this isn't a small company.  I wonder what dot-com companies would have looked like in 1998/1999 that could well be similar as some industries will have bubbles you do realize, right? The reason for pointing out the Market Capitalization is that this a way to measure the size of a company, as this is merely the sum of all the stock of the company.  There could be small companies that have low market capitalizations that could have high P/Es as they are relatively young and could be believed to have enough hype that there is a great deal of confidence in the stock.  For example, Amazon.com was public for years before turning a profit.  In being without profits, there is no P/E and thus it is worth understanding the limitations of a P/E as the computation just takes the previous year's earnings for a company divided by the current stock price.  If the expected growth rate is high enough this can be a way to justify a high P/E for a stock.  The question you asked about an industry having this is the derivation from a set of stocks.  If most of the stocks are high enough, then whatever mean or median one wants to use as the \"\"industry average\"\" will come from that.\""}
{"id": "326109", "text": "This is a junk article with a junk assumption. We have higher levels of debts today, but we have low rates of defaults. We don't have NINJA loans coming to an end in 6 months where the default rate suddenly doubles and triples. We don't have massive amounts of swaps against mortgages or even other forms of private debt skyrocketing. Moody's and S&amp;P review process was totally revamped.  If this article could get beyond basic theory and talk about specifics, it might be able to make a point, but instead it lost me after 2 paragraphs."}
{"id": "326305", "text": "My daughter is two, and she has a piggy bank that regularly dines on my pocket change.  When that bank is worth $100 or so I will make it a regular high yield savings account.  Then I will either setup a regular $10/month transfer into it, or something depending on what we can afford. My plan is then to offer my kid an allowance when she can understand the concept of money.  My clever idea is I will offer her a savings plan with the Bank of Daddy.  If she lets me keep her allowance for the week, I will give her double the amount plus a percentage the next week.  If she does it she will soon see the magic of saving money and how banks pay your for the privilege. I don't know when I will give her access to the savings account with actual cash.  I will show it to her, and review it with her so she can track her money, but I need to know that she has some restraint before I open the gates to her."}
{"id": "326335", "text": "The initial and overnight margin requirements are set by the exchanges (who calculate them using the Standard Portfolio of Analysis of Risk, or 'SPAN' system), and positions are market to market according to these at the end of the trading session. To find these margin requirements you will need to consult the website of the exchange on which the contract you are trading is issued (i.e. if you're trading on the London Metal Exchange it's no good looking at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange's margin requirements as a previous answer suggests!). However, for positions entered and exited within the same day, the daytrade margin rate will apply. This is set by your broker rather than the exchange, and can be as little as 10% of the exchange requirement. You can find a useful comparison of different margin types and requirements in the article I have published here: Understanding Margin for Futures Trading."}
{"id": "326843", "text": "\"Profit sharing adds complexity. I'd pitch it as a percentage of revenue to him. \"\"Profit\"\" is a term than can be abused. Sales are sales.   Somewhat related, if you're giving him 30% of all profit on all deals, you're basically selling 30% of your business for $80K. No surprise he's interested.   Think more about how you'll finance working capital. You need money to buy the pool supplies, pay for labor, etc. Ideally, you should float as little of this money as you can.   An incentive structure that rewards the salespeople should also be taken into consideration. Build that in somewhere. You want his reps to want to pitch your pools. They need some kind of incentive.   These are just thoughts off the top of my head. I don't completely understand the details, but maybe it'll help.\""}
{"id": "326872", "text": "First, put the money someplace that is safe - a saving account is fine - while you figure out what you want to do with it. You will obviously want to think about it what to do for a while. A financial advisor could help out, but not that many of them make their money on commission and therefore don't act in your best interest. The ones where you pay them directly are more aligned with your interests. As for how to invest, you have a lot of different options depending on your timeline and your risk tolerance."}
{"id": "327080", "text": "The T+3 settlement date only affects cash accounts.  In a cash account, you need to wait until the T+3 settlement date for your funds to be available to make your next trade.  But if you convert your cash account into a margin account, then you do not need to wait until the T+3 settlement date for your next trade - your broker will allow you to make another trade immediately."}
{"id": "327094", "text": "I wasn't talking about college or university, which are severely overpriced, I was talking about tech schools or trade schools. I live in a city that has a lot of manufacturing jobs open but not enough people educated in the field to actually get those jobs. So there was a breakdown somewhere along the way in terms of the preparation for good paying manufacturing jobs. This is what we need to address, I think you thought I was talking about something else."}
{"id": "327127", "text": "\"Without any highly credible anticipation of a company being a target of a pending takeover, its common stock will normally trade at what can be considered non-control or \"\"passive market\"\" prices, i.e. prices that passive securities investors pay or receive for each share of stock. When there is talk or suggestion of a publicly traded company's being an acquisition target, it begins to trade at \"\"control market\"\" prices, i.e. prices that an investor or group of them is expected to pay in order to control the company.  In most cases control requires a would-be control shareholder to own half a company's total votes (not necessarily stock) plus one additional vote and to pay a greater price than passive market prices to non-control investors (and sometimes to other control investors). The difference between these two market prices is termed a \"\"control premium.\"\"  The appropriateness and value of this premium has been upheld in case law, with some conflicting opinions, in Delaware Chancery Court (see the reference below; LinkedIn Corp. is incorporated in the state), most other US states' courts and those of many countries with active stock markets. The amount of premium is largely determined by investment bankers who, in addition to applying other valuation approaches, review most recently available similar transactions for premiums paid and advise (formally in an \"\"opinion letter\"\") their clients what range of prices to pay or accept. In addition to increasing the likelihood of being outbid by a third-party, failure to pay an adequate premium is often grounds for class action lawsuits that may take years to resolve with great uncertainty for most parties involved. For a recent example and more details see this media opinion and overview about Dell Inc. being taken private in 2013, the lawsuits that transaction prompted and the court's ruling in 2016 in favor of passive shareholder plaintiffs.  Though it has more to do with determining fair valuation than specifically premiums, the case illustrates instruments and means used by some courts to protect non-control, passive shareholders. ========== REFERENCE As a reference, in a 2005 note written by a major US-based international corporate law firm, it noted with respect to Delaware courts, which adjudicate most major shareholder conflicts as the state has a disproportionate share of large companies in its domicile, that control premiums may not necessarily be paid to minority shareholders if the acquirer gains control of a company that continues to have minority shareholders, i.e. not a full acquisition: Delaware case law is clear that the value of a dissenting [target company's]   stockholder\u2019s shares is not to be reduced to impose a minority   discount reflecting the lack of the stockholders\u2019 control over the   corporation. Indeed, this appears to be the rationale for valuing the   target corporation as a whole and allocating a proportionate share of   that value to the shares of [a] dissenting stockholder [exercising his appraisal rights in seeking to challenge the value the target company's board of directors placed on his shares]. At the same   time, Delaware courts have suggested, without explanation, that the   value of the corporation as a whole, and as a going concern, should   not include a control premium of the type that might be realized in a   sale of the corporation.\""}
{"id": "327263", "text": "First of all, Dilip's answer explains well how the business deductions generally work. For most (big) expenses you depreciate it. However, in some cases you need to capitalize it, which is another accounting method. When you capitalize your expense, it becomes part of the basis of the product you're creating. Since you're an engineer, this might be relevant for you. Talk to your tax adviser. How exactly you deduct/depreciate/capitalize things, and what expense goes which way depends greatly on the laws and jurisdictions. Even in the US, different states have different laws, and the IRS and State laws don't have to conform (unfortunately). For example, the limitations on Sec. 179 deduction in 2010-2011 were 20 times higher on Federal level than in the State of California. This could have lead to cases where you fully deducted your expense on your Federal tax return, but need to continue and depreciate it on your State return (or vice versa). Good tax adviser is crucial to avoid or manage these cases."}
{"id": "327366", "text": "There is one massive catch in this which I found out when I went to Nationwide to ask for a loan. I've got a credit card which they kept increasing my credit limit, it's now at something ridiculous - nearly \u00a310,000 but they keep increasing it. I never use that card, when I went to Nationwide though they said they couldn't give me a loan because I had \u00a310,000 credit already and if I reduced this credit this would affect my credit rating and they could potentially give me a loan. I then realised what MBNA had craftily done.  I have two cards with this bank, one with really low interest and the other with really high interest (and a high credit limit) - even though the other card has a zero balance loan companies still see it as money I could potentially go and spend, it doesn't matter to them that I've not spent any money on that card in about 12 months, to them it's the fact that they could give me a loan and then I could go and spend another \u00a310,000 on that card (as you can see extremely risky).   Of course this means that what MBNA are craftily doing is giving me such a high credit, knowing full well that I'm not going to use it, but it also prevents their competitors from offering me a loan, even at a lower rate, because I've already got too much credit available. So yes there is a catch to giving you a high credit limit on your cards and it's to prevent you from either leaving that bank or getting a lower interest rate loan out to clear the debt."}
{"id": "327432", "text": "\"You are correct that it could refer to any of the types of interest rates that you've mentioned. In general, though, phrases such as \"\"rising interest rates\"\" and \"\"falling interest rates\"\" refer to the Federal Funds Rate or LIBOR. These are the interest rates at which banks in the U.S. and U.K., respectively, are lending money to each other.\""}
{"id": "328066", "text": "Scalability is the key determinate - if it doesn't scale easily then chances are the big bucks will elude you. To the extent that unless your entrepreneurial idea doesn't have scalability built into the business model, you should probably think again.  Straight contracting/manpower sub is always limited and problematic - whereas encapsulating the IP and developing the *system* of applying that IS scalable."}
{"id": "328073", "text": "You don't have to wait.  If you sell your shares now, your gain can be considered a capital gain for income tax purposes. Unlike in the United States, Canada does not distinguish between short-term vs. long-term gains where you'd pay different rates on each type of gain.  Whether you buy and sell a stock within minutes or buy and sell over years, any gain you make on a stock can generally be considered a capital gain. I said generally because there is an exception:  If you are deemed by CRA to be trading professionally -- that is, if you make a living buying and selling stocks frequently -- then you could be considered doing day trading as a business and have your gains instead taxed as regular income (but you'd also be able to claim additional deductions.)  Anyway, as long as your primary source of income isn't from trading, this isn't likely to be a problem. Here are some good articles on these subjects:"}
{"id": "328134", "text": "You are an internship. I worked at Citibank in highschool as a junior financial advisor and I sat for 8 hours on Saturday cold-calling clients with +$150,000 sitting in the bank.   I did this for 5 months until I got fed up with it, but the point is your an intern, don't expect the stars."}
{"id": "328231", "text": "When you decided to invest to China. The big problem is corruption. You have to pay so much for the government before opening your company such as: documents for opening, certificate for your standard products, etc., and a lots of undertable expense that you can not add them into your income statement. China has only the advantage of population. Products manufactured from China are not seemed high-quality. I'm glad that U.S companies return their countries. It's a good decision."}
{"id": "328295", "text": "\"I'm going to subtly and cheekily change the obvious advice. There are three ways to deal with negative cashflow, not two: You're currently studying for a degree. You don't say what country you're in or how your studies are funded, but most people in the US, UK, and a fair number of other countries, run up debts while studying for a degree. They do this because a degree is valuable to them. They can't avoid it because the tuition alone costs more than most students can generate in income, never mind their living expenses. So by all means look for savings, (1). Clearly strangers on the internet can't just think up ways for you to spend less money without knowing anything about what you do spend money on. But you can at least list your expenditures for yourself, and see what's necessary. Consider also how much fun you want your studies to be: 4 years in a cold house to avoid paying for heating, and never going out with friends to avoid spending on unnecessary stuff is all very well. But with hindsight you'll regret torturing yourself if you're ever well-off enough to pay back whatever you would have borrowed to use for heating and fun. Only do (2) if it doesn't affect your studies or if the money you're paid justifies delaying the valuable asset you seek to acquire (a degree, leading perhaps to a better job but at least to the capacity to do a full-time job rather than fitting work around your studies). There are some jobs that are really good fits for students (reasonably low hours that don't clash with classes) and some jobs that are terrible. If these fail, resort to (3). I don't mean dishonest book-keeping, I mean accept that you are going to borrow money in order to pay for something of value that you can account as an asset. Work out now what you'll need to borrow and how you think you can pay it back, make sure the sum is worth it, budget for that, stick to your budget. You'll still have negative cashflow, nothing changes there, but your capital account looks fine. Personally I wouldn't actually put a monetary value on the degree, I'm not that bothered about the accounts and it's really difficult to be accurate about it. You can just consider it, \"\"more than I expect to borrow\"\" and be done with it. Studying costs money. Once you've graduated, you probably aren't going to be back here saying, \"\"I want to buy a house but I have no capital and I don't want to go into debt\"\". Are you? ;-) Although if you are, the answer happens to be \"\"Islamic mortgage\"\"! I don't know whether Islamic banks have an equivalent answer for student debt, since they can't own a share of your degree like they can a share of your home. Unless you're a Muslim, presumably the ways that Islamic finance avoids interest payments would not in any case satisfy your desire to be \"\"not in debt\"\".\""}
{"id": "328403", "text": "It is correct, in general. Gift tax is indeed at 35%, but you have the first 14K of your gift exempt from it for each person you give to, yearly (verify the number, it changes every year). You can also use your lifetime exemption ($5.45M in 2016, subject to change each year), but at the amounts you're talking about it still will not be enough. Charitable (501(c)) organizations, paying for someone's tuition or medical expenses (directly to the providers), political donations, transfer between you and your spouse - these are all exempt from gift tax. If you have 10 millions to give, I'm sure you can afford a $200 consultation with a EA/CPA licensed in your state."}
{"id": "328794", "text": "\"There are two components of option valuation, the value that's \"\"in the money\"\" and the \"\"time value.\"\" In the case of the $395 put, that option was already in the money and it will move less than the stock price by a bit as there will still be some time value there. $22.52 is intrinsic value (the right word for 'in the money') and the rest is time. The $365 strike is still out of the money, but as jldugger implied, the chance of it going through that strike is better as it's $6.66 closer.  Looking at the options chain gives you a better perspective on this. If Apple went up $20 Monday, and down $20 Tuesday, these prices would be higher as implied volatility would also go higher.  Now, I'd hardly call a drop of under 2% \"\"tanking\"\" but on the otherhand, I'd not call the 25% jump in the option price skyrocketing. Options do this all the time. Curious what prompted the question, are you interested in trading options? This stock in particular?\""}
{"id": "328901", "text": "Miro Zecevic Group offers novel arrangements and is focused on conveying the associated venture. This begins with a demonstrated, repeatable building and configuration handle, trailed by particular proposals and revealing concentrated on lessening costs, enhancing productivity or recognizing operational breakages before they happen. We hold fast to a repeatable, demonstrated process with take company public consultant potential huge advantages to our clients. We have associations with the world\u2019s biggest makers from computerization, power, controls, and web and security innovations prepared and experienced in working with these frameworks and organizations, and ready to convey to our clients neighborhood and worldwide prerequisites. Our group of experienced designing and business experts has demonstrated track records working for and with a portion of the world\u2019s biggest innovation organizations."}
{"id": "328995", "text": "\"Average person's life I'm going to say there is no normal debt level. Here's the standard life pattern: So it really depends on your situation, it's way too spread out to quote a \"\"normal\"\" figure. Cost of debt vs Gain from assets and Risk of income You need to strike a sweet spot based on: Someone who is more educated in finance will probably be able to run a tighter and more aggressive financial strategy, whereas someone who is educated in, say, creative media may not be able to do as good of a job. Running your life as a business Someone here mentioned this, I think it's very true. Unless you intend on living day to day, with no financial strategies, much of our lives parallel businesses. Both need to pay tax, both look for low risk high growth strategies, and both will (hopefully) have a purpose that goes beyond bringing in $$$.\""}
{"id": "329125", "text": "I'm amazed at how much debt my mom was able to accumulate before they finally cut her off. And it was all unsecured debt so there was jack shit they can do about her defaulting.  If you're poor, and old (no assets, no house, no nothing), it makes sense to go as far into unsecured debt as possible."}
{"id": "329270", "text": "The Government doesn't borrow money. It in fact simply prints it. The bond market is used for an advanced way of controlling the demand for this printed money. Think about it logically. Take 2011 for example. The Govt spent $1.7 trillion more than it took in. This is real money that get's credited in to people's bank accounts to purchase real goods and services. Now who purchases the majority of treasuries? The Primary Dealers. What are the Primary Dealers? They are banks. Where do banks get their money? From us.  So now put two and two together. When the Govt spends $1.7 trillion and credits our bank accounts, the banking system has $1.7 trillion more. Then that money flows in to pension funds, gets spent in to corporation who then send that money to China for cheap products... and eventually the money spent purchases up Govt securities for investments. We had to physically give China 1 trillion dollars for them to be able to purchase 1 trillion dollars in securities. So it makes sense if you think about how the math works in the real world."}
{"id": "329344", "text": "&gt;(thus credit does cost a bit more)  A ton more. An incredible amount more. You are basically going from secured creditors who can recover assets like rent, improvements, or the real estate to unsecured creditors who can recover nothing. The cost of financing would be prohibitive. Congrats, you've grinded the economy to a halt."}
{"id": "329425", "text": "\"Anything under 0.20% is \"\"really good, leave it alone.\"\" However, since you have access to their institutional funds, it isn't unreasonable to come up with your own desired asset allocation and save another half of the fees.  If you're happy with the Target Retirement date fund, just stick with it, but if you've got a particular AA you want to maintain, go for that with the cheaper underlying funds.\""}
{"id": "329466", "text": "If you are going to the frenzy of individual stock picking, like almost everyone initially, I suggest you to write your plan to paper. Like, I want an orthogonal set of assets and limit single investments to 10%. If with such limitations the percentage of brokerage fees rise to unbearable large, you should not invest that way in the first hand.  You may find better to invest in already diversified fund, to skip stupid fees. There are screeners like in morningstar that allow you to see overlapping items in funds but in stocks it becomes trickier and much errorsome. I know you are going to the stock market frenzy, even if you are saying to want to be long-term or contrarian investor, most investors are convex, i.e. they follow their peers, despite it would better to be a concave investor (but as we know it can be hard).  If the last part confused you, fire up a spreadsheet and do a balance. It is a very motivating activity, really. You will immediately notice things important to you, not just to providers such as morningstar, but alert it may take some time. And Bogleheads become to your rescue, ready spreadsheets here."}
{"id": "329662", "text": "\"As the other answer said, the person who owns the lent stock does not benefit directly.  They may benefit indirectly in that brokers can use the short lending profits to reduce their fees or in that they have the option to short other stocks at the same terms.   Follow-up question: what prevents the broker lending the shares for a very short time (less than a day), pocketing the interest and returning the lenders their shares without much change in share price (because borrowing period was very short). What prevents them from doing that many times a day ? Lack of market.   Short selling for short periods of time isn't so common as to allow for \"\"many\"\" times a day.  Some day traders may do it occasionally, but I don't know that it would be a reliable business model to supply them.  If there are enough people interested in shorting the stock, they will probably want to hold onto it long enough for the anticipated movement to happen.   There are transaction costs here.  Both fees for trading at all and the extra charges for short sale borrowing and interest.  Most stocks do not move down by large enough amounts \"\"many\"\" times a day.  Their fluctuations are smaller.  If the stock doesn't move enough to cover the transaction fees, then that seller lost money overall.  Over time, sellers like that will stop trading, as they will lose all their money.   All that said, there are no legal blocks to loaning the stock out many times, just practical ones.  If a stock was varying wildly for some bizarre reason, it could happen.\""}
{"id": "329781", "text": "\"There really isn't any good ways that I'm aware of. (The exception is in New York or California, where hospitals must post prices.) The law sets price floors on many procedures by setting Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates. As a result, the \"\"list price\"\" for a given procedure is dramatically inflated, and various health insurers negotiate rates somewhere in the middle. I'd recommend talking to the business offices or financial counselors at medical groups that you do business with. Ask about \"\"self pay discounts\"\" or other programs appropriate for folks in your position.\""}
{"id": "329810", "text": "\"I agree with some of the points of the other answers but why not avoid all the guesswork? I highly recommend you not charge him now. Wait until the end of the year when you have much more information about both of your companies and then you can run the numbers both ways and decide if it would benefit you (collectively). If either of your businesses runs on a cash basis and you decide to invoice, just make sure the check is deposited before Dec 31. Update: If you want to do this for 2016, at least your husband's business would have to be using an accrual basis (since it's too late to take the deduction on a cash basis). Simply run the numbers both ways and see if it helps you. If it doesn't help enough to warrant it for 2016 you could rerun the numbers near the end of 2017 to see if it helps then. Diclaimer: I think it's OK to do this type of manipulation for the scenario you described since you have done (or are doing) the work and you are charging a reasonable fee, but realize that you shouldn't manipulate the amount of the invoice, or fabricate invoices. For example, you shouldn't ever think about such things as: \"\"If I invoice $50K instead of $3K, will that help us?\"\"\""}
{"id": "330041", "text": "\"First, you are not exactly \"\"giving\"\" the brokerage $2000. That money is the margin requirement to protect them in the case the stock price rises. If you short 200 shares as in your example and they are holding $6000 from you then they are protected in the event of the stock price increasing to $30/share. Sometime before it gets there the brokerage will require you to deposit more money or they will cover your position by repurchasing the shares for your account. The way you make money on the short sale is if the stock price declines. It is a buy low sell high idea but in reverse. If you believe that prices are going to drop then you could sell now when it is high and buy back later when it is lower. In your example, you are selling 200 shares at $20 and later, buying those at $19. Thus, your profit is $200, not counting any interest or fees you have paid. It's a bit confusing because you are selling something you'll buy in the future. Selling short is usually considered quite risky as your gain is limited to the amount that you sold at initially (if I sell at $20/share the most I can make is if the stock declines to $0).  Your potential to lose is unlimited in theory. There is no limit to how high the stock could go in theory so I could end up buying it back at an infinitely high price. Neither of these extremes are likely but they do show the limits of your potential gain and loss.  I used $20/share for simplicity assuming you are shorting with a market order vs a limit order. If you are shorting it would be better for you to sell at 20 instead of 19 anyway. If someone says I would like to give you $20 for that item you are selling you aren't likely to tell them \"\"no, I'd really only like $19 for it\"\"\""}
{"id": "330049", "text": "I am like you with not acknowledging balances in my accounts, so I pay my credit card early and often.  Much more than once a month.  With my banks bill pay, I can send money to the credit card for free and at any time.   I pay it every two weeks (when I get paid), and I will put other extra payments on there if I bought a large item.  It helps me keep my balances based in reality in Quicken. For example, I saved the cash for my trip, put the trip on my credit card, then paid it all off the day after I got home.  I used the card because I didn't want to carry the cash, I wanted the rewards cash back, I wanted the automatic protection on the car rental, and I couldn't pay for a hotel with cash. There are many good reasons to use credit cards, but only if you can avoid carrying a balance."}
{"id": "330058", "text": "I would definitely be putting in enough to get the most out of the match.  Only reasons I can think of not too would be: Other than that, not investing in the 401(k) is turning down free money. Edit based on feedback in comments. The only time I would advocate number 1 is if you are intensely committed to getting out of debt, were on a very tight budget and had eliminated all non-essential spending. In that situation only, I think the mental benefit of having that last debt paid off would be worth more than a few dollars in interest."}
{"id": "330269", "text": "Ah, I did some more research and apparently Rental Income is considered Passive Income, and as such the IRS does not allow a net loss to exist, but you can carry the loss over into the next year. https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc425.html Generally, losses from passive activities that exceed the income from passive activities are disallowed for the current year. You can carry forward disallowed passive losses to the next taxable year. A similar rule applies to credits from passive activities. So in the event in a loss on my rental business activity, I simply pay no tax on it, and deduct the remainder in income in 2017 from taxes. I don't make any changes to my Consulting income at all."}
{"id": "330276", "text": "I found additional evidence on TDAmeritrade's website that helps confirm that the 3/17/11 prices Jason found are the ones to use since all three were traded on that day.  Although GM+A had prices and trading as early as 2/28/11, GM+B's price and trading shows up no earlier than 3/14/11, but there was no trading indicated for GM+A on 3/14 so 3/14 can't be used.  The two warrants were not traded every day after they came out. The next date that I found when all three, GM, GM+A and GM+B had trades was 4/11/11.  I found Google and Yahoo Finance unable to produce the historical prices for the warrants that far back.  Unfortunately, you need to be a TDA accountholder in order to access TDA's historical price information for stocks."}
{"id": "330288", "text": "I must say that this is a question that you should hire a professional tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) to answer. It is way above our amateurs' pay-grade. That said, I'll tell you what I personally think on the issue. I'm not a licensed tax adviser, and nothing that I write here can be used in any way as a justification for any action. Read the full disclaimer in my profile. I believe you're right to treat those as assets. You bought them as an investment, and you intend to sell them for profit. Here the good news for you end. As we decided to define the domains as an asset, we need to decide what type of asset it is. I believe you're holding a Sec. 197 asset. This is because domain is essentially akin to franchise and trademark, and as such falls under the Sec. 197 definition. That means that your amortization period is 15 years. Your expenses related to these domains should also be amortized, on the same schedule. When you sell a domain, you can deduct the portion that you have not yet deducted from the amortization schedule from your proceeds. Keep in mind passive loss limitations, since losses from assets held as investment cannot offset Schedule C income."}
{"id": "330417", "text": "\"Hello! I am working on a project where I am trying to determine the profit made by a vendor if they hold our funds for 5 days in order to collect the interest on those funds during that period before paying a third party.  Currently I am doing \"\"Amount x(Fed Funds Rate/365)x5\"\" but my output seems too low. Any advice?\""}
{"id": "330476", "text": "The LLC can be formed within just 24 hrs from the time of submitting of the form. It mainly includes all the business presence packages which is very much important for doing Incorporating your business so that the business can able to setup and startup very easily and quickly. It also help in protecting the assests and other liabilities that are the part of the Delaware llc."}
{"id": "330533", "text": "There is a positive not being mentioned above: the depreciation vs your regular earned income. Disclaimer: I am not a tax attorney or an accountant, nor do I play one on the internet. I am however a landlord. With that important caveat out of the way: Rental properties (and improvements to them) depreciate in value on a well-defined schedule. You can claim that depreciation as a phantom loss to lower the amount of your taxable regular income. If you make a substantial amount of the latter, it can be a huge boon in the first few years you own the property. You can claim the depreciation as if the property were new. So take the advice of a random stranger on the internet to your accountant/attorney and see how much it helps you."}
{"id": "330743", "text": "There are fund of funds,e.g. life cycle funds or target retirement funds, that could cover a lot of these with an initial investment that one could invest into for a few years and then after building up a balance large enough, then it may make sense to switch to having more control."}
{"id": "330792", "text": "Reading the plan documentation, yes, that is what it means.  Each purchase by bank debit, whether one-time or automatic, costs $2 plus $0.06 per share; so if you invested $50, you would get slightly less than $48 in stock as a result (depending on the per-share price). Schedule of Fees Purchases \u2013 A one-time $15.00 enrollment fee to establish a new     account for a non-shareholder will be deducted from the     purchase amount. \u2013 Dividend reinvestment: The Hershey Company pays the     transaction fee and per share* fee on your behalf. \u2013 Each optional cash purchase by one-time online bank     debit will entail a transaction fee of $2.00 plus $0.06 per     share* purchased. \u2013 Each optional cash purchase by check will entail a     transaction fee of $5.00 plus $0.06 per share* purchased. \u2013 If funds are automatically deducted from your checking or     savings account, the transaction fee is $2.00 plus $0.06     per share* purchased. Funds will be withdrawn on the     10th of each month, or the preceding business day if the     10th is not a business day. \u2013 Fees will be deducted from the purchase amount. \u2013 Returned check and rejected ACH debit fee is $35.00."}
{"id": "330874", "text": "Your question doesn't make much sense. The exceptions are very specific and are listed on this site (IRS.GOV). I can't see how you can use any of the exceptions regularly while still continuing being employed and contributing. In any case, you pay income tax on any distribution that has not been taxed before (which would be a Roth account or a non-deductible IRA contribution). Including the employer's match. Here's the relevant portion: The following additional exceptions apply only to distributions from a   qualified retirement plan other than an IRA:"}
{"id": "330917", "text": "Shareholders have voting rights, and directors have fiduciary obligations to shareholders. Sure, shareholders have rights to the dividends, but stock confers decisionmaking powers. I'm not really sure what your answer to this is, or how you are differentiating the concept of ownership from this."}
{"id": "331008", "text": "\"I would like to first point out that there is nothing special about a self-managed investment portfolio as compared to one managed by someone else. With some exceptions, you can put together exactly the same investment portfolio yourself as a professional investor could put together for you. Not uncommonly, too, at a lower cost (and remember that cost is among the, if not the, best indicator(s) of how your investment portfolio will perform over time). Diversification is the concept of not \"\"putting all your eggs in one basket\"\". The idea here is that there are things that happen together because they have a common cause, and by spreading your investments in ways such that not all of your investments have the same underlying risks, you reduce your overall risk. The technical term for risk is generally volatility, meaning how much (in this case the price of) something fluctuates over a given period of time. A stock that falls 30% one month and then climbs 40% the next month is more volatile than one that falls 3% the first month and climbs 4% the second month. The former is riskier because if for some reason you need to sell when it is down, you lose a larger portion of your original investment with the former stock than with the latter. Diversification, thus, is reducing commonality between your investments, generally but not necessarily in an attempt to reduce the risk of all investments moving in the same direction by the same amount at the same time. You can diversify in various ways: Do you see where I am going with this? A well-diversed portfolio will tend to have a mix of equity in your own country and a variety of other countries, spread out over different types of equity (company stock, corporate bonds, government bonds, ...), in different sectors of the economy, in countries with differing growth patterns. It may contain uncommon classes of investments such as precious metals. A poorly diversified portfolio will likely be restricted to either some particular geographical area, type of equity or investment, focus on some particular sector of the economy (such as medicine or vehicle manufacturers), or so on. The poorly diversified portfolio can do better in the short term, if you time it just right and happen to pick exactly the right thing to buy or sell. This is incredibly hard to do, as you are basically working against everyone who gets paid to do that kind of work full time, plus computer-algorithm-based trading which is programmed to look for any exploitable patterns. It is virtually impossible to do for any real length of time. Thus, the well-diversified portfolio tends to do better over time.\""}
{"id": "331093", "text": "\"But in the debt-payoff-first scenario, I'd be wiping out my debt in   two years. It would take several more years if I were to just pay the   minimums and put the extra money toward investing instead. Right. The idea is that in 2 years, you are likely to have more in the savings/stock account than you owe on the loan. But. The range of returns for X years has a smaller standard deviation the greater X is. e.g. any year has about a 1 in 3 chance of being negative. A 10 year period had a negative return (-1% CAGR) in the '00s recently, but the 15 year return even around that decade would have been successful. Jan 1 '96 - Dec 31 2010 returned 6.76% CAGR, Jan 1 2001 - Dec 31 2015 returned 4.96% CAGR.  This tells you that the time frame is as important as your sleep factor. Your 2 years? I'd just kill the loans. A 10-15 year horizon? I'd ask how you \"\"feel\"\" about that debt. The cost of going after a potential higher return may not be worth the risk to many. For some, it's fine. I retired, with a mortgage still in place, but the money in my 401(k) that could have paid off the mortgage is now about twice the remaining balance. So I sleep like a baby.  In the end, I'm a fan of investing for the long term vs paying off low rate debt, but it's a choice based on the individual.\""}
{"id": "331108", "text": "Adding a couple more assumptions, I'd compute about $18.23 would be that pay out in 2018.  This is computed by taking the Current Portfolio's Holdings par values and dividing by the outstanding shares(92987/5100 for those wanting specific figures used). Now, for those assumptions: Something to keep in mind is that bonds can valued higher than their face value if the coupon is higher than other issues given the same risk.  If you have 2 bonds maturing in 3 years of the same face value and same risk categories though one is paying 5% and the other is paying 10% then it may be that the 5% sells at a discount to bring the yield up some while the other sells at a premium to bring the yield down.  Thus, you could have bonds worth more before they mature that will eventually lose this capital appreciation."}
{"id": "331516", "text": "Sorry, but that's a load of sh*t.  The economy tanked in March of 2000 when the tech bubble burst.  Projecting the insane bubble economy outwards showed the debt could be paid off, but it was already over when Bush came into office.  (Tax receipts are backwards looking, the stock market is forward looking.  The world knew in early 2000 that the party was over.)"}
{"id": "331594", "text": "It may be tempting to be financially lenient with your customers as you start to build business relationships, but doing so may ultimately jeopardize your profitability. Establish clear payment terms on all invoices and documents, including a reasonable penalty (start with eight percent) over the invoice amount if the total is not paid within the standard payment terms."}
{"id": "331606", "text": "\"When margin is calculated as the equity percentage of an account, the point at which a broker will forcibly liquidate is typically called \"\"maintenance margin\"\". In the US, this is 25% for equities. To calculate the price at which this will occur, the initial and maintenance margin must be known.  The formula for a long with margin is: and for a short where P_m is the maintenance margin price, P_i is the initial margin price, m_i is the initial margin rate, and m_m is the maintenance margin rate.  At an initial margin of 50% and a maintenance margin of 25%, a long equity may fall by 1/3 before forced liquidation, a short one may rise by 50%. This calculation can become very complex with different asset classes with differing maintenance margins because the margin debt is applied to all securities collectively.\""}
{"id": "331696", "text": "I don't see why not. Many ways this could go. Perhaps you can arrange an agreement where you earn 50% of profits over the basic operating costs. This gives them an incentive to let you open it up. This gives you a chance to see if the business actually makes sense financially... It may not."}
{"id": "331712", "text": "You really need /r/personalfinance    These questions are not hard but not simple either. I think if this is your retirement money and you are retired, you should speak with a professional financial advisor. Find someone you trust, someone other people you know use. Do not follow anyone who promises guaranteed great returns. Find someone who is honest."}
{"id": "331780", "text": "\"I just want to make clear that the Fed saying this is much more significant than a pollster or other source. It gives it a great deal of credibility and makes it, in some way, the Fed's \"\"official\"\" stance on this.\""}
{"id": "332064", "text": "It looks like you need a lot more education on the subject. I suggest you pick up a book on investing and portfolio management to get a first idea. Dividend yields are currently way below 5% on blue chips. Unlike coupons from fixed income instruments (which, in the same risk category, pay a lot less), dividend yields are not guaranteed and neither is the invested principal amount.  In either case, your calculation is far away from reality.  Sure, there are investments (such as the mentioned direct investments in companies or housings in emerging economies) that can potentially earn you two digit percentage returns. Just remember: risk always goes both ways. A higher earning potential means higher loss potential. Also, a direct investment is a lot less liquid than an investment on a publicly quoted high turnover market place. If you suddenly need money, you really don't want to be pressed to sell real estate in an emerging market (keyword: bid ask spread). My advice: the money that you can set aside for the long term (10 years plus), invest it in stock ETFs, globally. Everything else should be invested in bond funds or even deposits, depending on when you will need the access. As others have pointed out, consider getting professional advice."}
{"id": "332113", "text": "You are in the perfect window for making an IRA contribution. The IRS allows you to make IRA contributions for last year until tax day. So you know that for 2014 you didn't have access to a 401K at work. You want to avoid making a deductible IRA contribution for this year (2015) until you are sure that you wont have a 401K at work this year. Take your time and decide if the detectible IRA or the Roth works best for your situation. Having a IRA now will be good becasue you have many years for it to grow. Keep in mind that it is not unusual to have multiple retirement accounts: Current 401K; rolled over into a IRA;  Roth IRA... Each has different rules, limits, and benefits. There is no reason to pick one way of investing for retirement becasue you never know if the next employer will have the type of plan you like. I am assuming that your spouse, if you are married, doesn't have access to a 401K; otherwise you would have to consider the applicable limits."}
{"id": "332136", "text": "You understand that the Fed is *supposed* to make overnight loans to banks, that one of its primary jobs is to be a lender of last resort?  And yes, some were foreign banks; foreign subsidies of US banks or counter-parties to large US banks.  Near-zero, yes for course we're talking about *overnight* loans.  The current commercial rate for overnight euro LIBOR is 0.26179%, in other words, 0.0026, near zero OMG conspiracy!"}
{"id": "332152", "text": "Most 401k plans (maybe even all 401k plans as a matter of law) allow the option of moving the money in your 401k account from one mutual fund to another  (within the group of funds that are in the plan).  So, you can exit from one fund and put all your 401k money (not just the new contributions) into another fund in the group if you like.  Whether you can find a fund within that group that invests only in the companies that you approve of is another matter. As mhoran_psprep's answer points out, changing investments inside a 401k (ditto IRAs, 403b and 457 plans) is without tax consequence which is not the case when you sell one mutual fund and buy another in a non-retirement account."}
{"id": "332314", "text": "If you have income in the US, you will owe US income tax on it, unless there is a treaty with your country that says otherwise."}
{"id": "332627", "text": "If you want to farm credit card benefits, there are a few low-cost ways to do so:"}
{"id": "332719", "text": "I would agree with the other answers about it being a bad idea to invest in stocks in the short term. However, do consider also long-term repairs. For example, you should be prepared to a repair happening in 20 years in addition to repairs happening in a couple of months. So, if it is at all possible for you to save a bit more, put 2% of the construction cost of a typical new house (just a house, not the land the house is standing on) aside every year into a long-term repair fund and invest it into stocks. I would recommend a low-cost index fund or passive ETF instead of manually picking stocks. When you have a long-term repair that requires large amounts of money but will be good for decades to come, you will take some money out of the long-term repair fund. Where I live, houses cost about 4000 EUR per square meter, but most of that is the land and building permit cost. The actual construction cost is about 2500 EUR per square meter. So, I would put away 50 EUR per square meter every year. So, for example, for a relatively small 50 square meter apartment, that would mean 2500 EUR per year. There are quite many repairs that are long-term repairs. For example, in apartment buildings, plumbing needs to be redone every 40 years or so. Given such a long time period, it makes sense to invest the money into stocks. So, my recommendation would be to have two repair funds: short-term repairs and long-term repairs. Only the long-term repair fund should be invested into stocks."}
{"id": "332855", "text": "\"Regardless of the source of the software (though certainly good to know), there are practical limits to the IRS 1040EZ form.  This simplified tax form is not appropriate for use once you reach a certain level of income because it only allows for the \"\"standard\"\" deduction - no itemization.   The first year I passed that level, I was panicked because I thought I suddenly owed thousands.  Switching to 1040A (aka the short form) and using even the basic itemized deductions showed that the IRS owed me a refund instead. I don't know where that level is for tax year 2015 but as you approach $62k, the simplified form is less-and-less appropriate.  It would make sense, given some of the great information in the other answers, that the free offering is only for 1040EZ.  That's certainly been true for other \"\"free\"\" software in the past.\""}
{"id": "332901", "text": "It is the first time I encounter redemption programme and I would like to know what are my options here You can hold on to the shares and automatically receive 2.25 SEK per share some time after 31-May; depending on how fast the company and its bank process the payouts. Alternatively you can trade in the said window for whatever the market is offering. how is this different from paying the dividend? I don't know much about Sweden laws. Structuring this way may be tax beneficial. The other benefit in in company's books the shareholders capital is reduced. can I trade these redemption shares during these 2 weeks in May? What is the point of trading them if they have fixed price? Yes you can. If you need money sooner ... generally the price will be discounted by few cents to cover the interest for the balance days."}
{"id": "332938", "text": "\"I take it you have nearly zero expenses, since you don't mention any savings and with your income you wouldn't have much left over for investing. At your level of income, any actual investing is either going to unwisely reduce your cash available should you need it (such as investment in mutual funds, which often have minimum investment periods of 2-6 months or more to avoid fees), or cost you a high percentage of your income in commissions (stock trading). So, I wouldn't recommend investing at all \u2014 yet. I find Dave Ramsey's baby steps to be very good general money management advice.  Here is how I would adapt the first three steps to your income and stage in life. Beyond this, Dave recommends saving for retirement, college (for kids) and paying off your house early.  These things are a little beyond your stage in life, but it would be good to start thinking about them. For you, I recommend following DJClayworth's advice to \"\"invest in yourself\"\".  Specifically, plan to get through college debt-free.  Put away money so that you have a head start once you do have living expenses \u2014 save for a car, save money for rent, etc. so that you don't have to live month to month as most people do starting out. So, what this boils down to: Put away every cent you have, in a savings account.\""}
{"id": "333102", "text": "\"One description of what happened is at 401(k) Plan Fix-It Guide.  The issue is the plan was \"\"Top Heavy,\"\" i.e. those making a high income were making disproportionately larger deposits than the lower paid employees. As the IRS article suggests, a nice matching deposit from the employer can eliminate the lower limit caused by the top heavy-ness.  Searching on [top heavy 401(k)] will yield more details if you wish to research more.\""}
{"id": "333140", "text": "You can rehypo securities which are regulated by the SEC. No funding ladder with any counter party will Accept non-security assets (which loans btw aren't securities like bonds). We see the same in the broadly syndicated loan market.   TRS loan facilities are just now developing into more mature vehicles to the point where banks are structuring collateral upgrades through writing fully funded participations to SPV's  and borrowing treasuries from a counter party who has a lien against the SPV (oc'd of course) but that's a bespoke and uncommon solution. Most banks are still funding these TRS facilities with unsecured funds.   The repo market is ultimately the robust and tradional means of securing funding against loan assets. Middle market and broadly syndicated repo are most common but ABS desks will often times reverse repo while loans or asset backed loans in addition to their normal warehousing businesses."}
{"id": "333219", "text": "\"All of the provided advice is great, but a slightly different viewpoint on debt is worth mentioning. Here are the areas that you should concentrate your efforts and the (rough) order you should proceed. Much of the following is predicated upon your having a situation where you need to get out of debt, and learn to better budget and control your spending. You may already have accomplished some of these steps, or you may prioritize differently. Many people advise prioritizing contributing to a 401(k) savings plan. But with the assumption that you need advise because you have debt trouble, you are probably paying absurd interest rates, and any savings you might have will be earning much lower rates than you are paying on consumer debt. If you are already contributing, continue the plan. But remember, you are looking for advice because your financial situation is in trouble, so you need to put out the fire (your present problem), and learn how to manage your money and plan for the future. Compose a budget, comprised of the following three areas (the exact percentages are fungible, fit them to your circumstances). Here is where planning can get fun, when you have freed yourself from debt, and you can make choices that resonate with your individual goals. Once you have \"\"put out the fire\"\" of debt, then you should do two things at the same time. As you pay off debt (and avoid further debt), you will find that saving for both independence and retirement become easier.  The average American household may have $8000+ credit card debt, and at 20-30%, the interest payments are $150-200/month, and the average car payment is nearly $500/month.  Eliminate debt and you will have $500-800/month that you can comfortably allocate towards retirement. But you also need to learn (educate yourself) how to invest your money to grow your money, and earn income from your savings. This is an area where many struggle, because we are taught to save, but we are not taught how to invest, choose investments wisely and carefully, and how to decide our goals.  Investing needs to be addressed separately, but you need to learn how. Live in an affordable house, and pay off your mortgage.  Consider that the payment on a mortgage on even a modest $200K house is over $1000/month. Combine saving the money you would have paid towards a mortgage payment with the money you would have paid towards credit card debt or a car loan. Saving becomes easy when you are freed from these large debts.\""}
{"id": "333334", "text": "\"People treat an emergency fund as some kind of ace-in-the-hole when it comes to financial difficulty, but it is only one of many sources of money that you can utilize. What is an emergency? First, you have to define what an emergency is.  Is it a lost job?  Is it an unplanned event (pregnancy, perhaps)?  Is it a medical emergency?  Is it the death of you or your spouse? Also, what does it mean to be unplanned?  Is being so unhappy with your job that you give a 2-week notice an emergency?  Is one month of planning an emergency?  Two? Only you can answer these questions for yourself, but they significantly shape your financial strategy.  Planning is highly dependent on your cashflow, and, for some people, it may take them a year to build enough savings to enable them to take 3 months off work.  For others, they may be able to change their spending to build up enough for 3 months in 1 month. Also, you have to consider the length of the emergency.  Job-loss is rarely permanent, but it's rarely short as well.  The current average is 30.7 weeks: that's 7 months! Money in an Emergency There are six main places that people get money during a financial emergency: A good emergency strategy takes all six of these into account.  Some emergencies may lean more on one source than the other.  However, some of these are correlated. For example, in 2008, three things happened:  the stock market crashed, unsecured debt dried up, and people faced financial emergency (lost jobs, cut wages).  If you were dependent on a stock portfolio and/or a line of credit, you'd be up a creek, because the value of your investments suddenly decreased, and you can't really tap your now significantly limited line of credit. However, if you had a one or more of cash savings, unemployment income, and unemployment insurance, you would probably have been OK. Budgeting for an emergency When you say \"\"financial emergency\"\", most people think job loss.  However, the most common cause of bankruptcy in the US is medical debt.  Depending on your insurance situation, this could be a serious risk, or it may not be.   People say you should have 3x-6x of your monthly income in savings because it's an easy, back-of-the-envelope way to handle most financial emergency risk, but it's not necessarily the most prudent strategy for you. To properly budget for an emergency, you need to fully take into account what emergencies you are likely to face, and what sources of financing you would have access to given the likely factors that led to that emergency. Generally, having a savings account with some amount of liquid cash is an important part of a risk-mitigation strategy.  But it's not a panacea for every kind of emergency.\""}
{"id": "333360", "text": "\"A lot of financial software will calculate the value of operating leasess for you (bullet 2). E.g. Capital IQ, BB.   What a lot of professionals do is \"\"reverse\"\" out EBITDA/EBIT etc. for:  - non-recurring expenses (think big accounting changes, some impairments) - change operating expenses into capital leases to adjust the capital structure - occasionally change some operating expenses (e.g. options) because you are under the assumption if you take a company private that those expenses will not be relevant  The whole point is simply to see the operating revenues/expenses of the firm\""}
{"id": "333384", "text": "Sorry, I was thinking of PCs. which are professional corporations. LLPs are limited partnerships.  If he has partners, an LLP might be suitable. Again, talk to a lawyer and accountant to see what is best for your friend."}
{"id": "333391", "text": "You are on the right path. Especially for the fact that you are paying the highest rate card with highest priority.  As long as your credit score will not stop you from getting the credit union loan, this is a great idea. It will turn the highest rate card(s) into something more reasonable and let you continue to attack principal instead of mostly paying interest."}
{"id": "333443", "text": "&gt; Your question is expressed as a run-on sentence, which I'm having trouble parsing. Maybe you could restate.  The one in the title? If yes, here it is restated:  *As I currently understand, we owe much of our national debt to ourselves. The reason for this is that people are being charged interest that does not exist in the system. Therefore, if we tried to pay the debt (like some conservative politicians are fighting for) it would be a massive transfer of wealth from the 99% to the 1%, since most of the debt is owed to the 1% (banks).*  So I was wondering if this conclusion/summary/understanding is flawed in some way."}
{"id": "333605", "text": "\"After the initial public offering, the company can raise money by selling more stock (equity financing) or selling debt (e.g. borrowing money).  If a company's stock price is high, they can raise money with equity financing on more favorable terms.  When companies raise money with equity financing, they create new shares and dilute the existing shareholders, so the number of shares outstanding is not fixed. Companies can also return money to shareholders by buying their own equity, and this is called a share repurchase.  It's best for companies to repurchase their shared when their stock price is low, but \"\"American companies have a terrible track record of buying their own shares high and selling them low.\"\" The management of a company typically likes a rising stock price, so their stock options are more valuable and they can justify bigger pay packages.\""}
{"id": "333616", "text": "You can make a capital contribution, not a loan. It's not a taxable event, no interest, and you can take a distribution later when the business has the money to pay you back. So yes, transfer the money. If you use software like Quickbooks, make use of unique accounts for tracking the contribution"}
{"id": "333892", "text": "Also, interest rates and credit risk directly corelate to Greece's ability to service the debt.  Japan could be at 400% and Greece 50%, but if they can't make payments or have credit good enought to refi the debt, that's when they will default.   Meanwhile, the fact that they are risky drives up rates further and makes it even harder to make payments.  It's called the death spiral.   Japan has low rates, solid GDP and good credit = non-issue."}
{"id": "333954", "text": "Normally, incorporation is for liability reasons.  Just file your taxes as a business.  This just means adding a T2125 to your personal return.  There's no registering, that's for GST if over a certain threshold. There's even a section in the instructions for internet businesses. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/t4002/t4002-e.html#internet_business_activities This is the form you have to fill out.  Take note that there is a place to include costs from using your own home as well.  Those specific expenses can't be used to create or increase a loss from your business, but a regular business loss can be deducted from your employment income. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/tf/t2125/t2125-15e.pdf"}
{"id": "333961", "text": "\"Trying to \"\"time the market\"\" is usually a bad idea. People who do this every day for a living have a hard time doing that, and I'm guessing you don't have that kind of time and knowledge.  So that leaves you with your first and third options, commonly called lump-sum and dollar cost averaging respectively.   Which one to use depends on where your preferences lie on the risk/reward scpectrum. Dollar cost averaging (DCA) has lower risk and lower reward than lump sum investing. In my opinion, I don't like it. DCA only works better than lump sum investing if the price drops. But if you think the price is going to drop, why are you buying the stock in the first place? Example: Your uncle wins the lottery and gives you $50,000. Do you buy $50,000 worth of Apple now, or do you buy $10,000 now and $10,000 a quarter for the next four quarters? If the stock goes up, you will make more with lump-sum(LS) than you will with DCA. If the stock goes down, you will lose more with LS than you will with DCA. If the stock goes up then down, you will lose more with DCA than you will with LS. If the stock goes down then up, you will make more with DCA than you will with LS. So it's a trade-off. But, like I said, the whole point of you buying the stock is that you think it's going to go up, which is especially true with an index fund! So why pick the strategy that performs worse in that scenario?\""}
{"id": "334154", "text": "If you are using the money to invest in a property (even abroad) then you can claim tax exemption. while some people will tell you that the reinvestment should be in India only, it have been ruled that the property can be purchased abroad too.."}
{"id": "334301", "text": "I have been in a similar position as you for the past few years. I put a bunch of cash into a tax free savings account (canadian) instead of paying down debt.   My rationale was that I wanted the exposure to the market and had to be in it in order to pay attention. I also put money into an rasp,  but only because my employer matched it (100% gain, no brainer).  Looking back, I think it would have been a better idea to get debt free sooner. Having that debt weighs on you and haunts everything you try to do. You can't afford rent where you want to be, where you should be. There's no keeping up with the Jones' if you're paying off debt.  That being said, in Canada your student loans are secured and if you lose your job, the government makes payments for you. If your loans are structured like this, then you are better off hanging onto that money."}
{"id": "334488", "text": "I think it is just semantics, but this example demonstrates what they mean by that: If you put $100 in a CD today, it will grow and you will be able to take out a greater amount plus the original principal at a later time. If you put $100 extra on your house payment today, you may save some money in the long run, but you won't have an asset that you wouldn't otherwise have at the end of the term that you can draw on without selling the property. But of course, you can't live on the street, so you need another house. So ultimately you can't easily realize the investment. If you get super technical, you could probably rationalize it as an investment, just like you could call clipping coupons investing, but it all comes down to what your financial goals are. What the advisers are trying to tell you is that you shouldn't consider paying down your mortgage early as an acceptable substitute for socking away some money for retirement or other future expenses. House payments for a house you live in should be considered expenses, in my opinion. So my view is that paying off a note early is just a way of cutting expenses."}
{"id": "334542", "text": "Dividends are a form of passive income."}
{"id": "334603", "text": "\"If you have a single member LLC there is no need to separate expenses in this way since it is simply treated as part of the owner's normal tax returns.  This is the way I've been operating. Owner of Single-Member LLC   If a single-member LLC does not elect to be treated as a corporation, the LLC is a \"\"disregarded entity,\"\" and the LLC's activities should be reflected on its owner's federal tax return. If the owner is an individual, the activities of the LLC will generally be reflected on: Form 1040 Schedule C, Profit or Loss from Business (Sole Proprietorship) (PDF) Form 1040 Schedule E, Supplemental Income or Loss (PDF) Form 1040 Schedule F, Profit or Loss from Farming (PDF) An individual owner of a single-member LLC that operates a trade or business is subject to the tax on net earnings from self employment in the same manner as a sole proprietorship.   If the single-member LLC is owned by a corporation or partnership, the LLC should be reflected on its owner's federal tax return as a division of the corporation or partnership. https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/single-member-limited-liability-companies\""}
{"id": "334750", "text": "I can answer Scenario #3. If you are purchasing a property with buy-to-let intentions [\u2026] can you use the   rental income exclusively to fund the mortgage repayments? Yes \u2013 this is exactly how buy-to-let mortgage applications are evaluated. Lenders generally expect you to fund the mortgage payments with rent. They look for the anticipated monthly rent income to cover a minimum of 125% of the monthly mortgage payment. This is to make sure you can allow for vacant periods, maintenance, compliance with rules and regulations, and still be in profit (i.e. generate a positive yield on your investment). However, buy-to-let (BTL) mortgage lenders also generally expect you to own your own home to begin with. It's up to them, but rare is the lender who will provide a buy-to-let mortgage to a non-owner-occupier. This is because of point 2 above. The lender doesn't want you to end up living in the property because then you'll need to repay the loan capital, since you'll always need somewhere to live. This makes the economics of BTL unfavourable. They look at your application as a business proposal: quite different to a residential mortgage application, which is what your question seems to be addressing. Bottom line: You're right about scenario #3 but it sounds like you're trying to afford a home first, whereas BTL is best viewed as an investment for someone who already has their main residence under ownership (mortgaged or otherwise). As for Scenarios #1 and #2 I can't offer first hand answers but I think Aakash M. and Steve Melnikoff have covered it."}
{"id": "334800", "text": "If you are talking about a corporate entity, weighted average tenor refers to the average maturity of the company's bond portfolio (or all debt) from the issue date. For example, a company issues 2 bonds in 2017, one for $100 with a maturity of 2019 and one for $50 with a maturity of 2020. The weighted average tenor would be 2.33 years. These numbers are not exact, just trying to give you an illustrative example."}
{"id": "334902", "text": "There is no reason for you to open a firm. However, it will help you, if you operate separate bank account for business and personal purposes. You can run your business as proprietorship business. Your inward remittance is your income. You can deduct payment made to your colleagues as salary. You should pay them by way of cheques or bank transfer only. You are also entitled to deduct other business expenses provided you keep proper receipt of the same such as broadband connection charges, depreciation on equipment and more importantly, rent on your house. If your total receipt from such income exceeds INR 60,00,000 you will need to withhold tax on payment made to your colleagues as also subject to audit of your accounts. If you want to grow your business, suggest you should take an Import / Export Code in your own name.  You can put any further question in this regard."}
{"id": "335136", "text": "\"Typically you diversify a portfolio to reduce risk. The S&P 500 is a collection of large-cap stocks; a diversified portfolio today probably contains a mix of large cap, small cap, bonds,  international equity and cash. Right now, if you have a bond component, that part of your portfolio isn't performing as well. The idea of diversification is that you \"\"smooth out\"\" the ups and downs of the market and come out ahead in most situations. If you don't have a bond or cash component in your portfolio, you may have picked (or had someone pick for you) lousy funds.  Without more detail, that's about all that can be said. EDIT: You provided more detail, so I want to add a little to my answer. Basically, you're in a fund that has high fees (1.58% annually) and performance that trails the mid-cap index. The S&P 500 is a large-cap index (large cap == large company), so a direct comparison is not necessarily meaningful. Since you seem to be new at this, I'd recommend starting out with the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSMX) or ETF (VTI). This is a nice option because it represents the entire stock market and is cheap... it's a good way to get started without knowing alot. If your broker charges a transaction fee to purchase Vanguard funds and you don't want to change brokers or pay ETF commissions, look for or ask about transaction-fee free \"\"broad market\"\" indexes. The expense ratio should be below 0.50% per year and optimally under 0.20%. If you're not having luck finding investment options, swtich to a discount broker like TD Ameritrade, Schwab, ScottTrade or Fidelity (in no particular order)\""}
{"id": "335164", "text": "\"My education on this topic at this age range was a little more free-form. We were given a weeklong project in the 6th grade, which I remember pretty clearly:  Fast forward 6 years (we were 12). You are about to be kicked out of   your parents' house with the clothes on your back, $1,000 cash in your   pocket, your high school diploma, and a \"\"best of luck\"\" from your   parents. That's it. Your mission is to not be homeless, starving and   still wearing only the clothes on your back in 3 months. To do this, you will find an apartment, a job (you must meet the qualifications fresh out of high school with only your diploma; no college, no experience), and a means of transportation. Then,   you'll build a budget that includes your rent, estimated utilities,   gasoline (calculated based on today's prices, best-guess fuel mileage of the car, and 250% of the best-guess one-way distance between home and job), food (complete nutrition is not a must, but 2000cal/day is), toiletries, clothing, and anything else you want or   need to spend your paycheck or nest egg on. Remember that the laundromat isn't free, and neither is buying the washer/dryer yourself. Remember most apartments aren't furnished but do have kitchen appliances, and you can't say you found anything on the side of the road. The end product of your work will be a narrative report of the first   month of your new life, a budget for the full 3 months, plus a \"\"continuing\"\" budget for a typical month thereafter to prove you're not just lasting out the 3 months, and all supporting   evidence for your numbers, from newspaper clippings to in-store   mailers (the Internet and e-commerce were just catching on at the time, Craigslist and eBay didn't exist yet, and not everyone had home Internet to begin with).  Extra Credit: Make your budget work with all applicable income and   sales taxes. Extra Extra Credit: Have more than your original $1000 in the bank at   the end of the 3 months, after the taxes in the Extra Credit. This is a pretty serious project for a 12-year-old. Not only were we looking through the classified ads and deciphering all the common abbreviations, we were were taking trips to the grocery store with shopping lists, the local Wal-Mart or Target, the mall, even Goodwill. Some students had photos of their local gas station's prices, to which someone pointed out that their new apartment would be on the other side of town where gas was more expensive (smart kid). Some students just couldn't make it work (usually the mistakes were to be expected of middle-class middle-schoolers, like finding a job babysitting and stretching that out full-time, only working one job, buying everything new from clothes to furniture, thinking you absolutely need convenience items you can do without, and/or trying to buy the same upscale car your dad takes to work), though most students were able to provide at least a plausible before-tax budget. A few made the extra credit work, which was a lot of extra credit, because not only were you filling out a 1040EZ for your estimated income taxes, you were also figuring FICA and Social Security taxes which even some adults don't know the rates for, and remember, no Internet. Given that the extra-extra credit required you to come out ahead after taxes (good luck), I can't remember that anyone got that far. The meta-lesson that we all learned? Life without a college education is rough.\""}
{"id": "335294", "text": "\"Since you have emphasized that you don't mind about variability, and that you have other funds you could liquidate, then I think a solution is to do with this money the same thing that you are already doing with those other funds. Then when you need the money, if the market has gone up sell the lots that were part of your original \"\"other funds\"\", which presumably have aged enough to qualify for long term gains rates, and let the newly purchased shares take their place.\""}
{"id": "335357", "text": "Your question indicates confusion regarding what an Individual Retirement Account (whether Roth or Traditional) is vs. the S&P 500, which is nothing but a list of stocks. IOW, it's perfectly reasonable to open a Roth IRA, put your $3000 in it, and then use that money to buy a mutual fund or ETF which tracks the S&P 500. In fact, it's ridiculously common...  :)"}
{"id": "335543", "text": "Our company gives the best business valuation services. If you want to any business valuation service, then you can come to our company website. When it comes to obtaining a business valuation, business owners are faced with a myriad of choices of the business valuation services. Kirk Kleckner valuation businesses need understanding and analysis of a variety of complex factors including detailed technical knowledge of value drivers and in-depth industry knowledge."}
{"id": "335606", "text": "Remember that long term appreciation has tax advantages over short-term dividends. If you buy shares of a company, never earn any dividends, and then sell the stock for a profit in 20 years, you've essentially deferred all of the capital gains taxes (and thus your money has compounded faster) for a 20 year period. For this reason, I tend to favor non-dividend stocks, because I want to maximize my long-term gain. Another example, in estate planning, is something called a step-up basis:"}
{"id": "335667", "text": "There's no standard formula. You can compare the going rates on the market for unsecured LOCs and take that as the starting anchor. Unsecured lines of credit run in the US at about 8-18%. Your risk should be reflected in the rate, and I see no reason why the rate would change throughout the loan. As to the amount of principal changing? Just chose one of the standard compounding options - daily (most precise, but most tedious to calculate), monthly average balance, etc."}
{"id": "335774", "text": "Pay attention to nickel-and-dime charges (atm fees, low balance fees, limit on atm transactions per month, charge for human teller transaction, charge for paper statements or tax records).  Consider that a financial company will spend on the order of $100-500 to sign up a good customer.  Are you getting this in a cash bonus, competitive high interest rate, reasonable other gift, or advertising directed at your eyeballs?  A variation in rates less than 1% easily fits into a marketing cost and there doesn't have to be any other magic to it."}
{"id": "335991", "text": "I would always suggest rolling over 401(k) plans to traditional IRAs when possible.  Particularly, assuming there is enough money in them that you can get a fee-free account at somewhere like Fidelity or Vanguard.  This is for a couple of reasons. First off, it opens up your investment choices significantly and can allow you significantly reduced expenses related to the account.  You may be able to find a superior offering from Vanguard or Fidelity to what your employer's 401(k) plan allows; typically they only allow a small selection of funds to choose from.  You also may be able to reduce the overhead fees, as many 401(k) plans charge you an administrative fee for being in the plan separate from the funds' costs. Second, it allows you to condense 401(k)s over time; each time you change employers, you can rollover your 401(k) to your regular IRA and not have to deal with a bunch of different accounts with different passwords and such.  Even if they're all at the same provider, odds are you will have to use separate accounts. Third, it avoids issues if your employer goes out of business.  While 401(k) plans are generally fully funded (particularly for former employers who you don't have match or vesting concerns with), it can be a pain sometimes when the plan is terminated to access your funds - they may be locked for months while the bankruptcy court works things out. Finally, employers sometimes make it expensive for you to stay in - particularly if you do have a very small amount.  Don't assume you're allowed to stay in the former employer's 401(k) plan fee-free; the plan will have specific instructions for what to do if you change employers, and it may include being required to leave the plan - or more often, it could increase the fees associated with the plan if you stay in.  Getting out sometimes will save you significantly, even with a low-cost plan."}
{"id": "336043", "text": "I don't see this article being about the merit of the customers claim but rather the condition of sale:  &gt; You agree not to file any complaint, chargeback, claim, dispute, or make any public forum post, review, Better Business Bureau complaint, social media post, or any public statement regarding the order, our website, or any issue regarding your order, for any reason, within this 90 day period, or to threaten to do so within the 90 day period, or it is a breach of the terms of sale, creating liability for damages in the amount of $250, plus any additional fees, damages - both consequential and incidental, calculated on an ongoing basis.  I'm happy to rally my pitchfork against any company that includes these conditions."}
{"id": "336053", "text": "\"There are a few of ways to do this: Ask the seller if they will hold a Vendor Take-Back Mortgage or VTB. They essentially hold a second mortgage on the property for a shorter amortization (1 - 5 years) with a higher interest rate than the bank-held mortgage. The upside for the seller is he makes a little money on the second mortgage. The downsides for the seller are that he doesn't get the entire purchase price of the property up-front, and that if the buyer goes bankrupt, the vendor will be second in line behind the bank to get any money from the property when it's sold for amounts owing. Look for a seller that is willing to put together a lease-to-own deal. The buyer and seller agree to a purchase price set 5 years in the future. A monthly rent is calculated such that paying it for 5 years equals a 20% down payment. At the 5 year mark you decide if you want to buy or not. If you do not, the deal is nulled. If you do, the rent you paid is counted as the down payment for the property and the sale moves forward. Find a private lender for the down payment. This is known as a \"\"hard money\"\" lender for a reason: they know you can't get it anywhere else. Expect to pay higher rates than a VTB. Ask your mortgage broker and your real estate agent about these options.\""}
{"id": "336268", "text": "\"Your CHMC insurance is payable to the lender not to you if you default. So technically you get nothing from it. However the likelihood is that you could not have got this loan, or got it only at an extremely high interest rate, without this insurance. The Canadian government has a page on CHMC, including a link to a page called \"\"What's in it for you?\"\".\""}
{"id": "336394", "text": "The main restrictions you see with IRA's involve contributions, and not the actual investments themselves. I would be indifferent to having a single investment across multiple accounts. It might be a bit trickier to manage, especially if your strategy involves some specific asset allocation. Other than account management though, there's no big issue."}
{"id": "336399", "text": "Yes, via a margin account, one can trade or transfer on unsettled funds. These are tight regulations that begin with the Federal Reserve, extend to FINRA, and downward. In a cash account, this is not possible. Since speed is a necessity, a margin account can actually be approved nearly instantly."}
{"id": "336468", "text": "\"For a newly registered business, you'll be using your \"\"personal\"\" credit score to get the credit.  You will need to sign for the credit card personally so that if your business goes under, they still get paid. Your idea of opening a business card to increase your credit score is not a sound one. Business plastic might not show up on   your personal credit history. While   some issuers report business accounts   on a consumer's personal credit   history, others don't. This cuts both ways. Some   entrepreneurs want business cards on   their personal reports, believing   those nice high limits and good   payment histories will boost their   scores. Other small business owners,   especially those who keep high running   balances, know that including that   credit line could potentially lower   their personal credit scores even if   they pay off the cards in full every   month. There is one instance in which the   card will show up on your personal   credit history: if you go into   default. You're not entitled to a   positive mark, \"\"but if you get a   negative mark, it will go on your   personal report,\"\" Frank says. And some further information related to evaluating a business for a credit card: If an issuer is evaluating you for a   business card, the company should be   asking about your business, says   Frank. In addition, there \"\"should be   something on the application that   indicates it's for business use,\"\" he   says. Bottom line: If it's a business   card, expect that the issuer will want   at least some information pertaining   to your business. There is additional underwriting for   small business cards, says Alfonso. In   addition to personal salary and credit   scores, business owners \"\"can share   financials with us, and we evaluate   the entire business financial   background in order to give them   larger lines,\"\" she says. Anticipate that the issuer will check   your personal credit, too. \"\"The vast   majority of business cards are based   on a personal credit score,\"\" says   Frank. In addition, many issuers ask   entrepreneurs to personally guarantee   the accounts. That means even if the   businesses go bust, the owners promise   to repay the debts. Source\""}
{"id": "336701", "text": "\"Doing what you suggest may actually be helpful. Today, you have wealth of 145k and debt of 140k, for net wealth of 5k. Your interest incurred is $671/month and your interest earned is $211, for a total loss of $460/month, just below the 491 $/month you are saving, so your total saving is $31/month currently. However, even though in total, you have more money each month than the month before, you are getting more debt and thus more interest to pay each month. Your interest earned is increasing much slower. That $31/month you are currently able to save? By the time you hit 51, that has become $0/month and is still dropping. By 60? Your debt has overtaken your retirement savings - that $5 net worth you have now is gone. If you were to withdraw money from your retirement to pay off your debt (with the $32k penalties) you would have wealth of 70k and debt of 97k, for a net wealth of -27k (i.e. net debt). Obviously, the above is not good. However, you reduce your monthly interest paid to $465, while also reducing your interest earned to $102. This is a total loss of $365/month, so you are saving $126/month.  Note that in this case, your $491 monthly repayment is higher than the interest you have to pay on the account, this means that each month, your interest payment becomes lower, thus you pay off more and more each month. Your balance would be getting better each month (and at a faster rate each month. Your net wealth would be back in positives and above your wealth on your current trajectory before you hit 62. By 65, you will have $9000 of net wealth if you use your retirement savings now, as opposed to $9000 net debt if you don't. And just adding a few things on to the end 1) This is just the maths of it, and does not take into account your behaviour. If having that debt accruing is helping to motivate you to give up on luxuries, then this analysis does not apply. I am assuming that the $491/month is literally all you can save, and that no matter what changes, you will always deposit that $491. If you do not think you can continue to deposit that $491 if you stop seeing such high interest accruing, then do not do this. 2) I am assuming your interest earned on your IRA is 1.75%. If this is not the case, then please let me know, and I can adjust my numbers accordingly. From http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/01/28/obama-state-of-the-union-myra-savings-plan/4992743/ 3) I'm assuming all numbers you mentioned are accurate, and will stay constant (interest rates may not) 4) This is not professional, financial advice. I am just a person on the internet.  5) This goes without saying (and will probably go down as well as \"\"let them eat cake\"\" did), but saving more money each month will be a more powerful, risk free way to get out of this problem. Work a 2nd job, cut costs however you can. 6) Sorry if you were looking for something more motivational or sugar coated.  7) Best of luck, feel free to ask any questions. Graph below in red is your current trajectory, and blue is if you withdraw from your retirement to pay off your debt.\""}
{"id": "336847", "text": "our mortgage has been sold to a secondary market player. There are multiple ways in which the deal is struck. At times the risk of default is with Original FI [with recourse], at times it is with secondary FI [without recourse]. The rate can be discounted. So the Original FI collects the EMI as per 3.75 and pays to the secondary FI at 3.25. Or it can also be one time fixed amount. How could this possibly be financially beneficial for the original loan holder? As indicated, there are multiple ways the Original FI makes money, either one time or over the period, depending on how the deal is struck. Are they truly making enough money from the mortgage fees and first payment's interest to to warrant their need to clear up their credit line for new mortgages?   Are mortgages always sold for less than the remaining principal? No broadly speaking the mortgage fees cover the cost for initiating the loan. There may be a very small amount banks may make. This is incidental. The actual money is made in the interest that is collected every month. If a Bank as say 5 loans for 100K each. It is very reputed brand and 10 people need 100K loans. Then it makes sense for the First FI to give loan to 5 people for 100K each, and sell this at profit to secondary FI. Take the 100K * 5 and give it off to new 5 people. Effectively making more money on the original 500K the bank had."}
{"id": "337049", "text": "Say I am an employee of Facebook and I will be able to sell stares at enough of a profit to pay of my mortgage and have enough money left to cover my living costs for many years. I also believe that there is a 95% chance that the stock price will go up in the next few years. Do I take a 5% risk, when I can transform my life without taking any risk?   (The USA tax system as explained by JoeTaxpayer increases the risk.)  So you have a person being very logical and selling stocks that they believe will go up in value by more than any other investment they could have.   It is called risk control. (Lot of people will know the above; therefore some people will delay buying stock until Lock Up expiration day hoping the price will be lower on that day.   So the price may not go down.)"}
{"id": "337079", "text": "For example: Dinner together: DR Food          50 DR Spouse        50 CR Credit Card       100"}
{"id": "337097", "text": "\"Selling an asset is not earning income. You are basically moving value from one asset (the laptop) to another (your bank account.) So you reduce the equity that is \"\"value of all my electronics\"\" and you increase the asset that is your bank account. In your case, you never entered the laptop in some category called \"\"value of all my electronics\"\" so you don't have that to make a double-entry against. The temptation is high to call it income as a result. Depending on the reason for all this double-entry book-keeping for personal finances, that may be fine. Or, you can create a category for balancing and use that, and realize the (negative) value of that account doesn't mean much.\""}
{"id": "337706", "text": "In most cases the rent paid by the company would be include as part of your salary for tax purposes, so your income would still be seen as $5000 per month."}
{"id": "337938", "text": "\"Ya it's not really young \"\"modern\"\" people buying these houses. I personally believe it's immigrant students, who use their parents money (as a sort of bypass), or just younger people who have rich parents, or get help from their parents. A lot of older people are still buying houses as well. It's quite a stupid landscape, from an economic perspective it's very inefficient, but that's not an issue that directly effects me, or that can easily be fixed. The cheapest you can find a \"\"decent\"\" house that I know, is about 2-3 hours north of the city, for around 500k. It's just a different lifestyle; you wouldn't be commuting downtown anyway, but it depends on the person and the job\""}
{"id": "337993", "text": "\"This answer is about the USA. Each time you sell a security (a stock or a bond) or some other asset, you are expected to pay tax on the net gain. It doesn't matter whether you use a broker or mutual fund to make the sale. You still owe the tax. Net capital gain is defined this way: Gross sale prices less (broker fees for selling + cost of buying the asset) The cost of buying the asset is called the \"\"basis price.\"\"  You, or your broker, needs to keep track of the basis price for each share. This is easy when you're just getting started investing. It stays easy if you're careful about your record keeping.  You owe the capital gains tax whenever you sell an asset, whether or not you reinvest the proceeds in something else. If your capital gains are modest, you can pay all the taxes at the end of the year. If they are larger -- for example if they exceed your wage earnings -- you should pay quarterly estimated tax. The tax authorities ding you for a penalty if you wait to pay five- or six-figure tax bills without paying quarterly estimates.  You pay NET capital gains tax. If one asset loses money and another makes money, you pay on your gains minus your losses. If you have more losses than gains in a particular year, you can carry forward up to $3,000 (I think). You can't carry forward tens of thousands in capital losses.  Long term and short term gains are treated separately. IRS Schedule B has places to plug in all those numbers, and the tax programs (Turbo etc) do too. Dividend payments are also taxable when they are paid. Those aren't capital gains. They go on Schedule D along with interest payments. The same is true for a mutual fund. If the fund has Ford shares in it, and Ford pays $0.70 per share in March, that's a dividend payment. If the fund managers decide to sell Ford and buy Tesla in June,  the selling of Ford shares will be a cap-gains taxable event for you.  The good news: the mutual fund managers send you a statement sometime in February or March of each year telling what you should put on your tax forms.  This is great. They add it all up for you. They give you a nice consolidated tax statement covering everything: dividends, their buying and selling activity on your behalf, and any selling they did when you withdrew money from the fund for any purpose.   Some investment accounts like 401(k) accounts are tax free. You don't pay any tax on those accounts -- capital gains, dividends, interest -- until you withdraw the money to live on after you retire. Then that money is taxed as if it were wage income. If you want an easy and fairly reliable way to invest, and don't want to do a lot of tax-form scrambling, choose a couple of different mutual funds, put money into them, and leave it there. They'll send you consolidated tax statements once a year. Download them into your tax program and you're done. You mentioned \"\"riding out bad times in cash.\"\"  No, no, NOT a good idea. That investment strategy almost guarantees you will sell when the market is going down and buy when it's going up. That's \"\"sell low, buy high.\"\" It's a loser. Not even Warren Buffett can call the top of the market and the bottom.  Ned Johnson (Fidelity's founder) DEFINITELY can't.\""}
{"id": "338174", "text": "In real estate,loan consolidation essentially means taking out a large loan on one property from the proceeds of which you pay off all the other mortgages. Unless you are able (or willing) to reveal how much more you can borrow against your home or the third property (who has the remaining interest in the third property, and would they be willing to mortgage the property?) there is no way of discussing how much you might be able to borrow and against what."}
{"id": "338277", "text": "There are two totally different things: There is your limited company, and there is yourself.  Your limited company will absolutely have to pay 20% corporation tax on all its profits. The profits are the income of the limited company (you say it's \u00a35,000 a year) minus all expenses. Usually you would pay yourself a salary, which immediately reduces your profits. And of course the payment to the accountant will reduce the profits.  If the limited company is your only source of income, the usual method is to pay yourself \u00a310,600 salary a year, possible pay money into a pension for yourself which is tax free and reduces the company's profits, pay 20% corporation on the rest, and pay yourself a dividend twice a year. Unless you have another job where you make a lot of money, you should have paid all that money to yourself as income and paid zero corporation tax.  And may I say that if you made \u00a35,000 a year, then there is most likely not enough going on to justify that an accountant charges you \u00a3600. You should be able to find someone doing it cheaper; I cannot imagine that he or she had to do a lot of work for this."}
{"id": "338315", "text": "&gt; mostly-passive funds consisting of a sufficiently diverse array of holdings with historically* low volatility  &gt; 3.Market it with excessive jargon to impress laymen   A quantitative-based global strategy with a wide coverage of asset classes that exhibit returns robustness and high inverted-alpha*. Uses the cutting edge of artificial intelligence to synthetically replicate index portfolios that maximizes benchmark correlation.   ^^*Defined ^^as ^^1/alpha, ^^as ^^alpha ^^-&gt; ^^0 ^^then ^^inverted ^^alpha ^^-&gt; ^^infinity."}
{"id": "338344", "text": "\"Has anyone done this before? I'm sure someone has, but it doesn't completely remove any price risk.   Suppose you buy it at 10 and it drops to 5? Then you've lost 5 on the stock and have no realized gain on the option (although you could buy back the option cheaply and exist the position). To completely remove price risk you have to delta hedge.  At ATM option generally has a delta of 50%, meaning that the value of the option changes 0.50 for every $1 change in the stock. The downside to delta hedging is you can spend a lot on transaction fees and employ a lot of \"\"buy high, sell low\"\" transactions with a highly volatile stock.\""}
{"id": "338727", "text": "You have to call Interactive Brokers for this. This is what you should do, they might even have a web chat. These are very broker specific idiosyncrasies, because although margin rules are standardized to an extent, when they start charging you for interest and giving you margin until settlement may not be standardized. I mean, I can call them and tell you what they said for the 100 rep."}
{"id": "338953", "text": "You can find the details in the IRS instructions for the form 5405. Summary - you have to repay the credit if you move, even if it is because you were laid off. However, if you sell the house, the repayment is limited by your gains. If you sell at a loss - you don't need to repay. Also, if you die, you don't have to repay, don't know if it helps."}
{"id": "339509", "text": "no offense, but clicking through to that guys blog and fund page he seems like a charlatan and a snake oil salesman. It's not surprising that he doesn't like asset manager software because he himself is an asset manager. the software is trying to replace him.  He doesn't make money by beating the market... he makes money by convincing others that he can... he is exactly the type of person that the original article is warning against investing with."}
{"id": "339528", "text": "what's unrealistic? applying a DCF model to the two possible options?  i didn't claim my description of the situation was comprehensive, didn't ask for input as to whether or not i was considering all possible factors.   why couldn't i use a DCF for a personal choice? any why would i use a RFR if the undertaking requires a risk premium? (or at least doesn't have the same risk level)"}
{"id": "339955", "text": "I don't know of any financial account that offers that kind of protection. I'm going to echo @Brick and say that if you need that level of restrictions on the money, you should talk to a lawyer. Your only option may be to setup a trust. If you are willing to go with a lower level of restrictions on the account, a 529 plan could do the job. A 529 Plan is an education savings plan operated by a state or educational institution designed to help families set aside funds for future college costs. It will be in your daughters name, and has the benefit of being tax advantaged, unless its used for non educational expenses. Since your daughter is a minor, there would have to be a custodian for the account that manages it on her behalf. The penalty for using it for non educational expenses might suffice to keep the custodian from draining the account, and I believe the custodian has a fiduciary duty to the account holder, which would open them up to lawsuits if the custodian did act in a way that was detrimental to your child."}
{"id": "340263", "text": "\"The American \"\"Security Exchange  Commission\"\" has imposed a rule upon all stock trading accounts. This rule is \"\"Regulation-T\"\". This rule specifies that stock trading accounts must be permitted three days after the termination of a trade to settle the account. This is just fancy lingo to justify the guarantee that the funds are either transferred out of your account to another persons  (the person that made money), or the money flows into your account.  A \"\"Day Trader's\"\" account avoids the hassle because you're borrowing money from your broker to trade with and circumvent Reg-T.  It's technically not how long you hold the trade that determines if you're a day trader, or not. It's your accounts liquidity and your credit worthiness.\""}
{"id": "340436", "text": "You bet if it was so simple. This is when financial acumen comes into its true form. The bank would never ever want to go insolvent. What it does is, take insurance against the borrower defaulting.  Remember the financial crisis of 2008 which was the outcome of borrowers defaulting. The banks had created derivatives based on the loans distributed. CDO, CDS are some of the simple derivatives banks sell to cover their backs in case of defaults. There are derivatives using these derivatives as underlyings which they then sold it across to other buyers including other banks. Google for Fabrice Tourre and you would realise how much deep the banks go to save themselves from defaulters. If everything fails then go to the government for help. That was what happened when the US government doled out $600 billion to save the financial sector."}
{"id": "340484", "text": "\"Allen, welcome to Money.SE. You've stumbled into the issue of Debt Snowball, which is the \"\"low balance\"\" method of paying off debt. The other being \"\"high interest.\"\" I absolutely agree that when one has a pile of cards, say a dozen, there is a psychological benefit to paying off the low balances and knocking off card after card. I am not dismissive of that motivation. Personal Finance has that first word, personal, and one size rarely fits all. For those who are numbers-oriented, it's worth doing the math, a simple spreadsheet showing the cost of the DS vs paying by rate.  If that cost is even a couple hundred dollars, I'll still concede that one less payment, envelope, stamp, etc, favors the DS method. On the other hand, there's the debt so large that the best payoff is 2 or 3 years away. During that time, $10000 paid toward the 24% card is saving you $2400/yr vs the $500 if paid toward 5% debt. Hard core DSers don't even want to discuss the numbers, strangely enough.  In your case, you don't have a pile of anything. The mortgage isn't even up for discussion. You have just 2 car loans. Send the $11,000 to the $19K loan carrying the 2.5%. This will save you $500 over the next 2 years vs paying the zero loan down. Once you've done that, the remaining $8000 will become your lowest balance, and you should flip to the Debt Snowball method, which will keep you paying that debt off.  DS is a tool that should be pulled out for the masses, the radio audience that The David (Dave Ramsey, radio show host) appeals to. They may comprise the majority of those with high credit card debt, and have greatest success using this method. But, you exhibit none of their symptoms, and are best served by the math. By bringing up the topic here, you've found yourself in the same situation as the guy who happens to order a white wine at a wedding, and finds his Mormon cousin offering to take him to an AA meeting the next day.  In past articles on this decision, I've referenced a spreadsheet one can download. It offers an easy way to see your choice without writing your own excel doc. For the situation described here, the low balance total interest is $546 vs $192 for the higher interest. Not quite the $500 difference I estimated. The $350 difference is low due to the small rate difference and relatively short payoffs. In my opinion, knowledge is power, and you can decide either way. What's important is that if you pay off the zero interest first, you can say \"\"I knew it was a $350 difference, but I'd rather have just one outstanding loan for the remain time.\"\" My issue with DS is when it's preached like a religion, and followers are told to not even run the numbers. I wrote an article, Thinking about Dave Ramsey a number of years back, but the topic never gets old.\""}
{"id": "340607", "text": "\"The \"\"price\"\" is the price of the last transaction that actually took place. According to Motley Fool wiki: A stock price is determined by what was last paid for it. During market hours (usually weekdays from 9:30AM-4:00PM eastern), a heavily traded issue will see its price change several times per second. A stock's price is, for many purposes, considered unchanged outside of market hours. Roughly speaking, a transaction is executed when an offer to buy matches an offer to sell. These offers are listed in the Order Book for a stock (Example: GOOG at Yahoo Finance).  This is actively updated during trading hours. This lists all the currently active buy (\"\"bid\"\") and sell (\"\"ask\"\") orders for a stock, and looks like this:  You'll notice that the stock price (again, the last sale price) will (usually*) be between the highest bid and the lowest ask price. * Exception: When all the buy or sell prices have moved down or up, but no trades have executed yet.\""}
{"id": "340661", "text": "Unless you started a bank or other kind of a financial institution (brokerage, merchant processor, etc etc), the page you linked to is irrelevant. That said, there's enough in the US tax code for you to reconsider your decision of not living in the US, or at least of being a shareholder of a foreign company. Your compliance costs are going to go through the roof. If you haven't broken any US tax laws yet (which is very unlikely), you may renounce your citizenship and save yourself a lot of money and trouble. But in the more likely case of you already being a criminal with regards the US tax law, you should probably get a proper tax advice from a US-licensed CPA/EA who's also proficient in the Japanese-American tax treaty and expats' compliance issues resolution."}
{"id": "340730", "text": "When your options vest, you will have the option to buy your company's stock at a particular price (the strike price). A big part of the value of the option is the difference between the price that your company's stock is trading at, and the strike price of the option. If the price of the company stock in the market is lower than the strike price of the option, they are almost worthless.  I say 'almost' because there is still the possibility that the stock price could go up before the options expire. If your company is big enough that their stock is not only listed on an exchange, but there is an active options market in your company's stock, you could get a feel for what they are worth by seeing what the market is willing to buy or sell similar exchange listed options. Once the options have vested, you now have the right to purchase your company's stock at the specified strike price until the options expire.  When you use that right, you are exercising the option.  You don't have to do that until you think it is worthwhile buying company stock at that price. If the company pays a dividend, it would probably be worth exercising the options sooner, (options don't receive a dividend).  Ultimately you are buying your company's stock (albeit at a discount).  You need to see if your company's stock is still a good investment. If you think your company has growth prospects, you might want to hold onto the stock.  If you think you'd be better off putting your money elsewhere in the market, sell the stock you acquired at a discount and use the money to invest in something else. If there are any additional benefits to holding on to the stock for a period of time (e.g. selling part to fit within your capital gain allowance for that year) you should factor that into your investment decision, but it shouldn't force you to invest in, or remain invested in something you would otherwise view as too risky to invest in. A reminder of that fact is that some employees of Enron invested their entire retirement plans into Enron stock, so when Enron went bankrupt, these employees not only lost their job but their savings for retirement as well..."}
{"id": "340815", "text": "When you buy a futures contract you are entering into an agreement to buy gold, in the future (usually a 3 month settlement date).  this is not an OPTION, but a contract, so each party is taking risk, the seller that the price will rise, the buyer that the price will fall.  Unlike an option which you can simply choose not to exercise if the price goes down, with futures you are obligated to follow through. (or sell the contract to someone else, or buy it back)  The price you pay depends on the margin, which is related to how far away the settlement date is, but you can expect around 5% , so the minimum you could get into is 100 troy ounces, at todays price, times 5%.  Since we're talking about 100 troy ounces, that means the margin required to buy the smallest sized future contract would be about the same as buying 5 ounces of gold.  roughly $9K at current prices. If you are working through a broker they will generally require you to sell or buy back the contract before the settlement date as they don't want to deal with actually following through on the purchase and having to take delivery of the gold.  How much do you make or lose? Lets deal with a smaller change in the price, to be a bit more realistic since we are talking typically about a settlement date that is 3 months out. And to make the math easy lets bump the price of gold to $2000/ounce.  That means the price of a futures contract is going to be $10K   Lets say the price goes up 10%,  Well you have basically a 20:1 leverage since you only paid 5%, so you stand to gain $20,000. Sounds great right?  WRONG.. because as good as the upside is, the downside is just as bad.  If the price went down 10% you would be down $20000, which means you would not only have to cough up the 10K you committed but you would be expected to 'top up the margin' and throw in  ANOTHER $10,000 as well.  And if you can't pay that up your broker might close out your position for you. oh and if the price hasn't changed, you are mostly just out the fees and commissions you paid to buy and sell the contract.  With futures contracts you can lose MORE than your original investment.  NOT for the faint of heart or the casual investor.  NOT for folks without large reserves who can afford to take big losses if things go against them.  I'll close this answer with a quote from the site I'm linking below The large majority of people who trade futures lose their money.   That's a fact. They lose even when they are right in the medium term,   because futures are fatal to your wealth on an unpredicted and   temporary price blip. Now consider that, especially the bit about 'price blip' and then look at the current volatility of most markets right now, and I think you can see how futures trading can be as they say 'Fatal to your Wealth' (man, I love that phrase, what a great way of putting it)  This Site has a pretty decent primer on the whole thing. their view is perhaps a bit biased due to the nature of their business, but on the whole their description of how things work is pretty decent.  Investopedia has a more detailed (and perhaps more objective) tutorial on the futures thing.  Well worth your time if you think you want to do anything related to the futures market."}
{"id": "340919", "text": "If you will be there 5-6 years it could be viable. Here are some of the cost considerations: There may be some more fees, but that should be the bulk of it - You'll have to do the math on all of the above and see which makes sense :)"}
{"id": "340934", "text": "&gt; I'm certain there is a very strong relationship between the amounts written on the checks and the worth of that product or service to the person with the pen.  Counterexample:   Let's say you are a professional horse gambler with winning strategy (let's say you can predict horses better than anyone!) playing against other players on the betting exchange. The person on the other end will always end up paying you and gets nothing."}
{"id": "341146", "text": "While tax deferral is a nice feature, the 401k is not the Holy Grail.  I've seen plenty of 401k's where the investment options are horrible: sub-par performance, high fees, limited options.   That's great that you've maxed out your Roth IRA.  I commend you for that.   As long as the investment options in your 401k are good, then I would stick with it."}
{"id": "341455", "text": "The other answers are good, but not UK-specific. You need to look for an Independent Financial Advisor (IFA). These are regulated by the FCA and you pay them a time-based fee for their services, they do not take commission on the products they recommend to you.  The Government Money Advice Service page (hat tip to @AndyT in the comments on the question for the link) tells you how to go about finding one of these and what sort of questions to ask. Contrary to the note in the answer by @Harper, in the UK many IFAs do have perfectly nice offices, this is not a sign that should put you off.  Personal recommendations for IFAs are usually the best way to go but failing that there are directories of them and many will have an initial conversation with you for free to ensure you are aligned with each other."}
{"id": "341473", "text": "Not clear what you're asking.  Are you trying to figure out their SIC/NAISC classification?  That tells you the business category they fall into, but there's no simple, instant way to find that out.  Much also depends on how the credit card issuer has classified them and how they arrived at that information. They may have a different means of classifying merchants, so you might try to call your bank and ask them, if they're able/willing to tell you.  That'll give you a starting point to figure it out, anyway."}
{"id": "341579", "text": "Damn. I just looked to confirm. Without reinvestment (but just holding dividends), looks like the return through 2013 is 0 and then there have been decent returns since 2013, but holy shit, it does not look good at all. All of that not adjusted for inflation.  I wonder how much of that shitty performance can be reasonably classified as 'necessary' due to the spin-off of GE Capital, which generated a lot of the profit for GE but really was a huge problem for them when liquidity became scarce in 2008."}
{"id": "341747", "text": "\"Yes, the annual contribution \"\"limits\"\" are effectively higher for Roth accounts than for the corresponding Traditional account, if that is what you are referring to, since the \"\"nominal\"\" limit is the same, but for Roth it's after-tax money, while for Traditional it's pre-tax money, which is equivalent to a lesser amount of after-tax money.\""}
{"id": "341837", "text": "It is important to consider your overall financial goals (especially in the 3-5 year range). If you have another financial goal which cannot be met without that additional money then meeting that financial goal might take priority over what I am about to say. Your mortgage rate is another important factor to consider when answering this question. Extra mortgage payments are equivalent to investing that money in a VERY low risk investment with an equivalent yield of the mortgage rate because you will be paying that much less per year in interest. (Actually, when you consider that mortgage interest is often tax-deductible the equivalent yield should be reduced by your income tax rate.) Typically it is not possible to find such a low risk investment with a yield as high as your mortgage rate. For example current mortgage rates are over twice as high as the yield of a one year CD.  Also keep in mind that additional mortgage payments help you build equity. This equity will most likely be applied to your next home purchase. If so their effect will be in place throughout the life of your next mortgage too."}
{"id": "341912", "text": "I have abused 0% interest programs time and time again, but only because my wife and I are assiduous about paying our bills on time. We've mostly taken advantage of it with bigger purchases that we've done through Lowe's or Home Depot (eg - washing machines, carpeting, stove, fridge), but its been well worth it.  There are two rules that we set for ourselves whenever we do a 0% interest program -- 1) We have the money already in savings so that we can easily pay it off at any time 2) We agree to pay our monthly bill on time There's nothing quite like using another person's money to buy your things, while keeping your money to gain interest in a savings account."}
{"id": "341930", "text": "This is a present value calculation, which excel or any financial calculator can handle.  N = 300 (months) %i = 5/12 or .05/12 depending on the program/calculator PMT = $5000 (the monthly payment) FV = 0 (you want to end at zero balance) This calculates a PV (present value of $855,300)  Chad had it right, but used a calculator that didn't offer the PV function, so he guessed and changed numbers til the answer was clear. user379 makes a good point, but why start inflation calculations at 65, and not now? You look like you're in your 30's, so there's 30 years of inflation, and $60K/yr in today's value will need to be closer to $150K/yr, given about 30 years of 3% inflation."}
{"id": "342018", "text": "\"A few ideas. I suggest it would wise to consider what lesson is learned as a result of any resolution of a financial issue. Is it a lesson of responsibility and of the importance of keeping one's word, or of getting away with whatever happens (poorly planned business) with no adverse consequences. \"\"No\"\" consequences (e.g. forgiven loan) is also a consequence, and it sends a message. Sounds like paying the loan from your savings automatically means it's deducted from inheritance, since the savings are part of that inheritance. This may seem like a square deal if we ignore inflation. Assuming Today the $54K is worth much more than, unless it is adjusted for inflation, the same $54K will be worth (i.e. will allow to buy) a few decades from now, when the inheritance materializes.  So this option means your son is foregoing a significantly smaller financial loss in the future in exchange for foregoing his debt completely today. This is like borrowing $54K from a bank now, and only having to forego the same amount decades in the future when it is in fact worth much less. What borrower would not be happy with such arrangement, and what lender would do it? Only one's own loving parents :) You are in charge of what life lessons your son will walk away with from this situation. Good luck!\""}
{"id": "342212", "text": "I've been a landlord and also a tenant. I have been able to deposit money in an account, where I have the account number, and/or a deposit slip. In a foreign bank you can deposit by a machine if in the bank or someone is there for you and knows the account number. With regards to cashing a check in another country, it is up to the bank and the time is at least 14 to 21 business days, with a fee is added. As of a winning check, since its in your name, if you are in another country sign the check, for deposit only with a deposit slip and send it to your out of country bank by FedEx - you will have a tracking number, where as regular mail it might get there in 3 months. I hope by now you came to your solution."}
{"id": "342401", "text": "Bollinger Bands are placed standard deviations away from the moving average. Therefore if the price is volatile, the bands diverge from the mean. During consolidation the bands would converge. They do not provide a clear indication of whether the price is trending or not."}
{"id": "342491", "text": "\"Neither. Why would you have to classify startups as value or growth?  A startup is its own category.  You can find startups at \"\"classic\"\" valuations (price/book...  Etc) that would make investors' eyes water...   But that happens because many startups are early stage and so revenue or book value or other classic valuations don't quite suit.\""}
{"id": "342604", "text": "Just read that citi is planning to return 132% of their expected earnings to shareholders over the next year in the WSJ. How does a bank return more to its shareholders than what it makes? Also banks requesting payouts in these stress tests of 100% of expected future earnings.   Am I missing something? Doesnt make much sense to me.   Hope someone sees this thanks."}
{"id": "342809", "text": "But how long to hold is the question...how long did this assumed manipulation go on for last time?  Edit: a quick half assed check on investopedia showed that it went up for around a month from its lowest point and it's high hit on feburary 6-8th 2017. So will it stay at this point again and gradually repeat February's numbers...or sell and walk away with what it netted me."}
{"id": "343206", "text": "Look through the related questions.  Make sure you fund the max your tax advantaged retirement funds will take this year.  Use the 30k to backstop any shortfalls.  Invest the rest in a brokerage account. In and out of your tax advantaged accounts, try to invest in index funds.  Your feeling that paying someone to manage your investments might not be the best use is shared by many.  jlcollinsnh is a financial independence blogger.  He, and many others, recommend the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Admiral Shares.  I have not heard of a lower expense ratio (0.05%). Search for financial independence and FIRE (Financial Independence Retire Early).  Use your windfall to set yourself on that road, and you will be less likely to sit where I am 25 years from now wishing you had done things differently. Edit:  Your attitude should be that the earliest money in your portfolio is in there the longest, and earns the most.  Starting with a big windfall puts you years ahead of where you'd normally be.  If you set your goal to retire at 40, that money will be worth significantly more in 20 years. (4x what you start with, assuming 7% average yearly return)."}
{"id": "343219", "text": "You realise a capital gain as soon as you sell the stock. At that point, you will have to pay taxes on the profits when you fill in your tax return. The fact that you used the money to subsequently purchase other stocks is not relevant, unless you sell those stocks within the same tax year. For example, purchase $5000 of stock A in 2010. Sell for $6000 in 2010. Purchase $6000 of stock B in 2010. Sell stock B for $6500 in 2010. Purchase $6500 of stock C in 2010. Sell stock C for $7000 in 2011. You owe capital gains on ($6000 - $5000) + ($6500 - $6000) = $1500 for tax year 2010. You owe capital gains on ($7000 - $6500) = $500 for 2011."}
{"id": "343472", "text": "Wish I could upvote this more than once. I built my company on my integrity and customer service. I have had numerous referrals through a few key elements such as * Showing up to every job ON TIME. you have no idea how much people appreciate it when you say you will be there at 1PM and show up at 12:56PM. * Breaking down what I am doing for the customer so they get a feel for what they are paying for (if they show interest, that is) * Eye contact, body language, and any other way you can exude honesty makes a world of a difference. I happen to be somewhat charming which assists me here, but anyone can do it.  I think these points have allow my business to grow faster than expected, and I am in a similar industry (electrical)."}
{"id": "343594", "text": "\"Remember that in most news outlets journalists do not get to pick the titles of their articles.  That's up to the editor.  So even though the article was primarily about ETFs, the reporter made the mistake of including some tangential references to mutual funds.  The editor then saw that the article talked about ETFs and mutual funds and -- knowing even less about the subject matter than the reporter, but recognizing that more readers' eyeballs would be attracted to a headline about mutual funds than to a headline about ETFs -- went with the \"\"shocking\"\" headline about the former. In any case, as you already pointed out, ETFs need to know their value throughout the day, as do the investors in that ETF.  Even momentary outages of price sources can be disastrous. Although mutual funds do not generally make transactions throughout the day, and fund investors are not typically interested in the fund's NAV more than once per day, the fund managers don't just sit around all day doing nothing and then press a couple buttons before the market closes.  They do watch their NAV very closely during the day and think very carefully about which buttons to press at the end of the day.  If their source of stock price data goes offline, then they're impacted almost as severely as -- if less visibly than -- an ETF. Asking Yahoo for prices seems straightforward, but (1) you get what you pay for, and (2) these fund companies are built on massive automated infrastructures that expect to receive their data from a certain source in a certain way at a certain time.  (And they pay a lot of money in order to be able to expect that.)  It would be quite difficult to just feed in manual data, although in the end I suspect some of these companies did just that.  Either they fell back to a secondary data supplier, or they manually constructed datasets for their programs to consume.\""}
{"id": "343632", "text": "As an expansion on the correct answer: Consider a really boring economy.  Nothing changes;  wages and prices stay constant for years at a time.  Every month the Consumer Price Index stays at 0%.   Then, something catastrophic happens, say on July 31, 2000. A cheap local source for a vital resource runs out, and it must be obtained from a higher cost source.  Floods cut internal road networks, resulting in higher transportation costs.  Whatever.  The new situation is permanent. As a result, the next month, August, 2000, prices go up 5%.  That is, 5% higher than the previous month, July, 2000, and 5% higher than a year previously, August 1999. There is a lot of consternation, and politicians each promise that they and only they can wrestle inflation to the ground. But, when the figures for September, 2000 come out, inflation stays the same.  Prices are the same as in August, 2000, and 5% higher than in September, 1999. This goes on for months.  Nothing changes, prices stay the same, and the inflation rate, year over year, stays at 5%. Finally, the figures for August, 2001 come out.  Wonder of wonders;  prices are the same as in August, 2000, and inflation drops to zero.   And the politicians all take the credit. Short version: inflation year over year changes either because of what in now included in the month just past, or what is now excluded from a year ago."}
{"id": "343708", "text": "\"The US withholding tax applies to stocks/ETFs purchased on the NYSE and other US-based exchanges. If you buy Cenovus on the TSE then you will not be charged this tax.  Your last sentence seems like you might be misunderstanding this tax though. If the tax applied, it would not cost you 15% on all your profits, it only applies to dividend yields. So if it pays you a 5% dividend, the tax costs you 0.75%. However, if you buy at $21.19 and sell at $26, then your capital gain is not subject to withholding taxes. It is however, subject to Canadian income tax (at 50% of the gain amount) when it's not sheltered in a TFSA or other registered account. The tax on the gains could easily amount to 16% of your profits, which is a much more significant cost. Therefore, having to pay a 0.75% withholding cost certainly does not \"\"defeat the purpose of the TFSA\"\" which is to shelter from Canadian income tax!\""}
{"id": "343823", "text": "I think the key to intrinsic value is that if you have something with *intrinsic* value, you can derive some direct benefit from it without trading.  For example a house has intrinsic value because without trading it, you can use it to stay warm and dry, and use it to store your stuff. Money - whether it's federal currency or bitcoin - has a very low intrinsic value. What can you do with cash without trading it? Maybe make some paper art or patch a leaking boat, but a $20 bill has very little practical (intrinsic) value until you trade it for goods or services. The same with bitcoin - you can't play it like a video game or drink it if you're thirsty, all you can do is trade it for things that you can use directly."}
{"id": "343850", "text": "assuming that a couple big players are making the majority of money in the stock market (which is true), it is logical to assume that most smaller players are losing.   For example, if one big hedge fund makes 20% a year,  it means either 20 funds lost 1%, or 5 funds lost 4%, and etc.   Assuming that the economy is not drastically getting much better, stocks are a zero sum game. Therefore, the couple of funds with the most resources will be taking from the people that aren't as advanced or taking a chance."}
{"id": "343961", "text": "\"Played \"\"the balance transfer game\"\" once recently, just as a reference - Got a balance transfer offer for a sock drawer no-AF card. 2% up-front fee, 0% APR. Grace period was, by the time I acted on it, about 16 months. Used it to pay down an auto loan with an APR slightly higher than 2%, and brought my equity back to positive. Towards the end when I rolled over the auto loan, thanks to the positive equity I was offered a rate discount on the new loan. Essentially this was a piggyback loan on the original auto loan funded by credit card (via balance transfer). Saved some interest charges without having to refinance.\""}
{"id": "343996", "text": "\"The fed does charge interest. Like you said, they do give profits to the treasury each year, but not all of their profits are sent back. They also pay dividends to the banks that hold stock in the Fed (I think it is like 7%).  But  yeah, since the fed does pay the rest back to the Treasury any interest it pays is basically moot.  &gt;If you don't already know, this is the modern version of \"\"printing money\"\".  This is the larger concern. If they are just buying bonds to implement monetary policy that is one thing. However, if they are financing the government debt because foreign investors are strapped for cash or don't want it, that is a bigger problem. I haven't been following closely enough to know if that is an issue here, but it seems treasury bills are in high demand at the moment so I don't think the fed is actually \"\"financing\"\" our budget, just keeping rates low (which does create problems but that's a different conversation).\""}
{"id": "344037", "text": "I'm specifically talking about QE and printing excessive money to pay off government liabilities. But yeah true. It amazes me how stupid people are in general to not realize this is happening. This is literally the (biggest) reason wages in america are depressed. They're not 'depressed', their real value is tiny."}
{"id": "344175", "text": "The benefit of a dividend reinvestment program is you, generally, don't pay transaction costs or commissions and you don't have to remember to do it.  Whether or not you may be able to eek out a little more by managing this yourself is a crapshoot and the equivalent of timing the market.   If you're so good at timing the market you shouldn't even be holding the stock, you should be buying and selling as the price fluctuates."}
{"id": "344220", "text": "If you are calculating: keep in mind that company A probably also sells washers, dryers, stoves, dish washers.... Each of which has their own market size. Also remember that people pay X times the value of earnings per share, so the value depends not on sales but on earnings, and expected growth."}
{"id": "344283", "text": "\"While @JB's \"\"yes\"\" is correct, a few more points to consider: There is no tax penalty for withdrawing any time from a taxable investment, that is, one not using specific tax protections like 401k/IRA or ESA or HSA. But you do pay tax on any income or gain distributions you receive from a taxable investment in a fund (except interest on tax-exempt aka \"\"municipal\"\" bonds),  and any net capital gains you realize when selling (or technically redeeming for non-ETF funds). Just like you do for dividends and interest and gains on non-fund taxable investments. Many funds have a sales charge or \"\"load\"\" which means you will very likely lose money if you sell quickly typically within at least several months and usually a year or more, and even some no-load funds, to discourage rapid trading that makes their management more difficult (and costly), have a \"\"contingent sales charge\"\" if you sell after less than a stated period like 3 months or 6 months.  For funds that largely or entirely invest in equities or longer term bonds, the share value/price is practically certain to fluctuate up and down, and if you sell during a \"\"down\"\" period you will lose money; if \"\"liquid\"\" means you want to take out money anytime without waiting for the market to move, you might want funds focussing on short-term bonds, especially government bonds, and \"\"money market\"\" funds which hold only very short bonds (usually duration under 90 days), which have much more stable prices (but lower returns over the longer term).\""}
{"id": "344372", "text": "I like C. Ross and MrChrister's advice to not be heavily weighted in one stock over the long run, especially the stock of your employer.  I'll add this: One thing you really ought to find out \u2013 and this is where your tax advisor is likely able to help \u2013 is whether your company's stock options plan use qualified incentive stock options (ISO) or non-qualified stock options (NQO or NSO).  See Wikipedia - Incentive stock option for details. From my understanding, only if your plan is a qualified (or statutory) ISO and you hold the shares for at least 1 year of the date of exercise and 2 years from the date of the option grant could your gain be considered a long-term capital gain. As opposed to: if your options are non-qualified, then your gain may be considered ordinary income no matter how long you wait \u2013 in which case there's no tax benefit to waiting to cash out. In terms of hedging the risk if you do choose to hold long, here are some ideas: Sell just enough stock at exercise (i.e. taking some tax hit up front) to at least recover your principal, so your original money is no longer at risk, or If your company has publicly listed options \u2013 which is unlikely, if they are very small \u2013 then you could purchase put options to insure against losses in your stock.  Try a symbol lookup at the CBOE. Note: Hedging with put options is an advanced strategy and I suggest you learn more and seek advice from a pro if you want to consider this route.  You'll also need to find out if there are restrictions on trading your employer's public stock or options \u2013 many companies have restrictions or black-out periods on employee trading, especially for people who have inside knowledge."}
{"id": "344780", "text": "\"Should is a very \"\"strong\"\" word. You do what makes most sense to you. Should I be making a single account for Person and crediting / debiting that account? You can do that. Should I be creating a loan for Person? And if so, would I make a new   loan each month or would I keep all of the loans in one account? You can create a loan account (your asset), you don't need to create a new account every time - just change the balance of the existing one. That's essentially the implementation of the first way (\"\"making a single account for a Person\"\"). How do I show the money moving from my checking account to Company and   then to Person's loan? You make the payment to Company from your Checking, and you adjust the loan amount to Person from Equity for the same amount. When the Person pays - you clear the loan balance and adjust the Checking balance accordingly. This keeps your balance intact for the whole time (i.e.: your total balance sheet doesn't change, money moves from line to line internally but the totals remain the same). This is the proper trail you're looking for. How do I (or should I even) show the money being reimbursed from the   expense? You shouldn't. Company is your expense. Payment by the Person is your income. They net out to zero (unless you charge interest). Do I debit the expense at any point? Of course. Company is your expense account. Should I not concern myself with the source of a loan / repayment and   instead just increase the size of the loan? Yes. See above.\""}
{"id": "344783", "text": "\"There are some good answers about the benefits of diversification, but I'm going to go into what is going on mathematically with what you are attempting. I was always under the assumption that as long as two securities are less than perfectly correlated (i.e. 1), that the standard deviation/risk would be less than if I had put 100% into either of the securities. While there does exist a minimum variance portfolio that is a combination of the two with lower vol than 100% of either individually, this portfolio is not necessarily the portfolio with highest utility under your metric.  Your metric includes returns not just volatility/variance so the different returns bias the result away from the min-vol portfolio. Using the utility function: E[x] - .5*A*sig^2 results in the highest utility of 100% VTSAX. So here the Sharpe ratio (risk adjusted return) of the U.S. portfolio is so much higher than the international portfolio over the period tracked that the loss of returns from adding more international stocks outweigh the lower risk that you would get from both just adding the lower vol international stocks and the diversification effects from having a correlation less than one. The key point in the above is \"\"over the period tracked\"\".  When you do this type of analysis you implicitly assume that the returns/risk observed in the past will be similar to the returns/risk in the future.   Certainly, if you had invested 100% in the U.S. recently you would have done better than investing in a mix of US/Intl.  However, while the risk and correlations of assets can be (somewhat) stable over time relative returns can vary wildly! This uncertainty of future returns is why most people use a diversified portfolio of assets.  What is the exact right amount is a very hard question though.\""}
{"id": "345030", "text": "First off, you have done very well to be in your financial position at your age. Congratulations.  I first started investing seriously about 10 years ago, and when I started, I had a similar attitude to you. Learning how to invest is a journey, and it will take you a while to learn both the intellectual and emotional sides of investing. First off, there is nothing wrong with having a chunk of cash that you aren't investing effectively. It is far better to be losing earning power WRT inflation that it is to make a bad investment, where you can lose all your money quite quickly. I have perhaps 15% of my capital just sitting around right now because I don't have any place where I'm excited to put it. For your IRA, I would look at the options you have, and choose one that is reasonably well diversified and has low costs. In most cases, an index fund is a reasonable choice. My 401K goes into an S&P 500 index fund, and I don't have to worry about it. Beyond that, I suggest spending some time learning about investing, and then making some small and conservative investments. I've learned a lot from the Motley Fool web site."}
{"id": "345219", "text": "I'm not familiar with Canadian taxes, but had your question been written about the United States, I'd advise you to at least consult for a couple of hours with an accountant. Taxes are complex, and the cost of making a mistake generally exceeds the cost of getting professional advice."}
{"id": "345410", "text": "The crucial insight is that the alternative to early exercise of an American call is not necessarily to hold it to expiry, but to sell it. And selling it, at its value, is always better than exercising it.  Note that this holds only for options on assets that don't pay dividends. Here's the proof, using Put-Call-Parity. We know that at expiry T, we have (using a Call and a Put both struck at K): C(T) - P(T) = S(T) - K (if this is not clear to you, consider the case where S is less than, equal to, or greater than K at maturity, and go through each of them.) If the stock S doesn't pay any dividends (and there is no cost of carry etc.), we can replicate both sides now at time 0; we just buy one call, sell one put (that gives us the left hand side), buy the stock, and borrow money so that at time T we have to repay K (that gives us the right hand side). That means that now, we only need to borrow df * K, where df is the discount factor, and is less than one (assuming the good old pre-2009 world where interest rates are positive). Thus: C(0) - P(0) = S(0) - df * K.  Rearranging gives: C(0) = S(0) - df * K + P(0).  That's the value of the call, if we sell it (or hold it). However, if we exercise, we only get: C_ex = S(0) - K Now, we see that C(0) > C_ex, because we subtract less (df*K < K), and add P(0)."}
{"id": "345482", "text": "\"in theory, yes. in practice, no. largely because merchants pay a fee to process credit card transactions which normally exceeds the cash back you can get. i tried this with square, since their vendor fee was 2.75%, and i got 5% back on restaurants.  however, even though i registered with square as a restaurant, transactions were categorized as \"\"other services\"\" or something, so i only got 1% back and lost 1.75% net. moreover, if you did find a card/processor combination that left you with a net gain, they would eventually catch on and charge you with some sort of fraud.  i wasn't worried about it with the square experiment because it was only 1$, but if you tried to do this with large sums, a human would catch you. and if it was enough money to matter, there would be a lawsuit. if you were really unlucky, you might get charged with some terrorism crap like \"\"structuring\"\" deposits.\""}
{"id": "345681", "text": "\"Equity does not represent production divisions in a company (i.e. chocolate, strawberry, and vanilla does not make sense).  In Sole proprietorship, equity represents 1 owner.  In Partnership, equity has at least two sub-accounts, namely Partner 1 and Partner 2.  In Corporations, equity may have Common Stockholders and Preferred Stockholders, or even different class of shares for insiders and angel investors.  As you can see, equity represents who owns the company. It is not what the company does or manufactures.  First and foremost, define the boundary of the firm. Are your books titled \"\"The books of the family of Doe\"\", \"\"The books of Mr & Mrs Doe\"\", or \"\"The books of Mr & Mrs Doe & Sons\"\".  Ask yourself, who \"\"owns\"\" this family. If you believe that a marriage is perpetual until further notice then it does not make any sense to constantly calculate which parent owns the family more. In partnership, firm profits are attributed to partner's accounts using previously agreed ratio. For example, (60%/40% because Partner 1 is more hard working and valuable to the firm.  Does your child own this family? Does he/she have any rights to use the assets, to earn income from the assets, to transfer the assets to others, or to enforce private property rights? If they don't have a part of these rights, they are certainly NOT part of Equity.  So what happens to the expenses of children if you follow the \"\"partnership\"\" model? There are two ways. The first way is to attribute the Loss to the parents/family since you do not expect the children to repay. It is an unrecoverable loss written off. The second way is to create a Debtor(Asset) account to aggregate all child expense, then create a separate book called \"\"The books Children 1\"\", and classify the expense in that separate book.  I advise using \"\"The family of Doe\"\" as the firm's boundary, and having 1 Equity account to simplify everything. It is ultimately up to you to decide the boundaries.\""}
{"id": "345697", "text": "\"It all comes down to how the loan itself is structured and reported - the exact details of how they run the loan paperwork, and how/if they report the activity on the loan to one of the credit bureaus (and which one they report to).  It can go generally one of three ways: A) The loan company reports the status to a credit reporting agency on behalf of both the initiating borrower and the cosigner. In this scenario, both individuals get a new account on their credit report. Initially this will generally drop related credit scores somewhat (it's a \"\"hard pull\"\", new account with zero history, and increased debt), but over time this can have a positive effect on both people's credit rating. This is the typical scenario one might logically expect to be the norm, and it effects both parties credit just as if they were a sole signor for the loan. And as always, if the loan is not paid properly it will negatively effect both people's credit, and the owner of the loan can choose to come after either or both parties in whatever order they want. B) The loan company just runs the loan with one person, and only reports to a credit agency on one of you (probably the co-signor), leaving the other as just a backup. If you aren't paying close attention they may even arrange it where the initial party wanting to take the loan isn't even on most of the paperwork. This let the person trying to run the loan get something accepted that might not have been otherwise, or save some time, or was just an error. In this case it will have no effect on Person A's credit. We've had a number of question like this, and this isn't really a rare occurrence. Never assume people selling you things are necessarily accurate or honest - always verify. C) The loan company just doesn't report the loan at all to a credit agency, or does so incorrectly. They are under no obligation to report to credit agencies, it's strictly up to them. If you don't pay then they can report it as something \"\"in collections\"\". This isn't the typical way of doing business for most places, but some businesses still operate this way, including some places that advertise how doing business with them (paying them grossly inflated interest rates) will \"\"help build your credit\"\". Most advertising fraud goes unpunished. Note: Under all of the above scenarios, the loan can only effect the credit rating attached to the bureau it is reported to. If the loan is reported to Equifax, it will not help you with a TransUnion or Experian rating at all. Some loans report to multiple credit bureaus, but many don't bother, and credit bureaus don't automatically copy each other. It's important to remember that there isn't so much a thing as a singular \"\"consumer credit rating\"\", as there are \"\"consumer credit ratings\"\" - 3 of them, for most purposes, and they can vary widely depending on your reported histories. Also, if it is only a short-term loan of 3-6 months then it is unlikely to have a powerful impact on anyone's credit rating. Credit scores are formulas calibrated to care about long-term behavior, where 3 years of perfect credit history is still considered a short period of time and you will be deemed to have a significant risk of default without more data. So don't expect to qualify for a prime-rate mortgage because of a car loan that was paid off in a few months; it might be enough to give you a score if you don't have one, but don't expect much more. As always, please remember that taking out a loan just to improve credit is almost always a terrible idea. Unless you have a very specific reason with a carefully researched and well-vetted plan that means that it's very important you build credit in this specific way, you should generally focus on establishing credit in ways that don't actually cost you any money at all. Look for no fee credit cards that you pay in full each month, even if you have to start with credit-building secured card plans, and switch to cash-value no-fee rewards cards for a 1-3% if you operate your financial life in a way that this doesn't end up manipulating your purchasing decisions to cost you money. Words to the wise: \"\"Don't let the credit score tail wag the personal financial dog!\"\"\""}
{"id": "345793", "text": "\"Overall the question is one of a political nature.   However, this component can have objective answers: \"\"What behavior is trying to be prevented?\"\" There are mechanisms by which capital gains can be deferred (1031 like-kind exchange, or simply holding a long position for years) or eliminated by the estate step up in basis.  With these available, mechanisms that enable basis-reduction are ripe for abuse.   On the other hand, if this truly bothers you then if you meet the IRS qualifications of a day trader, you may elect to use \"\"mark to market\"\" accounting, eliminating this entirely as a concern. Special rules for traders of securities\""}
{"id": "345825", "text": "to know the reasons, please click the link above and read this post. for sure you will learn a lot from this piece most especially on how you can always pay your financial obligations, like your credit card bills and monthly loan payments, on-time and in-full, each month."}
{"id": "345851", "text": "\"Cart's answer describes well one aspects of puts: protective puts; which means using puts as insurance against a decline in the price of shares that you own.  That's a popular use of puts.  But I think the wording of your question is angling for another strategy: Writing puts. Consider: Cart's strategy refers to the buyer of a put.  But, on the transaction's other side is a seller of the put \u2013 and ultimately somebody created or wrote that put contract in the first place!  That first seller of the put \u2013 that is, the seller that isn't just selling one they themselves bought \u2013 is the put writer. When you write a put, you are taking on the obligation to buy the other side's stock at the put exercise price if the stock price falls below that exercise price by the expiry date.  For taking on the obligation, you receive a premium, like how an insurance company charges a premium to insure against a loss. Example:  Imagine ABC Co. stock is trading at $25.00.  You write a put contract agreeing to buy 100 shares of ABC at $20.00 per share (the exercise price) by a given expiration date.  Say you receive $2.00/share premium from the put buyer.  You now have the obligation to purchase the shares from the put buyer in the event they are below $20.00 per share when the option expires \u2013 or, technically any time before then, if the buyer chooses to exercise the option early. Assuming no early assignment, one of two things will happen at the option expiration date: ABC trades at or above $20.00 per share. In this case, the put option will expire worthless in the hands of the put buyer.  You will have pocketed the $200 and be absolved from your obligation.  This case, where ABC trades above the exercise price, is the maximum profit potential. ABC trades below $20.00 per share.  In this case, the put option will be assigned and you'll need to fork over $2000 to the put buyer in exchange for his 100 ABC shares.  If those shares are worth less than $18.00 in the market, then you've suffered a loss to the extent they are below that price (times 100), because remember \u2013 you pocketed $200 premium in the first place.  If the shares are between $18.00 to $20.00, you're still profitable, but not to the full extent of the premium received. You can see that by having written a put it's possible to acquire ABC stock at a price lower than the market price \u2013 because you received some premium in the process of writing your put.  If you don't \"\"succeed\"\" in acquiring shares on your first write (because the shares didn't get below the exercise price), you can continue to write puts and collect premium until you do get assigned. I have read the book \"\"Money for Nothing (And Your Stocks for FREE!)\"\" by Canadian author Derek Foster.  Despite the flashy title, the book essentially describes Derek's strategy for writing puts against dividend-paying value stocks he would love to own.  Derek picks quality companies that pay a dividend, and uses put writing to get in at lower-than-market prices.  Four Pillars reviewed the book and interviewed Derek Foster: Money for Nothing: Book Review and Interview with Derek Foster. Writing puts entails risk.  If the stock price drops to zero then you'll end up paying the put exercise price to acquire worthless shares!  So your down-side can easily be multiples of the premium collected.  Don't do this until and unless you understand exactly how this works.  It's advanced. Note also that your broker isn't likely to permit you to write puts without having sufficient cash or margin in your account to cover the case where you are forced to buy the stock.  You're better off having cash to secure your put buys, otherwise you may be forced into leverage (borrowing) when assigned.  Additional Resources: The Montreal Exchange options guide (PDF) that Cart already linked to is an excellent free resource for learning about options.  Refer to page 39, \"\"Writing secured put options\"\", for the strategy above. Other major options exchanges and organizations also provide high-quality free learning material:\""}
{"id": "345954", "text": "Generally value funds (particularly large value funds) will be the ones to pay dividends. You don't specifically need a High Dividend Yield fund in order to get a fund that pays dividends. Site likes vanguards can show you the dividends paid for mutual funds in the past to get an idea of what a fund would pay. Growth funds on the other hand don't generally pay dividends (or at least that's not their purpose). Instead, the company grows and become worth more. You earn money here because the company (or fund) you invested in is now worth more.  If you're saying you want a fund that pays dividends but is also a growth fund I'm sure there are some funds like that out there, you just have to look around"}
{"id": "346444", "text": "What I should have done in the first place was just ask them.  From their customer support team: Thanks for writing in and for your interest in Square. It is perfectly acceptable to use Square for personal business, such as a yard sale. You do not need to have a registered business to take advantage of Square and the ability to accept credit cards. Just please note that it is against our Terms of Service to process prepaid cards, gift cards or your own credit card using your own Square account. Additionally, you may not use Square as a money transfer system. For every payment processed through Square, you must provide a legitimate good or service. Please let me know if you have any additional concerns."}
{"id": "346474", "text": "I'm looking for ways to geared to save for retirement, not general investment. Many mutual fund companies offer a range of target retirement funds for different retirement dates (usually in increments of 5 years). These are funds of funds, that is, a Target 2040 Fund, say, will be invested in five or six different stock and bond mutual funds offered by the same company. Over the years and as the target date approaches closer, the investment mix will change from extra weight given to stock mutual funds towards extra weight being given to bond mutual funds. The disadvantage to these funds is that the Target Fund charges its own expense ratio over and above the expense ratios charged by the mutual funds it invests in: you could do the same investments yourself (or pick your own mix and weighting of various funds) and save the extra expense ratio. However, over the years, as the Target Fund changes its mix, withdrawing money from the stock mutual funds and investing the proceeds into bond mutual funds, you do not have to pay taxes on the profits generated by these transactions except insofar as some part of the profits become distributions from the Target Fund itself. If you were doing the same transactions outside the Target Fund, you would be liable for taxes on the profits when you withdrew money from a stock fund and  invested the proceeds into the bond fund."}
{"id": "346498", "text": "\"Is he affiliated with the company charging this fee? If so, 1% is great. For him. You are correct, this is way too high. Whatever tax benefit this account provides is negated over a sufficiently long period of time. you need a different plan, and perhaps, a different friend. I see the ISA is similar to the US Roth account. Post tax money deposited, but growth and withdrawals tax free. (Someone correct, if I mis-read this). Consider - You deposit \u00a310,000. 7.2% growth over 10 years and you'd have \u00a320,000. Not quite, since 1% is taken each year, you have \u00a318,250.  Here's what's crazy. When you realize you lost \u00a31750 to fees, it's really 17.5% of the \u00a310,000 your account would have grown absent those fees. In the US, our long term capital gain rate is 15%, so the fees after 10 years more than wipe out the benefit.  We are not supposed to recommend investments here, but it's safe to say there are ETFs (baskets of stocks reflecting an index, but trading like an individual stock) that have fees less than .1%.  The UK tag is appreciated, but your concern regarding fees is universal. Sorry for the long lecture, but \"\"1%, bad.\"\"\""}
{"id": "346735", "text": "\"First of all, setting some basics: What is a sound way to measure the risk of each investment in order to compare them with each other ? There is no single way that can be used across all asset classes / risks. Generally speaking, you want to perform both a quantitative and qualitative assessment of risks that you identify.  Quantitative risk assessment may involve historical data and/or parametric or non-parametric models. Using historical data is often simple but may be hard in cases where the amount of data you have on a given event is low (e.g. risk of bust by investing in a cryptocurrency). Parametric and non-parametric risk quantification models exist (e.g. Value at Risk (VaR), Expected Shortfall (ES), etc) and abound but a lot of them are more complicated than necessary for an individual's requirements. Qualitative risk assessment is \"\"simply\"\" assessing the likelihood and severity of risks by using intuition, expert judgment (where that applies), etc. One may consult with outside parties (e.g. lawyers, accountants, bankers, etc) where their advisory may help highlighting some risks or understanding them better. To ease comparing investment opportunities, you may want to perform a risk assessment on categories of risks (e.g. investing in the stock market vs bond market). To compare between those categories, one should look at the whole picture (quantitative and qualitative) with their risk appetite in mind. Of course, after taking those macro decisions, you would need to further assess risks on more micro decisions (e.g. Microsoft or Google ?). You would then most likely end up with better comparatives as you would be comparing items similar in nature. Should I always consider the worst case scenario ? Because when I do that, I always can lose everything. Generally speaking, you want to consider everything so that you can perform a risk assessment and decide on your risk mitigating strategy (see Q4). By assessing the likelihood and severity of risks you may find that even in cases where you are comparatively as worse-off (e.g. in case of complete bust), the likelihood may differ. For example, keeping gold in a personal stash at home vs your employer going bankrupt if you are working for a large firm. Do note that you want to compare risks (both likelihood and severity) after any risk mitigation strategy you may want to put in place (e.g. maybe putting your gold in a safety box in a secure bank would make the likelihood of losing your gold essentially null). Is there a way to estimate the probability of such events, better than intuition ? Estimating probability or likelihood is largely dependent on data on hand and your capacity to model events. For most practical purposes of an individual, modelling would be way off in terms of reward-benefits. You may therefore want to simply research on past events and assign them a 1-5 (1 being very low, 5 being very high) risk rating based on your assessment of the likelihood. For example, you may assign a 1 on your employer going bankrupt and a 2 or 3 on being burglarized. This is only slightly better than intuition but has the merit of being based on data (e.g. frequency of burglary in your neighborhood). Should I only consider more probable outcomes and have a plan for them if they occur? This depends largely on your risk appetite. The more risk averse you are, the more thorough you will want to be in identifying, tracking and mitigating risks. For the risks that you have identified as relevant, or of concern, you may opt to establish a risk mitigating strategy, which is conventionally one of accepting, sharing (by taking insurance, for example), avoiding and reducing. It may not be possible to share or reduce some risks, especially for individuals, and so often the response will be either to accept or avoid the given risks by opting in or out on an opportunity.\""}
{"id": "346882", "text": "Yes, indeed.  For example, Ford Motor Company's website has a bit about them. Is there any advantage to having an actual physical note instead of a website? You can safeguard them yourself.  Which may or may not be a good thing.  It certainly brings up a bit of hassle and extra costs if you want to sell them.  Though you can have lost certificates replaced, so there is more to it than just having physical possession of the certificates."}
{"id": "347773", "text": "If you are splitting rent, it is not income because you are reducing the amount of space you have available to you and reducing your rent, it's the same as if you moved to a smaller apartment. You can't claim a deduction for rent paid, so there really are no tax implications in this arrangement. If you own a house and someone helps pay the mortgage, that does become a rental situation if the other party has no ownership stake in the house. Could you find other ways to disguise it, like having your brother pay utilities or buy groceries? Sure, but I think it's technically taxable income by the letter of the law. I also don't think the IRS is going to come after you for trading a place to sleep for groceries/cable."}
{"id": "347825", "text": "The reason diversification in general is a benefit is easily seen in your first graph.  While the purple line (Betterment 100% Stock) is always below the blue line (S&P), and the blue line is the superior return over the entire period, it's a bit different if you retired in 2009, isn't it?  In that case the orange line is superior: because its risk is much lower, so it didn't drop much during the major crash.  Lowering risk (and lowering return) is a benefit the closer you get to retirement as you won't see as big a cumulative return from the large percentage, but you could see a big temporary drop, and need your income to be relatively stable (if you're living off it or soon going to).   Now, you can certainly invest on your own in a diverse way, and if you're reasonably smart about it and have enough funds to avoid any fees, you can almost certainly do better than a managed solution - even a relatively lightly managed solution like Betterment.  They take .15% off the top, so if you just did exactly the same as them, you would end up .15% (per year) better off. However, not everyone is reasonably smart, and not everyone has much in the way of funds. Betterment's target audience are people who aren't terribly smart about investing and/or have very small amounts of funds to invest.  Plenty of people aren't able to work out how to do diversification on their own; while they probably mostly aren't asking questions on this site, they're a large percentage of the population.  It's also work to diversify your portfolio: you have to make minor changes every year at a minimum to ensure you have a nicely balanced portfolio.  This is why target retirement date portfolios are very popular; a bit higher cost (similar to Betterment, roughly) but no work required to diversify correctly and maintain that diversification."}
{"id": "347957", "text": "It is a good enough approximation. With a single event you can do it your way and get a better result, but imagine that the $300 are spread over a certain period with $10 contribution each time? Then recalculating and compounding will be a lot of work to do. The original ROI formula is averaging the ROI by definition, so why bother with precise calculations of averages that are imprecise by definition, when you can just adjust the average without losing the level of precision? 11.4 and 11.3 aren't significantly different, its immaterial."}
{"id": "347992", "text": "A stock is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. If it trades different values on different days, that means someone was willing to pay a higher price OR someone was willing to sell at a lower price.  There is no rule to prevent a stock from trading at $10 and then $100 the very next trade... or $1 the very next trade. (Though exchanges or regulators may halt trading, cancel trades, or impose limits on large price movements as they deem necessary, but this is beside the point I'm trying to illustrate). Asking what happens from the close of one day to the open of the next is like asking what happens from one trade to the next trade... someone simply decided to sell or pay a different price.  Nothing needs to have happened in between."}
{"id": "348315", "text": "The \u00a3500 are an expense associated with the loan, just like interest. You should have an expense account where you can put such financing expenses (or should create a new one). Again, treat it the same way you'll treat interest charges in future statements."}
{"id": "348362", "text": "No no no.... ok fine, yes... **but** you can't have that and run a national deficit of 150% of GDP. I don't care what Keynes said, you could have as large a demand as you want, if the majority of all cash flows are going into debt repayments your economies not going to be able to grow, ie: enter a recession."}
{"id": "348424", "text": "You are incorrect in saying that you have a capital gains of $0. You either have no capital gains activity, because you haven't realized it or you have an unrealized capital gains of -$10k. If you were to sell immediately after receiving the dividend you would end up as a wash investment wise - the 10k of dividend offsetting the 10k capital wash. Though due to different tax treatments of money you may be slightly negative with respect to taxes.  You are taxed when you receive the money. And you realized that 10k in dividends - even if you didn't want too.  In the future if this bothers you. You need to pay attention to the dividend pay out dates for funds. But then just after they payout a dividend and have drain their cash account. The issue is that you unknowingly bought 90k of stock and 10k of cash. This information is laid out in the fund documentation, which you should be reviewing before investing in any new fund."}
{"id": "348621", "text": "Yes, this happens a lot. And in many cases companies don't even know this is happening. Collateralized Debt Obligations frequently contain pieces of the same financial products, where it is not obvious what the underlying asset is. It gets complicated to explain, but I can make an analogy to a portfolio of stocks you might create. Your portfolio contains companies and those companies also own some of the other companies in your same portfolio. The value of all the companies in your portfolio are very interrelated even though you thought you made diversified investments, under the idea that they can't all do poorly at the exact same time. Except they can, if the value of the company's shares are solely based on the value of other company's shares, but nobody noticed that none of them have an actual robust operations. This was a key factor of the financial disaster around 2008, but this problem was solved with the addition of additional disclaimers that all investors agree to, so they know what they are buying"}
{"id": "348927", "text": "The main advantage and disadvantage I can see in a scenario like this are - how savvy and good an investor are you? It's a good way to create below-market average returns if you're not that good at investing and returns way above market average if you are..."}
{"id": "349299", "text": "\"This may vary some by the state, but the general facts are consistent broadly. The elements of check fraud typically are: This means that not only do you have to have presented a check that is returned for insufficient funds, but you must have known at the time that it wouldn't be honored.   It must typically also be given for present consideration, which is why the comments to the other answer correctly note that the post-dated check \"\"scam\"\" cooked up by the payday loan folks shouldn't generally be relevant under these laws; on the same site, they note the cases that are clearly not present consideration: So if I give you a check for $50 and it's returned for NSF because I screwed up my bank accounts and had all my money in savings, that's probably not fraud.  But if I decide I really want a Tesla X and give Tesla Motors a check for $95,000, knowing I don't have $95,000, that's fraud. How the prosecutor proves knowledge is probably beyond the scope of Personal Finance and Money Stack Exchange, though I imagine it tends to commonly be done so by showing the person doesn't normally have that much money in their account.\""}
{"id": "349424", "text": "\"As you are earning an income by working in India, you are required to pay tax in India. If you contract is of freelance, then the income earned by you has to be self declared and taxes paid accordingly. There are some expenses one can claim, a CA should be able to guide you.   Not sure why the Swiss comapny is paying taxes?. Are they depositing this with Income Tax, India, do they have a TAN Number. If yes, then you don't need to pay tax. But you need to get a statement from your company showing the tax paid on behalf of you. You can also verify the tax paid on your behalf via \"\"http://incometaxindia.gov.in/26ASTaxCreditStatement.asp\"\" you cna register. Alternatively if you have a Bank Account in India with a PAN card on their records, most Banks provide a link to directly see\""}
{"id": "349611", "text": "I would like to know how they calculated such monthly payment The formula is:  Your values would come out to be: r = (1+3.06/(100*365))^31-1=0.002602 (converting your annual percentage to a monthly rate equivalent of daily compounded interest) PV = 12865.57 n = 48 Inserting your values into the formula: P = [r*(PV)]/[1-(1+r)^(-n)] P = [0.002602*(12865.57)]/[1-(1.002602)^(-48)] P = 285.47"}
{"id": "349621", "text": "\"Option 1 is out. There are no \"\"safe returns\"\" that make much money. Besides, if a correction does come along how will you know when to invest? There is no signal that says when the bottom is reached, and you emotions could keep you from acting. Option 2 (dollar cost averaging) is prudent and comforting. There are always some bargains about. You could start with an energy ETF or a few \"\"big oil\"\" company stocks right now.\""}
{"id": "349650", "text": "Institutional investors are not just rich guys they are rich guys managing money wherever it is left. Banks, retirement funds, hedge funds, pension funds, the social security fund (though they only invest in the US government)  Edit: the pension fun is idle capital looking to bring in returns."}
{"id": "349847", "text": "Your total salary deferral cannot exceed $18K (as of 2016). You can split it between your different jobs as you want, to maximize the matching.  You can contribute non-elective contribution on top of that, which means that your self-proprietorship will commit to paying you that portion regardless of your deferral. That would be on top of the $18K. You cannot contribute more than 20% of your earnings, though. So if you earn $2K, you can add $400 on top of the $18K limit (ignoring the SE tax for a second here). Keep in mind that if you ever have employees, the non-elective contribution will apply to them as well. Also, the total contribution limit from all sources (deferral, matching, non-elective) cannot exceed $53K (for 2016)."}
{"id": "350067", "text": "This happens on dark pools quite often. If I am a large institutional investor with tens of millions of shares, I may want to unload slowly and limit the adverse affects on the price of the stock. Dark pools offer anonymity and have buyers / sellers that can handle large volume.  In the case of a day trader, they often trade stocks with light volume (since they have large fluctuations that can be quite profitable throughout the session). At the end of the session, many traders are unwilling to hold positions on margin and want to unload fast."}
{"id": "350082", "text": "I know of no way to answer your question without 'spamming' a particular investment.  First off, if you are a USA citizen, max out your 401-K. Whatever your employer matches will be an immediate boost to your investment.  Secondly, you want your our gains to be tax deferred. A 401-K is tax deferred as well as a traditional IRA.  Thirdly, you probably want the safety of diversification. You achieve this by buying an ETF (or mutual fund) that then buys individual stocks.  Now for the recommendation that may be called spamming by others : As REITs pass the tax liability on to you, and as an IRA is tax deferred, you can get stellar returns by buying a mREIT ETF.  To get you started here are five: mREITs  Lastly, avoid commissions by having your dividends automatically reinvested by using that feature at Scottrade. You will have to pay commissions on new purchases but your purchases from your dividend Reinvestment will be commission free.  Edit: Taking my own advice I just entered orders to liquidate some positions so I would have the $ on hand to buy into MORL and get some of that sweet 29% dividend return."}
{"id": "350131", "text": "I would definitely pay down the debt first.  If it is going to take 15 years to do so, you probably need to allocate more money to paying down debt. Cut expenses by going out to eat less, and keeping spending to the bare necessities.  You might even consider getting a second job, just for paying down the debt.  If that isn't enough, consider selling off some assets.  You should be able to come up with a plan to be debt free (excluding maybe a regular mortgage) within 3-5 years. Once the only debt you have is a home mortgage, then its time to look at putting money towards retirement again. Note, you should not take money out of a 401k or IRA to pay off debt.  The costs for doing so are nearly always too great."}
{"id": "350180", "text": "There's often a legal basis to answer this question. For instance, Austria (guessing from your profile) currently uses a 4% Statutory interest rate. You'll need to dig up not just the actual but also the historical rates. Note that you'll want the non-commercial interest rate - some countries differentiate between loans to businesses and loans to individuals."}
{"id": "350247", "text": "It would be worth looking at their details as they will outline clearly what the 2% is on. Having said that the 2% will probably be on the value of the portfolio at the time the charge is calculated. (It might be that they don't levy this on the cash section of portfolio, it might be that they do.) They will usually make you sign a direct debit form so that they can take the fees straight from you. There are much better deals around than this, 2% is a huge fee if you had an portfolio that is worth \u00a3100,000 after some years the fees they would be charging you would be \u00a32,000 a year. it's worth shopping around for a better deal, as it can prove costly to change ISA provider at later date."}
{"id": "350276", "text": "I think the best answer that doesn't make the buyer look like a moron is this. Buyer had previously sold a covered call.  They wanted to act on a different opportunity so they did a closing buy/write with a spread of a couple cents below asking for the stock, but it dipped a couple cents and the purchase of those options to close resolved at 4 cents due to lack of sellers."}
{"id": "350317", "text": "Generally, ETFs and mutual funds don't pay taxes (although there are some cases where they do, and some countries where it is a common case). What happens is, the fund reports the portion of the gain attributed to each investor, and the investor pays the tax. In the US, this is reported to you on 1099-DIV as capital gains distribution, and can be either short term (as in the scenario you described), long term, or a mix of both. It doesn't mean you actually get a distribution, though, but if you don't - it reduces your basis."}
{"id": "350357", "text": "\"Rich people use \"\"depositor\"\" banks the same way the rest of us use banks; to keep a relatively small store of wealth for monthly expenses and a savings account for a rainy day. The bulk of a wealthy person's money is in investments. Money sitting in a bank account is not making you more money, and in fact as Kaushik correctly points out, would be losing value to inflation. Now, all investments have risk; that's why interest exists. If, in some alternate universe, charging interest were illegal across the board, nobody would loan money, because there's nothing to be gained and a lot to lose. You have to make it worth my while for me to want to loan you my money, because sure as shootin' you're going to use my loan to make yourself wealthier. A wealthy person will choose a set of investments that represent an overall level of risk that he is comfortable with, much like you or I would do the same with our retirement funds. Early in life, we're willing to take a lot of risk, because there's a lot of money to be made and time to recover from any losses. Closer to retirement, we're much more risk-averse, because if the market takes a sudden downturn, we lose a significant portion of our nest egg with little hope of regaining it before we have to start cashing out. The very wealthy have similar variances in risk, with the significant difference that they are typically already drawing a living from their investments. As such, they already have some risk aversion, but at the same time they need good returns, and so they must pay more attention to this balancing act between risk and return. Managing their investments in effect becomes their new job, once they don't have to work for anyone else anymore. The money does the \"\"real work\"\", and they make the executive decisions about where best to put it. The tools they use to make these decisions are the same ones we have; they watch market trends to identify stages of the economic cycle that predicate large movements of money to or from \"\"safe havens\"\" like gold and T-debt, they diversify their investments to shield the bulk of their wealth from a sudden localized loss, they hire investment managers to have a second pair of eyes and additional expertise in navigating the market (you or I can do much the same thing by buying shares in managed investment funds, or simply consulting a broker; the difference is that the wealthy get a more personal touch). So what's the difference between the very wealthy and the rest of us? Well first is simple scale. When a person with a net worth in the hundreds of millions makes a phone call or personal visit to the financial institutions handling their money, there's a lot of money on the line in making sure that person is well looked-after. If we get screwed over at the teller window and decide to close our acocunts, the teller can often give us our entire account balance in cash without batting an eyelid. Our multimillionaire is at the lower end of being singlehandedly able to alter his banks' profit/loss statements by his decisions, and so his bank will fight to keep his business. Second is the level of control. The very wealthy, the upper 1%, have more or less direct ownership and control over many of the major means of production in this country; the factories, mines, timber farms, software houses, power plants, recording studios, etc that generate things of value, and therefore new wealth. While the average Joe can buy shares in these things through the open market, their investment is typically a drop in the bucket, and their voice in company decisions equally small. Our decision, therefore, is largely to invest or not to invest. The upper 1%, on the other hand, have controlling interests in their investments, often majority holdings that allow them far more control over the businesses they invest in, who's running them and what they do.\""}
{"id": "350396", "text": "\"Yesterday I have received a call from my local bank. They told the the payment had arrived, but the money sender failed to specify my account number. They have only specified SWIFT code and my address. And in order to receive my money, money sender has to send an additional SWIFT message, where my account number must be specified. And the money transfer will remain \"\"frozen\"\" (or \"\"blocked\"\") until such a message would be received. In this case normally your local bank has to send a SWIFT MT199 to the sending Bank that the account number quoted is missing. The Sending Bank would contact the company and send back a SWIFT message with required info.\""}
{"id": "350508", "text": "From a Canadian point of view, I think we are generally very similar to how you describe Austria.  The only thing I use cash for, is to pay for my coffee at a local micro-roaster who only accepts cash.  Cheques, I only use to pay friends.  Everything else is debit or credit card.  Very few businesses around here will even accept cheques anymore."}
{"id": "350589", "text": "(in response to last comment to me) Ok. I understand now. Forgive me if I appeared to be splitting hairs. When it comes to understanding, exact wording is important. I keep money at home, enough to not be a frequent ATM user, not enough to imply any distrust of the banking system or preparation for Armageddon. You last comments implies the brochure said 13% keep all their money at home, i.e. have no banking relationship. A recent poll concluded 25% of people had less than $2500 available if they had an issue, such as the need to repair a car, or furnace. From that factoid, it wouldn't surprise me that half of those people have no bank acount at all. Not for lack of trust, but lack of money to deposit."}
{"id": "350819", "text": "Banks will usually look at 2 years worth of tax returns for issuing business credit.  If those aren't available (for instance, for recently formed businesses), they will look at the personal returns of the owners. Unfortunately, it sounds like your friend is in the latter category. Bringing in another partner isn't necessarily going to help, either; with only two partners / owners, the bank would probably look at both owners' personal tax returns and credit histories.  It may be necessary to offer collateral. I'm sorry I can't offer any better solutions, but alternative funding such as personal loans from family & friends could be necessary.  Perhaps making them partners in exchange for capital."}
{"id": "351109", "text": "Lets make some assumptions. You are not close to retirement.  You have no other debts.  You have a job.  You have no big need for the money.   You should invest that.  Do not invest with a bank, they are not as competitive on fees as a brokerage account. You can get specific answers that are different from every person, (so you should dig in and research a lot more if you care (and you should).  Personally, I would suggest you open an account with one of the low cost providers. Then, with that new investment account, put your money into a target retirement account.  File your statements away and tend to it once a year.  (Make sure it is there, that you can access it, that nothing alarming is going on).  You certainly have enough to start an investment account.  If you want to get more into it, ask a phone adviser what you should open. Finally, before you start investing, make sure you follow the advice of radix07 and have no debt, saving the most you can for retirement. A rule of thumb is your money will double every 72 months. Congratulations, you are a saver.  Investing isn't for you as the risk of investing is in conflict with your desire to preserver you money. Open a savings account or high interest checking account with a credit union, online only or local community bank.  Shop around no the web for the highest interest.  Don't get your hopes up though, the highest rate you see (that doesn't have strings attached) won't be much here late summer of 2012."}
{"id": "351163", "text": "\"Hit you local library and pick up a copy of \"\"Critical Business Skills for Success\"\" by The Great Courses.   It's a 30 hour audio book, but is an amazing business crash course. I wish I would have found it before trying (and failing) my own business.\""}
{"id": "351169", "text": "I think you can. I went to Mexico for business and the company paid for it, so if you are self employed you should be able to expense it."}
{"id": "351209", "text": "Unless you are getting the loan from a loan shark, it is the most common case that each payment is applied to the interest accrued to date and the rest is applied towards reducing the principal.  So, assuming that fortnightly means 26 equally-spaced payments during the year, the interest accrued at the end of the first fortnight is $660,000 x (0.0575/26) = $1459.62 and so the principal is reduced by $2299.61 - $1459.62 = $839.99 For the next payment, the principal still owing at the beginning of that fortnight will be $660,000-$839.99 = $659,160.01 and the interest accrued will be $659,160.01 x (0.0575/26) = $1457.76 and so slightly more of the principal will be reduced than the $839.99 of the previous payment.  Lather, rinse, repeat until the loan is paid off which should occur at the end of 17.5 years (or after 455 biweekly payments). If the loan rate changes during this time (since you say that this is a variable-rate loan), the numbers quoted above will change too. And no, it is not the case that just %5.75 of the $2300 is interest, and the rest comes off the principle (sic)? Interest is computed on the principal amount still owed ($660,000 for starters and then decreasing fortnightly). not the loan payment amount. Edit  After playing around with a spreadsheet a bit, I found that if  payments are made every two weeks (14 days apart) rather than 26 equally spaced payments in one year as I used above, interest accrues at the rate of 5.75 x (14/365)% for the 14 days rather than at the rate of (5.75/26)% for the time between payments as I used above each 14 days, $2299.56 is paid as the biweekly mortgage payment instead of the $2299.61 stated by the OP, then 455 payments (slightly less than 17.5 calendar years when leap years are taken into account) will pay off the loan.  In fact, that 455-th payment should be reduced by 65 cents.  In view of rounding of fractional cents and the like, I doubt that it would be possible to have the last equal payment reduce the balance to exactly 0."}
{"id": "351273", "text": "$34/month for doing 12 transactions or more.  If your time is worth less than about $2.50 per transaction, then it makes sense. I'd also check to see what happens if you miss and make only 11 transactions one month.  Do you lose a finger or something?  Or (less dramatically) do they take away your nice rate forever or slap you on the wrist financially? The fine print taketh away in these deals.  I'd be sure to see what it says."}
{"id": "351352", "text": "it's kind of like a circular loop:  i think he would suggest identifying strategies/portfolio managers who have demonstrated outperformance in a persistent manner.  Thing is, that's also really hard to do.  I think empirically, MPT suffers when the market does. By diversifying, you'll only be down less. He's suggesting shooting for absolute returns -- no matter what the market does, he wants to see positive gains.  (a lot) easier said than done"}
{"id": "351502", "text": "You have asked this question but provide very little information. As others have stated, what country are you in? Was there a will or any other agreement?  Basically any estate will go to the beneficiaries once all debtors have been paid off. How this is done will largely depend on which country/state/region you are in and what documentation was in place at the time of death. You might want to check out this website for details on passing away without a will: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-estate-settled-if-theres-32442.html"}
{"id": "351518", "text": "Bid and ask prices of stocks change not just daily, but continuously.  They are, as the names suggest, what price people are asking for to be willing to sell their stock, and how much people are bidding to be willing to buy it at that moment. Your equation is accurate in theory, but doesn't actually apply.  The bid and ask prices are indicators of the value of the stock, but the only think you care about as a trader are what you actually pay and sell it for.  So regardless of the bid/ask the equation is: Since you cannot buy an index directly (index, like indicator) it doesn't make sense to discuss how much people are bidding or asking for it.  Like JoeTaxpayer said, you can buy (and therefore bid/ask) for ETFs and funds that attempt to track the value of the S&P 500."}
{"id": "351867", "text": "\"One thing to consider is that road wear is largely proportional to vehicle weight to the 4 power. \"\"Generalized Fourth Power Law\"\". This leads to a result that an 18 wheeler is roughly the equivalent of 9600 cars.  One consequence is that we can tax shipping weight, assuming some of it will go over road. Another option would be vehicle registration fees that are proportional to the weight of the vehicle. Yet another would be a tax on automotive battery packs (comparable to the lifetime energy output if it were gas).  Keep in mind that most local road construction is funded by property taxes, not gasoline. Next time you see a cyclist, thank them for paying for the road and doing several hundred times less damage to it than your car. :)\""}
{"id": "351907", "text": "Don't do debt.  After a few years (I forget how many) the bad history will have rolled off, but by then you will probably have no desire to go back into debt again. If you do want to build up a credit score, then at that point it's essentially the same as starting from scratch.  However, from personal experience, once you've lived debt free for a few years you never want to get back on the debt wheel again. A credit score is the output of a behavioral model that indicates the chances that a bank will earn money from your business. Do things that earn the banks money and you will have a high credit score."}
{"id": "352052", "text": "There's nothing wrong with your reasoning except that you expect the tax laws to make perfect sense. More often than not they don't. I suggest getting in touch with a professional tax preparer (preferably with a CPA or EA designation), who will be able to understand the issue, including the relevant portions of the French-US tax treaty, and explain it to you. You will probably also need to do some reporting in France, so get a professional advice from a French tax professional as well. So, in my tax return, can I say that I had no US revenue at all during   this whole year? I doubt it."}
{"id": "352120", "text": "\"In almost all cases, gifts from employers are considered taxable compensation, based on the employer-employee nature of the relationship. Furthermore, cash gifts are always considered to be intended as wages, regardless of how you receive the money. Furthermore, regardless of whether you expect to receive anything in return (such as contractual consideration) or whether the amounts are large enough to be declared as taxable personal gifts, it is likely that the IRS would consider these payments to be \"\"disguised wages\"\", as these payments would fail several tests that the IRS uses to determine whether benefits provided by the employer are non-taxable, including: I'd recommend reviewing IRS publication 535 here, as well as publication 15-B here for more on what constitutes taxable wages & benefits. It seems very unlikely to me that you could make a persuasive legal defense in which you claimed to be working full-time for $60.00 per year and just happened to be receiving large personal gifts of $130,000.00. In my opinion it seems much more likely that these payments would be found to be taxable wages for services rendered.\""}
{"id": "352202", "text": "\"Relax im not picking on you, I just think its hilarious that people actually think saying \"\"my college's student investment fund valued this stock\"\" holds any legitimacy. Also, if i was back office I wouldnt be an IB analyst would I? So your dig at me doesnt make any sense.\""}
{"id": "352271", "text": "because the market price for good investment advice isn't that low. investment advice is subject to market pricing just like any other good or service.  if you are good enough at investing that you seek increased volatility opportunities, you will have no trouble finding investors willing to give you a share of the upside without any of the downside risk."}
{"id": "352464", "text": "\"&gt; Milano says that Hellie\u2019s poor oversight of the remodeling job caused costs to spiral. She ended up spending $5 million, though the home is worth no more than $3 million.    This sounds like lack of oversight on Milano's part.   Who gives their so-called \"\"business manager\"\" handle your home improvement project?   Why can't you go to an architecture &amp; construction company yourself? How hard is that?\""}
{"id": "352589", "text": "What is the corporate structure? Your partnership agreement or LLC operating agreement should dictate how you approach this."}
{"id": "352638", "text": "\"There are a number of bona fide reasons to consider here. If there is a cost to discharging a security packet, or a mortgage, it may not be convenient if we are advanced in the repayment schedule. Early exit fees may apply, or the interest may be \"\"pre-determined\"\". As a rule of thumb, when we are talking about rates above 10% p.a. then arrangements should be short (bridging finance - keep it short and charge 'em heaps), and for personal arrangements, small.\""}
{"id": "352700", "text": "It depends how deep in the money it is, compared to the dividend.  Even an in the money call has some time premium. As the call holder, if I exercise instead of selling the call, I am trading the potential for a dividend, which I won't receive, for getting that time premium back by selling.  Given the above, you'll notice a slight distortion in options pricing as a dividend date approaches, as the option will reflect not just the time premium, but the fact that exercising with grab the dividend.  Edit to address your comment - $10 stock, $9 strike, 50 cent div. If the option price is high, say $2, because there's a year till expiration, exercising makes no sense. If it's just $1.10, I gain 40 cents by exercising and selling after the dividend."}
{"id": "352760", "text": "There are two methods of doing this Pulling out the money and paying the penalty if any, and going on your way. Having the Roth IRA own the business, and being an employee. If you go with the second choice, you should read more about it on this question."}
{"id": "352838", "text": "\"If you start an LLC with you as the sole member it will be considered a disregarded entity.  This basically means that you have the protection of being a company, but all your revenues will go on your personal tax return and be taxed at whatever rate your personal rate calculates to based on your situation.  Now here is the good stuff.  If you file Form 2553 you can change your sole member LLC to file as an S Corp.  Once you have done this it changes the game on how you can pay out what your company makes.  You will need to employ yourself and give a \"\"reasonable\"\" salary.  This will be reported to the IRS and you will file your normal tax returns and they will be taxed based on your situation. Now as the sole member you can then pay yourself \"\"distribution to share holders\"\" from your account and this money is not subject to normal fica and social security tax (check with your tax guy) and MAKE SURE to document correctly.  The other thing is that on that same form you can elect to have a different fiscal year than the standard calendar IRS tax year.  This means that you could then take part of profits in one tax year and part in another so that you don't bump yourself into another tax bracket.  Example:  You cut a deal and the company makes 100,000 in profit that you want to take as a distribution.  If you wrote yourself a check for all of it then it could put you into another tax bracket.  If your fiscal year were to end say on sept 30 and you cut the deal before that date then you could write say 50,000 this year and then on jan 1 write the other check.\""}
{"id": "353048", "text": "Check out Khan Academy if you get a chance - they have a large suite of finance/capital market video clips that cover a lot of the basics of financial theory in short, manageable clips that might be suitable for someone in high school."}
{"id": "353081", "text": "\"With 40% of your take-home available, you have a golden opportunity here. Actually two, and the second builds out easily from the first.  Golden Opportunity # 1: Layoff Immunity Ok, not really immunity. Most people don't think of themselves getting laid off, and don't prepare. Of course it may not happen to you, but it can. It's happened to me twice. The layoff itself is an emotional burden (getting rejected is hard), but then you're suddenly faced with a gut-wrenching, \"\"how am I gonna pay the rent????\"\" If you have no savings, it's terrifying. Put yourself in that spot. Imagine that tomorrow, you're out of a job. For how many months could you pay your expenses with the money you have? Three months? One? Not even that?  How about shooting for 12 months? It's really, really comforting to be able to say: \"\"I don't have to worry about it for a year\"\". 12 months saved up gives you emotional and financial stability, and it gives you options -- you don't have to take the first job that comes along.  Now, saving 12 months of expenses is huge. But, you're in the wonderful spot where you can save 40% of your income. It would only take 2.5 years to save up a year's worth of income! But, actually, it's better than that. Because your 12-month Layoff Immunity fund doesn't have to include the amount for retirement, or taxes, or that 40% we're talking about. Your expenses are less than 60% of take-home -- you'd only need 12 months of that. So, you could have a fully funded 12-Month Layoff Immunity Fund only in a year and a half!  Golden Opportunity #2: Freedom Fund Do you like your Job? Would you still do it, if you didn't need the money? If so, great. But if not, why not get yourself into a position where you don't need it? That is, build up enough money from saving and investing to where you can pay your expenses - forever - from your investments. The number to keep in mind is 25. Figure out your annual expenses, and multiply it by 25. That's the amount you'd need to never need a job again. (That works out to a 4% withdrawal rate, adjusting for inflation every year, with a low risk of running out of money. It's a rule of thumb, but smart people doing a lot of math worked it out.) Here you keep saving and investing that 40% in solid mutual funds in a regular, taxable account. Between your savings and the compounding returns off the investments, you could easily have a fully funded \"\"Freedom Fund\"\" by the time you're 50. In fact, by 45 isn't unreasonable.  It could be even better. If you live in that high-rent area because of the job, and wouldn't mind living were the rents are lower once you quit, your target amount would be lower. Between that, working dedicatedly toward this goal, and maybe a little luck, you might even be able to do this by age 40.  Final Thoughts There are other things you could put that money toward, like a house, of course. The key take-away here, is to save it, and invest it.  You're in a unique position of being able to do that with 40% of your income. That's fabulous! But don't think it's the norm. Most people can't save that much, and, once you lose the ability to save that much, it's very difficult to get it back. Expenses creep in, lifestyle \"\"wants\"\" become \"\"needs\"\", and so on. If you get into the habit of spending it, it's very difficult to shrink your lifestyle back down - down to what right now you're perfectly comfortable with. So, spend some time figuring out what you want out of life -- and in the mean time, sock that 40% away.\""}
{"id": "353337", "text": "\"Whoa. These things are on two dimensions.  It's like burger and fries, you can also have chicken sandwich and fries, or burger and onion rings.   You can invest in an taxable brokerage account and/or an IRA.  And then, within each of those...  You can buy index funds and/or anything else. All 4 combinations are possible.  If someone says otherwise, take your money and run.  They are a shady financial \"\"advisor\"\" who is ripping you off by steering you only into products where they get a commission. Those products are more expensive because the commission comes out of your end.  Not to mention any names.  E.J.    If you want financial advice that is honest, find a financial advisor who you pay for his advice, and who doesn't sell products at all.  Or, just ask here.  But I would start by listening to Suze Orman, Dave Ramsey, whomever you prefer.  And read John Bogle's book.   They can tell you all about the difference between money market, bonds, stocks, managed mutual funds (ripoff!) and index funds. IRA accounts, Roth IRA accounts and taxable accounts are all brokerage accounts.  Within them, you can buy any security you want, including index funds.  The difference is taxation.  Suppose you earn $1000 and choose to invest it however  Later you withdraw it and it has grown to $3000.  Investing in a taxable account, you pay normal income tax on the $1000. When you later withdraw the $3000, you pay a tax on $2000 of income.  If you invested more than a year, it is taxed at a much lower \"\"capital gains\"\" tax rate.  With a traditional IRA account, you pay zero taxes on the initial $1000.  Later, when you take the money out, you pay normal income tax on the full $3000.  If you withdrew it before age 59-1/2, you also pay a 10% penalty ($300).  With a Roth IRA account, you pay normal income tax on the $1000.  When you withdraw the $3000 later, you pay NOTHING in taxes.  Provided you followed the rules.   You can invest in almost anything inside these accounts: Money market funds. Terrible return.  You won't keep up with the market.  Bonds.  Low return but usually quite safe.  Individual stocks.  Good luck.   Managed mutual funds.  You're paying some genius stock picker to select high performing stocks. He has a huge staff of researchers and  good social connections.  He also charges you 1.5% per year overhead as an \"\"expense ratio\"\", which is a total loss to you.  The fact is, he can usually pick stocks better than a monkey throwing darts.  But he's not 1.5% better!  Index funds.  These just shrug and buy every stock on the market.  There's no huge staff or genius manager, just some intern making small adjustments every week.  As such, the expense ratio is extremely small, like 0.1%.    If any of these investments pay dividends, you must pay taxes on them when they're issued, if you're not in an IRA account.  This problem gets fixed in ETF's.  Index ETF's.  These are index funds packaged to behave like stocks.  Dividends increase your stock's value instead of being paid out to you, which simplifies your taxes.  If you buy index funds outside of an IRA, use these.  Too many other options to get into here.\""}
{"id": "353546", "text": "As an addition to Chris Rea's excellent answer, these tender offers are sometimes made specifically to cast doubt on the current market price. For instance, a large public company that contracts with a smaller supplier or service company, also public, might make a tender offer below market price. The market will look at this price and the business relationship, and wonder what the larger company knows about the smaller one that they don't. Now, what happens when investors lose confidence in a stock? They sell it, supply goes up, demand goes down, and the price drops. The company making the tender offer can then get its shares either way; directly via the offer, or on the open market. This is, however, usually not successful beyond the very short term, and typically only works because the company making a tender offer is the 800-pound gorilla, which can dictate its own terms with practically anyone else it meets. Such offers are also very closely watched by the SEC; if there's any hint that the larger company is acting in a predatory manner, or that its management is using the power and information of the company to profit themselves, the strategy will backfire as the larger company finds itself the target of SEC and DoJ legal proceedings."}
{"id": "353625", "text": "\"For easy math, say you are in the 25% tax bracket. A thousand deposited dollars is $750 out of your pocket, but $2000 after the match.  Now, you say you want to take the $750 and pay down the card. If you wait a year (at 20%) you'll owe $900, but have access to borrow a full $1000, at a low rate, 4% or so. The payment is less than $19/mo for 5 years.  So long as one is comfortable juggling their debt a bit, the impact of a fully matched 401(k) cannot be beat. Keep in mind, this is a different story than those who just say \"\"don't take a 401(k) loan.\"\" Here, it's the loan that offers you the chance to fund the account. If you are let go, and withdraw the money, even at the 25% rate, you net $1500 less the $200 penalty, or $1300 compared to the $750 you are out of pocket. If you don't want to take the loan, you're still ahead so long as you are able to pay the cards over a reasonable time. I'll admit, a 20% card paid over 10+ years can still trash a 100% return. This is why I add the 401(k) loan to the mix.  The question for you - jldugger - is how tight is the budget? And how much is the match? Is it dollar for dollar on first X%?\""}
{"id": "353653", "text": "\"Professional investors managing large investment portfolios for \"\"institutions\"\" -- a college, a museum, a charitable organization, et cetera. I'm not sure whether those managing investments for a business are considered institutional investors or not. The common factor tends to be large to immense portfolios (let's call it $100M and up, just for discussion) and concern with preserving that wealth.  Having that much money to work with allows some investment strategies that don't make sense for smaller investors, and makes some others impractical to impossible. These folks can make mistakes too; Madoff burned a lot of charities when his scam collapsed.\""}
{"id": "353698", "text": "I'm a little confused by your question to be honest. It sounds like you haven't sold it to him, but you have a verbal arrangement for him to use the car like it's his. I'm going to assume that's the case for this answer. This is incredibly risky. If you've got the car on credit and he stops paying, or you guys break up... you will be liable for continuing to make payments! If the loan is in your name, it's your responsibility. Edited. The credit is yours. If he decides to stop paying, you're a little stuck."}
{"id": "353865", "text": "The idea behind investing in index funds is that you will not under perform the market but also at the same time not over perform against the market either. It is meant for those (majority of the investing population) who do not or cannot invest more time in actively researching different investment options. So even considering for a moment that the yields on the index funds will drop significantly in the future, since the fund is supposed to be replication of the whole market itself, the market too can be assumed to be giving significantly lower future yields. In my opinion the question that you ask is confusing/contradictory because, its like pegging the fund performance to an avg and then asking if it will be higher or lower in the future. But rather its always going to be exactly the average, even if the absolute yields turn higher or lower"}
{"id": "353926", "text": "Yes, you can still file a 1040nr. You are a nonresident alien and were:  engaged in a trade or business in the United States Normally, assuming your withholding was correct, you would get a minimal amount back. Income earned in the US is definitely Effectively Connected Income and is   taxed at the graduated rates that apply to U.S. citizens and resident aliens. However, there is a tax treaty between US and India, and it suggests that you would be taxed on the entirety of the income by India. This suggests to me that you would get everything that was withheld back."}
{"id": "354136", "text": "\"This answer is applicable to the US.  Similar rules may hold in some other countries as well.   The shares in an open-ended (non-exchange-traded) mutual fund are not traded on stock exchanges and the \"\"market\"\" does not determine the share price the way it does for shares in companies as brokers make offers to buy and sell stock shares. The price of one share of  the mutual fund (usually called Net Asset Value (NAV) per share) is usually calculated at the close of business, and is, as the name implies, the net worth of all the shares in companies that the fund owns plus cash on hand etc divided by the number of mutual fund shares outstanding. The NAV per share of a mutual fund might or might not increase in anticipation of the distribution to occur, but the NAV per share very definitely falls on  the day that the distribution is declared. If you choose to re-invest your distribution in the same fund, then you will own more shares at a lower NAV per share but the total value of your investment will not change at all.  If you had 100 shares currently priced at $10 and  the fund declares a distribution of $2 per share, you will  be reinvesting $200 to buy more shares but the fund will be selling you additional shares at $8 per share (and of course, the 100 shares you hold will be priced at $8 per share too.  So, you will have 100 previous shares worth only $800 now + 25 new shares worth $200 for a total of 125 shares at $8 = $1000 total investment, just as before. If you take the distribution in cash, then you still hold the 100 shares but they are worth only $800 now, and the fund will send you the $200 as cash. Either way, there is no change in your net worth. However, (assuming that the fund is is not in a tax-advantaged account), that $200 is taxable income to you regardless of whether you reinvest it or take it as cash. The fund will tell you what part of that $200 is dividend income (as well as what part is Qualified Dividend income),  what part is short-term capital gains, and what part is long-term capital gains; you declare the income in the appropriate categories on your tax return, and are taxed accordingly. So, what advantage is there in re-investing? Well, your basis in those shares has increased and so if and when you sell the shares, you will owe less tax. If you had bought the original 100 shares at $10 and sell the 125 shares a few years later at $11 and collect $1375, you owe (long-term capital gains) tax on  just $1375-$1200 =$175  (which can also be calculated as $1 gain on each of the original 100 shares = $100 plus $3 gain on the 25 new shares = $175). In the past, some people would forget the intermediate transactions and think that they had invested $1000 initially and gotten $1375 back for a gain of $375 and pay taxes on $375 instead. This is less likely to occur now since mutual funds are now required to report more information on the sale to the shareseller than they used to in the past. So, should you buy shares in a mutual fund right now? Most mutual fund companies publish preliminary estimates in November and December of what distributions each fund will be making by the end of the year. They also usually advise against purchasing new shares during this period because one ends up \"\"buying a dividend\"\".  If, for example, you bought those 100 shares at $10 on the Friday after Thanksgiving and the fund distributes that $2 per share  on December 15, you still have $1000 on December 15, but now owe taxes on $200 that you would not have had to pay if you had postponed buying those shares till after the distribution was paid. Nitpickers: for simplicity of exposition, I have not gone into the detailed chronology of when the fund goes ex-dividend, when the distribution is recorded,  and when cash is paid out, etc., but merely treated all these events as happening simultaneously.\""}
{"id": "354551", "text": "I wouldn't recommend trying to chase a good return on this money.  I'd just put it into a savings account of some sort.  If you can get a better interest rate with an online account, then feel free to do that.  I'd recommend using this money to pay for as much of college out of pocket as you can.  The more student loans you can avoid, the better. As @John Bensin said, trying to make money in the stock market in such a short time is too risky.  For this money, you want to preserve the principal to pay for school, or to pay down your loans when you get out. If you find you have more money than you need to finish paying for school, then I'd suggest setting some aside for an emergency fund, setting aside enough to pay your loans off when you're out of school, saving for future purchases (house, car, etc), and then start investing (maybe for retirement in a Roth IRA or something like that)."}
{"id": "354767", "text": "For the type of market neutrality you desire, free from crash risk, it's best to hedge the shares with covered calls when implied volatility is expensive and puts when implied volatility is cheap with the nearest at the money expirations.  A put only strategy can be very expensive and should only be used with the longest term options available since they can cost many tens of % per year. Securities become almost perfectly correlated during a crash; therefore, market crash risk of one security is essentially equal to the market crash risk, so hedging the security itself makes a position market neutral for crash risk. This strategy will have intermittent opportunity cost risk in the form of slower returns during market expansion to pay for smaller losses during a crash; however, the expected long run return hedged this way should be greater than the underlying's expected long run return with less volatility."}
{"id": "354889", "text": "\"You hit on the biggest advantage of keeping things out of tax-advantaged accounts: Easier access to the money. It hurts to take money out of a 401(k) early.  It may hurt more in the future.  (Do you think the reason the 10% penalty is there in order to protect you from yourself?)  It also may be converted into a vehicle besides what you have it in now, due to a \"\"national liquidity crisis.\"\" You have plenty in tax-advantaged accounts, IMO.\""}
{"id": "354943", "text": "If the 'gratuity' is a payment from your previous Indian company made when you left them, then the US tax system will treat it exactly the same as wages paid by your previous company. Whether or not you need to pay taxes on your wages and gratuity will depend on whether your are considered resident in the US for tax purposes for this financial year. It is likely that you will be. Assuming you are, then the US requires that you pay tax on all income, wherever it is earned in the world. You will need to fill in a tax return and declare both your gratuity and your wages in India for that year.  India and the US have a 'double tax agreement', which means essentially that you won't be taxed twice if you have already paid tax on the gratuity and wages in India. But you do have to declare them."}
{"id": "354968", "text": "Sarasota Short Sale Lawyer are experts in contract law.  If you are experiencing unmanageable debt issues such as Short Sale, Foreclosure, or Real Estate, it is important to realize you are not alone and that there are viable options for getting a new financial lease on life that works in the long run."}
{"id": "354974", "text": "\"With a gross income of $ 95,000 per year, and a net savings rate of over $ 18,000 per year, a budget of $ 3,600 per year for automobile interest and depreciation is not irresponsible. But poor car choices, poor car maintenance habits, and driving habits that risk totalling cars are irresponsible.  Also, not fully understanding a lease deal is irresponsible. The \"\"great lease deal\"\" might be encouraging you to make a different \"\"poor car choice\"\" than you made last time.  A \"\"great deal\"\" on a bad car is not really a great deal.  Also, depending on the contract and your driving habits, you might have a surprising cost at the end of the lease.\""}
{"id": "355315", "text": "\"Limited Price is probably equivalent to the current par value of a \"\"limit order\"\". Markets move fast, and if the commodity is seeing some volatility in the buy and sell prices, if you place an ordinary buy order you may not get the price you were quoted. A \"\"limit order\"\" tells your broker or whomever or whatever is making the order on your behalf that you will pay no more than X yuan. While the market is below that price, the trader will attempt to get you the quantity you want, but if they can't get you your full order for an average price less than the limit, the whole thing is rolled back. You can set a limit at any price, but a limit order of 1 yuan for a pound of sterling silver will likely never be executed as long as the market itself is functioning. So, you are being provided with a \"\"par value\"\" that they can guarantee will be executed in the current market. Entrustment prices are probably prices offered to the managers of trust funds. A trust is simply a set of securities and/or cash which is placed under the nominal control of a third party, who then must in good faith attempt to fulfill the goals of the actual owner of the securities with regards to growth or retention of value. Trustees almost never speculate with the money they control, but when they do move money it's often a sizeble chunk (hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars instead of a few thousand dollars here and there). So, in return for the long-term holdings, large buys and sells, and thus the reduced cost of maintaining a business relationship with the broker, the broker may offer better prices to trust fund managers.\""}
{"id": "355373", "text": "The simplest thing is to transfer to your current account. You'll have the ability to borrow (assuming employer allows) 50% of the balance if you need to, and one less account to worry about.  Transferring to an IRA is the other common choice. This offers the ability to convert to a Roth IRA and to invest any way you choose. The 401(k) options may be limited.  Without more details, it's tough to decide. For example, if you are in the 15% bracket, the Roth conversion can be a great idea. And the 401(k) might be not so great, just deposit to the match, and then use the IRA. For example."}
{"id": "355592", "text": "\"There absolutely is a specific model that makes this so popular with so many credit card companies, and that model is \"\"per transaction fees\"\". Card companies also receive cost-sharing incentives from certain merchants. There is also a psychological reasoning as an additional incentive. When you want to accept credit cards as a source of payment as a business, you generally have three kinds of fees to pay: monthly/yearly subscription fees, percentage of transaction fee, and per transaction fee.  The subscription fees can be waived and sometimes are expressed as a \"\"minimum cost\"\", so the business pays a certain amount whether you actually have people use credit cards or not. Many of these fees don't actually make it to the credit card companies, as they just pay the service providers and middle-men processing companies. The percentage of transaction fee means that the business accepting payment via credit card must pay a percentage usually ranging from 1-3% of the total transactions they accept. So if they get paid $10,000 a month by customers in the form of credit cards, the business pays out $100-300 a month to the credit card processor - a good portion of which will make it back to the credit card issuing company, and is a major source of income for them. The per transaction fee means that every time a transaction is run involving a card, a set fee is incurred by the business (which is commonly anywhere from $0.05 to $0.30 per transaction). If that $10,000 a month business mentioned previously had 10 customers paying $1,000 each at $0.10 a transaction, that's only $1 in fees to the credit card processors/companies. But if instead that business was a grocery store with an average transaction of $40, that's $25 in fees.  This system means that if you are a credit card company and want to encourage people to make a specific kind of purchase, you should encourage purchases that people make many times for relatively small amounts of money. In a perfect world you'd want them to buy $1 bottles of water 5 times a day with their credit card. If the card company had 50,000 card holders doing this, at the end of 1 year the company would have $91,250,000 spread across 91,250,000 transactions. The card company might reasonably make $0.05 per transaction and %1 of the purchase total. The Get Rewarded For Drinking More campaign might earn the card company $912,500 in percentage fees and over $4.5 million in transaction fees. Yet the company would only have to pay 3% in rewards from the percentage fees, or $2.7 million, back to customers. If the card company had encouraged using your credit card for large once-yearly purchases, they would actually pay out more money in rewards than they collect in card-use fees. Yet by encouraging people to make small transactions very often the card company earns a nice net-income even if absolutely every customer pays their balance in full, on time, and pays no annual/monthly fees for their card - which obviously does not happen in the real world. No wonder companies try so hard to encourage you to use your card all the time! For card companies to make real money they need you to use your credit card. As discussed above, the more often you use the card the better (for them), and there can be a built-in preference for small repeated transactions. But no matter what the size of transaction, they can't make the big bucks if you don't use the card at all! Selling your personal information isn't as profitable if they don't have in-depth info on you to sell, either. So how do they get you to make that plastic sing? Gas and groceries are a habit. Most people buy one or the other at least once a weak, and a very large number of us make such purchases multiple times a week. Some people even make such purchases multiple times a day! So how do people pay for such transactions? The goal of the card companies is to have you use their product to pay as much as possible. If you pay for something regularly you'll keep that card in your wallet with you, rather than it getting lost in a drawer at home. So the card companies want you to use your card as a matter of habit, too. If you use a card to buy for gas and groceries, why wouldn't you use it for other things too? Lunch, dinner, buying online? If the card company pays out more and makes less for large, less-regular purchases, then the ideal for them is to have you use the card for small regular purchase and yet still have you use the card for larger infrequent purchases even if you get reduced/no rewards. What better way to achieve all these goals than to offer special rewards on gas and groceries? And because it's not a one-time purchase, you aren't so likely to game the system; no getting that special 5% cash-back card, booking your once-per-decade dream vacation, then paying it off and cancelling it soon after - which would actually make the card company lose money on the deal. In the end, credit card companies as a whole have a business model that almost universally prefers customers who use their products regularly and preferably for small amounts a maximum number of times. They want to reduce their expenses (like rewards paid out) while maximizing their revenue. They haven't figured out a better way to do all of this so well as to encourage people to use their cards for gas and groceries - everything else seems like a losing proposition in comparison. The only time this preference differs is when they can avoid paying some or all of the cost of rewards, such as when the merchants themselves honor the rewards in exchange for reduced or zero payment from the card companies. So if you use an airline card that seems to give you 10% back in airline rewards? Well, that's probably a great deal for the card company if the airline provides that reward at their own expense to try to boost business. The card company keeps the transaction-related fees and pays out almost nothing in rewards - the perfect offer (for them)!  And this assumes no shenanigans like black-out periods, \"\"not valid with any other offers\"\" rewards like on cars where only a fool pays full MSRP (and sometimes the rewards are tagged in this sort of way, like not valid on sale/clearance items, etc), expiring rewards, the fact that they know not everyone uses their rewards, annual fees that are greater than the rewards you'll actually be obtaining after accounting for all the other issues, etc. And credit card industries are known for their shenanigans!\""}
{"id": "355675", "text": "While I don't disagree with the other answers as far as CD laddering goes (at least in principle), three months CDs are currently getting much lower rates than money market accounts, at least according to http://www.bankrate.com.  A savings account is also more liquid than CDs. Bonds are another option, and they can generally be liquidated quickly on the secondary market.  However, they can go down in value if interest rates rise (actually this is true of CDs as well--there is a secondary market, though  I believe only for brokerage CDs?). Bottom line, A high yield savings account is likely your best best.  As others noted, you should think of your emergency fund as savings, not investment."}
{"id": "355717", "text": "You're aware there's no such thing as a cheap house in Jersey right? Rental values are listed in price per DAY to make them look less scary.   Also, no, you couldn't. You pay tax in the country you are resident in and the States don't equate property ownership to residency; neither does HMRC.   Interesting side note, in Jersey's neighbour Guernsey you can own a house but not legally be allowed to live in it due to the dual property market."}
{"id": "355773", "text": "\"It's \"\"projected\"\" to go up, until the underwriting banks decide enough time has passed for them to stop pretending they believe in their unrealistically optimistic scenario and start slashing target price estimates by 40%. So a few weeks...\""}
{"id": "355870", "text": "Have a look at swift codes website, but on wikipedia, there seems to be some variation in the interpretation of the standard. Broadly, it should be that a swift code refers to a particular branch, but it is possible that there is a cost associated with running a swift code, so some banks may prefer to share swift codes across branches. You should check and confirm."}
{"id": "355871", "text": "\"I am strongly skeptical of this.  In fact, after reading your question, I did the following: I wrote a little program in python that \"\"simulates\"\" a stock by flipping a coin. Each time the coin comes up heads, the stock's value grows by 1. Each time the coin comes up tails, the stock's value drops by 1.  I then group, say, 50 of these steps into a \"\"day\"\", and for each day I look at opening, closing, maximum and minimum. This is then graphed in a candlestick chart.  Funny enough, those things look exactly like the charts analysts look at. Here are a few examples:    If you want to be a troll, show these to a technical analyst and ask them which of these stocks you should sell short and which of them you should buy. You can try this at home, I posted the code here and it only needs Python with a few extra packages (Numpy and Pylab, should both be in the SciPy package). In reply to a comment from JoeTaxpayer, let me add some more theory to this. My code actually performs a one-dimensional random walk. Now Joe in the comments says that an infinite number of flips should approach the zero line, but that is not exactly correct. In fact, there is a high chance to end up far from the zero line, because the expected distance from the start for a random walk with N steps is sqrt(N).  What does indeed approach the zero line is if you took a bunch of these random walks and then performed the average over those. There is, however, one important aspect in which this random walk differs from the stock market: The random walk can go down as far as it likes, whereas a stock has a bottom below which it cannot fall. Reaching this bottom means the company is bankrupt and gets removed from the market. This means that the total stock market, which we might interpret as a sum of random walks, does indeed have a bias towards upwards movement, since I'm only averaging over those random walks that don't go below a certain threshold. But you can really only benefit from this effect by being broadly diversified.\""}
{"id": "355972", "text": "\"Will the bank be taxed on the $x received through selling the   collateral? Why do you care? They will, of course, although their basis will be different. It is of no concern for you. What is your concern is that the write-off of the loan is taxed as ordinary income (as opposed to capital gains when you sell the stocks) for you. So when the bank seizes the stocks, they will also report to the IRS that they gave you the amount of money that you owed them (which they will \"\"give you\"\" and then put it on the account of the loan). So you get taxed on that amount as income. In addition, you will be taxed on the gains on the stocks, as giving them to the bank is considered a sale. So you may actually find yourself in a situation where you'd be paying taxes twice, once capital gains, and once as ordinary income, on the same money. I would strongly advise against this. If it is a real situation and not a hypothetical question - get a professional tax advice. I'm not a professional, talk to a CPA/EA licensed in your state.\""}
{"id": "356035", "text": "Okay, I went through a similar situation when my mother died in March of this year. The estate still needs to go into probate. Especially if there was a will. And when you do this, your husband will be named as the executor. Then what he will need to do is produce both of their death certificates to the bank, have the account closed, and open an estate account with both of their names on it. Their debts & anything like this should be paid from this account as well. Then what you can do is endorse the check as the executor and deposit it into this account. After all debts are paid, the money can be disbursed to the beneficiaries (your husband). Basically, as long as they didn't have any huge debts to pay, he will see the money again. It just may be a couple of months. And you will have to pay some filing fees."}
{"id": "356161", "text": "\"Oftentimes, the lender (the owner of the security) is not explicitly involved in the lending transaction. Let's say the broker is holding a long-term position of 1MM shares from Client A. It is common for Client A's agreement with Broker A to include a clause that allows the broker to lend out the 1MM shares for its own profit (\"\"rehypothecation\"\"). Client A may be compensated for this in some form (e.g. baked into their financing rates), but they do not receive any compensation that is directly tied to lending activities. You also have securities lending agents that lend securities for an explicit fee. For example, the borrower's broker may not have sufficient inventory, in which case they would need to find a third-party lending agent. This happens both on-demand as well as for a fixed-terms (typically a large basket of securities). SLB (securities lending and borrowing) is a business in its own right.  I'm not sure I follow your follow-up question but oftentimes there is no restriction that prevents the broker from lending out shares \"\"for a very short time\"\". Unless there is a transaction-based fee though, the number of times you lend shares does not affect \"\"pocketing the interest\"\" since interest accrues as a function of time.\""}
{"id": "356490", "text": "If I sell a covered call, on stock I own 100%, there is no risk of a margin call. The stock goes to zero, I'm still not ask to send in more money. But, if bought on margin, margin rules apply.  A naked put would require you to be able to buy the stock if put to you. As the price of the stock drops, you still need to be able to buy it at the put strike price.  Mark to market is just an expression describing how your positions are considered each day."}
{"id": "356535", "text": ""}
{"id": "356595", "text": "Whatever you do, don't take your retirement savings to Vegas. Second, you should also consider investment expenses. Your investments profit after the managers pay themselves. Get the lowest expense ratio mutual funds you can. Third, most active managers do not beat the market. Index funds are your friends. They also tend to have the lower expense ratios."}
{"id": "356623", "text": "I understand you're trying to ask a narrow question, but you're basically asking whether you should time the market.  You can find tons of books saying you shouldn't try it, and tons more confirming that you can.  Both will have data and anecdotes to back them up.  So I'll give you my own opinion. Market timing, especially in a macro sense, is a zero-sum game.  Your first thought should be: I'm smarter than the average person; the average person is an idiot.  However, remember that a whole lot of the money in the market is not controlled by idiots.  You really need to ask yourself if you can compete with people who get paid to spend 12 hours a day trying to beat the market. Stick with a mid-range strategy for now.  Your convictions aren't and shouldn't be strong enough at the moment to do otherwise.  But, if you can't resist, I say go ahead and do what you feel.  Regardless of what you do, your returns over the next 3 years won't be life changing.  In the meantime, learn as much as you can about investing, and keep a journal of your investment activity to keep yourself honest."}
{"id": "356726", "text": "You just disclosed that you are new investor to the stock market. I'd advise that you first understand investing a bit better, as most will advise that investors need to be above a certain level before picking individual stocks.  That said, most stocks trade in high enough volume and have low enough short interest that they don't fall under the category you seek. You want to first ask your broker if they have such a process, not all do. If so, they would need to provide you with the stocks that fall into this odd situation, specifically, the shares that have traders seeking to short the stock, but the stock is unavailable. Even then, the broker may have requirements that you don't fall into, minimum history with broker, minimum size account, etc. Worse, they are not likely to offer this for 100 shares, but may have a 1000 or higher share requirement. Are you willing to buy some obscure $50/sh priced stock to lend out at 1%/mo? The guy trying to short it is far smarter than both you and I, at least regarding this particular stock. This strategy is more appropriate for the 7 figure net worth investor.  If any reader has actual experience with this, I'm happy to hear it. This response is from my recollection of two articles I read about 3 years ago, coincidence they both were published within weeks of each other."}
{"id": "357017", "text": "\"So basically, the bar has been lowered due to the fact that so many people don't qualify for credit. The medical debt issue is one thing, but the fact that only 28% of home purchases these days are first time home buyers instead of 40% says more about our unaffordable higher educational system, labor market and people's ability to earn decent income than it does about credit being \"\"too tight\"\".  If anything this is a loosening of standards since the banks have no alternative in order to drum up new sales. They're 12% off the mark and they're finding ways to close the gap. Wages probably won't get better, so they're better off accepting lower quality customers and rolling the dice on their ability to pay off debts over the life of the loans they issue.  Sounding familiar?\""}
{"id": "357037", "text": "You should be careful about mingling your personal money and that of the business, even if it is a sole prop right now.  It is a good habit to keep separate business and personal bank/credit accounts just so that when you change to an LLC, it is simpler for you to separate what belongs to the company and what is yours personally.  What you're doing makes it more difficult (although only marginally so) to itemize business deductions that were paid with an ostensibly personal credit account.  The better habit to get into now is keeping that distinct separation between personal and business. That being said, there's nothing illegal in what you're doing, but it would make an accountant cringe, that's for sure. (chuckle) Hope this helps. Good luck!"}
{"id": "357113", "text": "Is your credit card spending on things outside the categories listed in your question? I generally don't put credit card expenditures in their own category of spending because I'm buying things like gas and groceries, etc. I track all spending whether from my checking account (bill autopay) or credit card account as spending in budget categories, and I just transfer money from my checking account to my credit card account to cover anything that was spent there during the previous month."}
{"id": "357492", "text": "No. But you are not splitting the 401(k), the judge is. There is no provision for an employee to simply request funds to give to the ex-spouse. But there is a QDRO, a qualified domestic relations order whereby a judge orders this to occur. The lawyers will be aware of the loans, as will the judge, and will take that into account when splitting the 401(k). Depending on what other money the Ex has, he make be required to pay the loans back, partially, or in full.  No one can guess what will happen. The judge will take all aspects of your finances and current earnings into account."}
{"id": "357520", "text": "Yes, you are the proprietor of the business and your SSN is listed on Schedule C. The information on Schedule C is for your unincorporated business as a contractor; it is a sole proprietorship. You might choose to do this business under your own name e.g. Tim Taylor (getting paid with checks made out to Tim Taylor) or a modified name such as Tim the Tool Man Taylor (this is often referred to as DBA - Doing Business as), under a business name such as Tool Time etc. with business address being your home address or separate premises, and checking accounts to match etc. and all that is what the IRS wants to know about on Schedule C.  Information about the company that paid you is not listed on Schedule C."}
{"id": "357738", "text": "No fees: Write a check. Deposit it into the other bank."}
{"id": "357817", "text": "I have no idea what you're talking about, but for context, Amazon employee badges are blue. The point is that as far as employment status is concerned they're more or less on par with corporate.  (There are lots of caveats to the above statement but the general case holds.)"}
{"id": "357914", "text": "\"Tax cost basis is the amounts you've spent on developing the product which you hasn't deducted yet from previous income. From what you've described, it sounds like your cost basis is $0. Time you spent is not your cost, since time is not money. The fact that you might have earned something if working at that time but you didn't - is irrelevant, because potential income that you didn't get is not a loss that you took. Someone mentioned \"\"intangibles\"\" in the comments - that would be the line of thought of the buyer. However, since you didn't buy the product but rather developed it, you can only deduct the actual expenses you've incurred, that you haven't deducted so far.\""}
{"id": "357979", "text": "Wikipedia has a fairly detailed explanation of ETFs.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange-traded_fund"}
{"id": "358175", "text": "There is no requirement to open a company. You can work as freelancer. You need to report income and file returns. If your income is more than exempt limit, pay taxes. Apply for a PAN number if you don't have one yet."}
{"id": "358213", "text": ""}
{"id": "358227", "text": "\"Check the transactions costs, \"\"Desk fees\"\" and the whole structure, sit down with them and list everything.  Then make a spreadsheet and calculate all the stuff they hit you with and figure out how good you have to be in trading to make money, (in terms of accuracy and p/l).\""}
{"id": "358581", "text": "The only thing the book advises to do is to start an LLC that invests in real estate, then deduct everything you do as a business expense related to investing in real estate. Going on a vacation to Hawaii?  Deduct it, you were checking out real estate.  And so on and so forth."}
{"id": "358602", "text": "The way the wash sale works is your loss is added to your cost basis of the buy.  So suppose your original cost basis is $10,000.  You then sell the stock for $9,000 which accounts for your $1,000 loss.  You then buy the stock again, say for $8,500,  and sell it for $9,000.  Since your loss of $1,000 is added to your cost basis, you actually still have a net loss of $500. You then buy the stock again for say $10,500,  then sell it for $9,500.  Your $500 loss is added to your cost basis,  and you have a net loss of $1,500. Since you never had a net gain, you will not owe any tax for these transactions."}
{"id": "358729", "text": "Many mortgages have a clause saying the bank will not sell the loan. You are acting like this is unheard of, but it is a standard checkbox on most bank's mortgages, where they either mark that they can sell it or they mark that they won't. So, it is common enough for it to be on their standard forms. (There are many sources of funding for banks for mortgages that explicitly prevent them from selling loans)"}
{"id": "358795", "text": "\"The loan-to-value ratio (LTV Ratio) is a lending risk assessment ratio that financial institutions and others lenders examine before approving a mortgage. It sounds like your lender has a 60% requirement. Remember the home is the collateral for the loan.  If you stop making payments, they can take the house back from you.  That number is less than 100% to accommodate changing market prices, the cost of foreclosure, repairing and reselling the home.  They may be a safety factor built in depending on the home's location.   If you want to buy a $1.8 million dollar home you will have to come up with 40% down payment.  That down payment is what reduces the risk for the lender.  So no, there is no way to cheat that. Think about the transaction from the view of the lender.   Note: in some areas, you can still get a loan if you don't have the required down payment.  You just have to pay a monthly mortgage insurance.  It's expensive but that works for many home buyers.  A separate insurance company offers a policy that helps protect the lender when there isn't enough deposit paid. Update:  Er, no.  Keep it simple.  The bank will only loan you money if it has collateral for the loan. They've built in a hefty safety margin to protect them in case you quit paying them your monthly payments.  If you want to spend the money on something else, that would work as long as you provide collateral to protect the lender.  You mention borrowing money for some other purpose then buying a home.  That would be fine, but you will have to come up with some collateral that protect the lender. If you wanted to buy a new business, the bank would first ask for an appraisal of the value of the assets of the business.  That could be applied to the collateral safety net for the lender.  If you wanted to buy a business that had little appraisal value, then the bank would require more collateral from you in other forms.  Say you wanted to borrow the money for an expensive operation or cosmetic surgery. In that case there is no collateral value in the operation. You can't sell anything from the surgery to anybody to recover costs. The money is spent and gone.  Before the bank would loan you any money for such a surgery, they would require you to provide upfront collateral.  (in this case if you were to borrow $60,000 for surgery, the bank would require $100,000 worth of collateral to protect their interest in the loan.) You borrow money, then you pay it back at a regular interval at an agreed upon rate and schedule.  Same thing for borrowing money for the stock market or a winning horse at the horse race.  A lender will require a hard asset as collateral before making you a loan...   Yes I know you have a good tip on a winning horse,and you are bound to double your money, but that's not the way it works from a lender's point of view.    It sounds like you are trying to game the system by playing on words.  I will say quit using the \"\"40% to 60%\"\" phrase.  That is just confusing.  The bank's loan to value is reported as a single number (in this case 60%)  For every $6000 you want to borrow, you have to provide an asset worth $10,000 as a safety guarantee for the loan. If you want to borrow money for the purchase of a home, you will need to meet that 60% safety requirement.  If you want to borrow $1,000,000 cash for something besides a home, then you will have to provide something with a retail value of $1,666,667 as equity. I think the best way for you to answer your own question is for you to pretend to be the banker, then examine the proposal from the banker's viewpoint. Will the banker alway have enough collateral for whatever it is you are asking to borrow? If you don't yet have that equity, and you need a loan for something besides a home, you can always save your money until you do have enough equity.  Comment One. I thought that most lenders had a 75% or 80% loan to value ratio. The 60% number seems pretty low.  That could indicate you may be a high risk borrower, or possibly that lender is not the best for you.  Have you tried other lenders?  It's definitely worth shopping around for different lenders.   Comment Two. I will say, it almost sounds like you aren't being entirely honest with us here.  No way someone with a monthly income who can afford a $1.8 Million home would be asking questions like this.  I get that English probably isn't your first language, but still.  The other thing is: If you are truly buying a $1.8 Million dollar home your real estate agent would be helping you find a lender that will work with you.  They would be HIGHLY motivated to see this sale happen.   All of your questions could be answered in ten minutes with a visit to your local bank (or any bank for that matter.)  When you add up the costs and taxes and insurance on a 30 fixed loan, you'd have a monthly mortgage payment of nearly $10,500 a month or more.  Can you really afford that on your monthly income?\""}
{"id": "358997", "text": "What is your time horizon? Over long horizons, you absolutely want to minimise the expense ratio \u2013 a seemingly puny 2% fee p.a. can cost you a third of your savings over 35 years. Over short horizons, the cost of trading in and trading out might matter more. A mutual fund might be front-loaded, i.e. charge a fixed initial percentage when you first purchase it. ETFs, traded daily on an exchange just like a stock, don't have that. What you'll pay there is the broker commission, and the bid-ask spread (and possibly any premium/discount the ETF has vis-a-vis the underlying asset value).  Another thing to keep in mind is tracking error: how closely does the fond mirror the underlying index it attempts to track? More often than not it works against you. However, not sure there is a systematic difference between ETFs and funds there. Size and age of a fund can matter, indeed - I've had new and smallish ETFs that didn't take off close down, so I had to sell and re-allocate the money. Two more minor aspects: Synthetic ETFs and lending to short sellers. 1) Some ETFs are synthetic, that is, they don't buy all the underlying shares replicating the index, actually owning the shares. Instead, they put the money in the bank and enter a swap with a counter-party, typically an investment bank, that promises to pay them the equivalent return of holding that share portfolio. In this case, you have (implicit) credit exposure to that counter-party - if the index performs well, and they don't pay up, well, tough luck. The ETF was relying on that swap, never really held the shares comprising the index, and won't necessarily cough up the difference. 2) In a similar vein, some (non-synthetic) ETFs hold the shares, but then lend them out to short sellers, earning extra money. This will increase the profit of the ETF provider, and potentially decrease your expense ratio (if they pass some of the profit on, or charge lower fees). So, that's a good thing. In case of an operational screw up, or if the short seller can't fulfil their obligations to return the shares, there is a risk of a loss.  These two considerations are not really a factor in normal times (except in improving ETF expense ratios), but during the 2009 meltdown they were floated as things to consider. Mutual funds and ETFs re-invest or pay out dividends. For a given mutual fund, you might be able to choose, while ETFs typically are of one type or the other. Not sure how tax treatment differs there, though, sorry (not something I have to deal with in my jurisdiction).  As a rule of thumb though, as alex vieux says, for a popular index, ETFs will be cheaper over the long term. Very low cost mutual funds, such as Vanguard, might be competitive though."}
{"id": "359257", "text": "A lender lends money to a person or institution. A creditor is owed money by the person or institution. Many times they are equal. But if you owe money to somebody they are a creditor. You could have paid with a check, but it bounced. Or you contracted them for a service, and then never paid for that service.  Yes technically a creditor did offer a short term that was supposed to be paid within X days of being billed.  Sometimes a creditor works the other way also. You gave a deposit to company X for them to remodel your kitchen. They never start the job. They now owe you a refund of your deposit. You are now a creditor."}
{"id": "359442", "text": "\"Well, it's not even just about dealing with a half day. There is literally a message on every single data feed that states \"\"this is it for this trading session\"\". Why the hell would you consider any data after that as something you'd process?\""}
{"id": "359510", "text": "\"Congrats on saving the money but unfortunately, you're looking for a 24% annual rate of return and that's not \"\"reasonable\"\" to expect.  $200 per month, is $2,400 per year.  $2,400/$10,000 is 24%. In a 1% savings account with spending of $200 per month spending you'll have about $7,882 at the end of the year.  You'll earn about $90 of interest over the course of the year.  I'm sure other people will have more specific opinions about the best way to deploy that money.  I'd open a brokerage account (not an IRA, just a regular plain vanilla brokerage account), break off $5,000 and put it in to a low fee no commission S&P index fund; which CAN lose value.  Put the rest in a savings account/checking account and just spend wisely.\""}
{"id": "359571", "text": "Wow the collateral totally eliminates the purpose of the swap for B, to have a consistent steady cash flow and stable expenses.   It probably wouldn't be worth a broker's time unless it was in the millions.  They should invent interest rate swaps for the mass market. I'm patenting that!"}
{"id": "359713", "text": "\"Based on past case law, a check made payable to qualified charity and delivered (e.g., placed in the mail on 12/31 would count as delivered as it is out of the hands of the donor) would fall under the \"\"constructive receipt doctrine\"\". However, for non-charitable gifts (e.g., gifts to family members) it is the date the check is cashed (honored by the receiving bank).  This is important as the annual gift exclusion is just that \"\"Annual\"\".  Therefore, if I gift my child $14,000 by writing a check on 12/31/2014 but they deposit it on 1/3/2015 then I have used my annual gift exclusion for 2015 and not 2014.  This means I could not gift them anything further in 2015. BTW the annual gift amount is for ALL gifts cash and non-cash.  Most people don't seem to realize this.  If I give $14,000 of cash to my child and then also give them Christmas gifts with a value of $1,000 I have exceeded my annual gift exclusion to that child.  Usually there are ways around this issue as I can give $14,000 to each and every person I want and if married my spouse can do the same.  This allows us to give $14,000 from each of us to each child plus $14,000 from each of us to their spouse if married and $14,000 from each of us to each of their children if they have any.\""}
{"id": "359814", "text": "Starting and running a business in the US is actually a lot less complicated than most people think. You mention incorporation, but a corporation (or even an S-Corp) isn't generally the best entity to start a business with . Most likely you are going to want to form an LLC instead this will provide you with liability protection while minimizing your paperwork and taxes. The cost for maintaining an LLC is relatively cheap $50-$1000 a year depending on your state and you can file the paperwork to form it yourself or pay an attorney to do it for you. Generally I would avoid the snake oil salesman that pitch specific out of state LLCs (Nevada, Delaware etc..) unless you have a specific reason or intend on doing business in the state.  With the LLC or a Corporation you need to make sure you maintain separate finances. If you use the LLC funds to pay personal expenses you run the risk of loosing the liability protection afforded by the LLC (piercing the corporate veil). With a single member LLC you can file as a pass through entity and your LLC income would pass through to your federal return and taxes aren't any more complicated than putting your business income on your personal return like you do now. If you have employees things get more complex and it is really easiest to use a payroll service to process state and federal tax with holding.  Once your business picks up you will want to file quarterly tax payments in order to avoid an under payment penalty.  Generally, most taxpayers will avoid the under payment penalty if they owe less than $1,000 in tax after subtracting their withholdings and credits, or if they paid at least 90% of the tax for the current year, or 100% of the tax shown on the return for the prior year, whichever is smaller. Even if you get hit by the penalty it is only 10% of the amount of tax you didn't pay in time. If you are selling a service such writing one off projects you should be able to avoid having to collect and remit sales tax, but this is going to be very state specific. If you are selling software you will have to deal with sales tax assuming your state has a sales tax. One more thing to look at is some cities require a business license in order to operate a business within city limits so it would also be a good idea to check with your city to find out if you need a business license."}
{"id": "359987", "text": "Can't pretend to be an expert in construction or real estate but I'm pretty sure that you can approach the people you know and pay them on a per job basis. I'm pretty sure finding other workers on a per job basis will be easy. I wouldn't say its common but its not uncommon either."}
{"id": "360048", "text": "\"In the end, all these fees hurt the average consumer, since the merchant ultimately passes cost to consumer. Savvy consumers can stay at par or get ahead, if they put in the effort. It's a pain, but I rotate between 4 cards depending on time of year and type of purchase, to optimize cash back. My cards are:  1. 5% rewards card on certain categories, rotates each quarter 2. 2% travel/dining card (fee card, but I travel a bunch so it's worth it, no foreign transaction fees) 3. 1.5% rewards card for everything else 4. Debit card (swiped as a CC) for small purchases (i.e. lunches) at credit union for \"\"enhanced\"\" high interest checking account, requiring certain # swipes/month. This alone returns to me ~$800/yr.\""}
{"id": "360125", "text": ""}
{"id": "360139", "text": "\"The mortgage broker makes money from the mortgage originator, and from closing fees.  All the broker does is the grunt work, mostly paperwork and credit record evaluation.  But there's a lot of it.  They make their money by navigating the morass of regulations (federal, state, local) and finding you the best mortgage from the mortgage lender(s) they represent.  They don't have any capital involved in the deal.  Just sweat equity. Mortgage originator is the one who put up the capital for you to borrow.  They're the ones who get most of the payments you send in.  They sell the mortgage if they receive what they consider an equitable offer.  Keep in mind that the mortgage, from the lender's point of view, is made up of three parts.  The capital expenditure, the collateral, and the cashflow.  The present value of the cashflow at the rate of the loan is greater than the capital expenditure.  Any offer between those two numbers is 'in the money' for them, and the next owner, assuming no default.  But the collateral makes up for the chance of default, to an extent. There's also a mortgage servicing company in many cases.  This doesn't have to be the current holder of the loan. Study \"\"the time value of money\"\", and pay close attention to the parts about present value, future value, and cash flow and how to compare these.\""}
{"id": "360193", "text": "AS PER IRS PUBLICATION: Question: Is money received from the sale of inherited property considered taxable income? Answer:   To determine if the sale of inherited property is taxable, you must first determine your basis in the property. The basis of property inherited from a decedent is generally one of the following: For information on the FMV of inherited property on the date of the decedent\u2019s death, contact the executor of the decedent\u2019s estate. Also, note that in 2015, Congress passed a new law that, under certain circumstances, requires an executor to provide a statement identifying the FMV of certain inherited property to the individual receiving that property. Check IRS.gov for updates on final rules being promulgated to implement the new law. If you or your spouse gave the property to the decedent within one year before the decedent's death, see Publication 551, Basis of Assets. Report the sale on Schedule D (Form 1040), Capital Gains and Losses, and on Form 8949, Sales and Other Dispositions of Capital Assets: Under the new law passed by Congress in 2015, an accuracy-related penalty may apply if an individual reporting the sale of certain inherited property uses a basis in excess of that property\u2019s final value for federal estate tax purposes. Again, check IRS.gov for updates on final rules being promulgated to implement the new law. For estates of decedents who died in 2010, basis is generally determined as described above. However, the executor of a decedent who died in 2010 may elect out of the estate tax rules for 2010 and use the modified carryover of basis rules.   Under this special election, the basis of property inherited from a decedent who died during 2010 is generally the lesser of: Under this special election for estates of decedents who died in 2010, the executor of the decedent\u2019s estate may increase the basis of certain property that beneficiaries acquire from a decedent by up to $1.3 million (plus certain unused built-in losses and loss carryovers, if applicable), but the increased basis cannot exceed the FMV of the property at the date of the decedent\u2019s death. The executor may also increase the basis of certain property that the surviving spouse acquires from a decedent by up to an additional $3 million, but the increased basis cannot exceed the FMV of the property at the date of the decedent\u2019s death. The executor of the decedent\u2019s estate is required to provide a statement to all heirs listing the decedent\u2019s basis in the property, the FMV of the property on the date of the decedent\u2019s death, and the additional basis allocated to the property. Contact the executor to determine what the basis of the asset is. Report the sale on Schedule D (Form 1040) and on Form 8949, as described above. Additional Information:"}
{"id": "360221", "text": "So you have to be a science and math whiz to research the most important financial decisions of your life?  Business and Comp. Sci. Did finance. Left to go into education and entrepreneurship. 10+ years working with high risk youth in higher education.  Voted for Obama.  But go ahead and be intellectually lazy and put everyone in a nice box. Makes thinking easy for you I suppose.  Voted for Obama."}
{"id": "360481", "text": "\"good vs \"\"bad\"\" debt in the context of that post. At least in the UK this can be a good tactic to reduce the cost of credit card debt. Some things to consider\""}
{"id": "360628", "text": "Determining how much you should budget to spend on any area of your budget is one of those hard topics to find good information about.  Part of the problem is that everyone has different priorities and needs, and incomes and expenses vary greatly depending upon where you live and your career choices. The best thing you can do is track your spending for 1-3 months (you can use the envelope system if you need to, to track and control how much you spend on miscellaneous things like lunches, coffee, etc).  The precision is important, though you probably dont need to measure to the penny, however you should capture all the areas where you spend money (even if you later gather them into more broad areas). Split your spending into three broad areas, and try to limit the spending for each of those areas to the stated percentages (adjust for your preferences). You state net Income $2600, and you stated you have $1731 of known expenses, so you are spending another $870 on groceries, debt payments, restaurants, unplanned expenses, and emergencies. Essentials (50%,$1300) - rent, transportation, food, utilites Total $972+groceries (you probably spend $400-600 on groceries, so your essentials are higher by $100-300 than you can afford.  You should try to cut your electricity usage ($30-50), and you may be able to find cheaper car insurance (save $20). Financial Priorities (30%,$780) - savings, debt payments Total $376, nearly 15% before you pay for credit cards and savings.  Please focus on paying off your debts (credit cards, window loan, student loans).  You are spending almost 10% of your income on student loans, and you cannot afford much other debt. Lifestyle (20%,$520) Total $279, over 10% of your income on communications!  Please try to cut cellphone, and DirectTV costs, at least until you have reduced debt. Since you have internet, your wife could use a voip provider (vonage, ooma telo, etc) or get an ipod touch and use skype or similar, at least until you get out of debt. You might consider trying to find a way to earn extra money, until you have paid off either the loan for windows, your credit card debt, or one of your student loans."}
{"id": "360716", "text": "\"What you seem to want is a dividend reinvestment plan (DRIP).  That's typically offered by the broker, not by the ETF itself.  Essentially this is a discounted purchase of new shares when you're dividend comes out.  As noted in the answer by JoeTaxpayer, you'll still need to pay tax on the dividend, but that probably won't be a big problem unless you've got a lot of dividends.  You'll pay that out of some other funds when it's due.  All DRIPs (not just for ETFs) have potential to complicate computation of your tax basis for eventual sale, so be aware of that.  It doesn't have to be a show-stopper for you, but it's something to consider before you start.  It's probably less of a problem now than it used to be since brokers now have to report your basis on the 1099-B in the year of sale, reducing your administrative burden (if you trust them to get it right). Here's a list of brokerages that were offering this from a top-of-the-search-list article that I found online: Some brokerages, including TD Ameritrade, Vanguard, Scottrade, Schwab and, to a lesser extent, Etrade, offer ETF DRIPs\u2014no-cost dividend reinvestment programs. This is very helpful for busy clients. Other brokerages, such as Fidelity, leave ETF dividend reinvestment to their clients. Source: http://www.etf.com/sections/blog/23595-your-etf-has-drip-drag.html?nopaging=1 Presumably the list is not constant.  I almost didn't included but I thought the wide availability (at least as of the time of the article's posting) was more interesting than any specific broker on it. You'll want to do some research before you choose a broker to do this.  Compare fees for sure, but also take into account other factors like how soon after the dividend they do the purchase (is it the ex-date, the pay date, or something else?).  A quick search online should net you several decent articles with more information.  I just searched on \"\"ETF DRIP\"\" to check it out.\""}
{"id": "360773", "text": "Though non-resident Indians (NRIs) earn their living abroad, their obligation to file tax returns in India doesn't end. With the July 31 deadline for filing returns barely a month away, NRIs need to gear up to file their return if they have income in India that exceeds the basic exemption limit. How to Determine tax residency status: An NRI first needs to determine his tax residency status, that is, whether he falls in the category of resident or non-resident Indian (NRI) for tax purposes. While there may be no ambiguity regarding the status of an NRI who has lived abroad for a long time, those who have moved abroad recently or have returned to India after a long stay abroad need to ascertain their residency status properly."}
{"id": "360925", "text": "With your income so high, your marginal tax rate should be pretty easy to determine.  You are very likely in the 33% tax bracket (married filing jointly income range of $231,450 to $413,350), so your wife's additional income will effectively be taxed at 33% plus 15% for self-employment taxes. Rounding to 50% means you need to withhold $19,000 over the year (or slightly less depending on what business expenses you can deduct). You could use a similar calculation for CA state taxes. You can either just add this gross additional amount to your withholdings, or make an estimated tax payment every quarter.  Any difference will be made up when you file your 2017 taxes. So long as you withhold 100% of your total tax liability from last year, you should not have any underpayment penalties."}
{"id": "361013", "text": "The net return reported to you (as a percentage) by a mutual fund is the gross return minus the expense ratio.  So, if the gross return is X% and the expense ratio is Y%, your account will show a return of (X-Y)%.  Be aware that X could be negative too. So, with Y = 1, If X = 10 (as you might get from a stock fund if you believe historical averages will continue), then the net return is 9% and you have lost (Y/X) times 100% = 10% of the gross return. If X = 8 (as you might get from a bond fund if you believe historical averages will continue), then the net return is 7% and you have lost (Y/X) times 100% = 12.5% of the gross return. and so on and so forth.  The numbers used are merely examples of the returns that have been obtained historically, though it is worth emphasizing that 10% is an average return, averaged over many decades, from investments in stocks, and to believe that one will get a 10% return year after year is to mislead oneself very badly. I think the point of the illustrations is that expense ratios are important, and should matter a lot to you, but that their impact is proportionately somewhat less if the gross return  is high, but very significant if the gross return is low, as  in money-market funds.  In fact, some money market funds which  found that X < Y have even foregone charging the expense ratio  fee so as to maintain a fixed $1 per share price.  Personally,  I would need a lot of persuading to invest in even a stock fund with 1% expense ratio."}
{"id": "361163", "text": "The sentiment is because between closing and opening a lot can happen, and between opening and the time your order actually goes through, even more can happen.  An after-hours trade has an extra amount of short-term risk attached; the price of a stock at the opening bell is technically the same as its price as of the closing the previous trading day, but within a tenth of a second, which is forever in a computerized exchange, that price may move drastically one way or the other, based on news and on other markets. The sentiment, therefore, is simple; if you're trading after-hours, you're trading risky. You're not trading based on what the market's actually doing, you're trading based on what you think the market will do in the morning, and there's still more math going on every second in the privately-held supercomputers in rented cubes in the NYSE basement than you could do all night, digesting this news and projecting what it's going to do to the stocks. Now, if you've done your homework and the stock looks like a good long-term buy, with or without any after-hours news, then place the order at 3 in the morning; who cares what the stock's gonna do at the opening bell. You're gonna hold that stock for the next ten years, maybe; what it does in 5 seconds of opening turmoil is relatively minor compared to the monthly trends that you should be worrying about."}
{"id": "361279", "text": "France is one country where cheques are common. More an more people are using credit cards for typical store payments and wire transfers are slowly gaining traction. There are several cases where cheques come handy: Sure, all these cases could ultimately be resolved with a wire transfer. Sometimes it is just simpler/faster to mail a piece of paper. This said, I believe than in 1\u00e0 years from now even France will go cheque-less."}
{"id": "361329", "text": "The Money Girl (Quick and Dirty Tips for a richer life) Podcast is a pretty good source for this type of information. Some Recent Topics:"}
{"id": "361345", "text": "Short answer is to put the max 15% contribution into your ESPP. Long answer is that since you want to be saving as much as you can anyway, this is a great way to force you to do it, and pick up at least a 15% return every six months (or however often your plan makes a purchase). I say at least because sometimes an ESPP will give you the lower of the beginning or end period stock price, and then a 15% discount off of that (but check the details of your plan). If you feel like your company's stock is a good long term investment, then hold onto the shares when purchased. Otherwise sell as soon as you get them, and bank that 15% return."}
{"id": "361482", "text": "Stock awards by employers are treated and taxed as salary. I.e.: you pay ordinary rate income tax, FICA taxes, State taxes etc. The fact that you got your salary in shares and not cash is irrelevant for tax purposes. Once you got the shares and paid your taxes on them, the treatment is the same as if you got the salary and immediately bought the shares. Holding period for capital gains tax purposes starts at the time you paid your taxes on the award, which is the time at which you get full ownership (i.e.: vesting time, for the restricted stocks). When you sell these stocks - you treat the sale as any other stock sale: you check the holding period for capital gains tax rates, and you do not pay (or get refund) any FICA taxes on the sales transaction. So bottom line: You got $10K salary and you bought $10K worth of company stock, and you sold it at $8K half a year later. You have $10K wages income and $2K short term capital loss."}
{"id": "361514", "text": "Never borrow money to get a tax deduction. Even 18 months interest free is a stupid risk to save a few $ in taxes (we're talking $1K or less in tax savings from what I can tell in your questions)."}
{"id": "361623", "text": "\"The most important thing is not to tell yourself \"\"I'll save more later in my career when I have more disposable income,\"\" because of two factors. 1) You will get raises over your career, but unless you make it big, it will never really feel like you have extra money. You may double or triple your salary over a career, but it usually happens in small increments which your lifestyle tends to adjust upwards to meet even though it doesn't feel like it. 2) Later in your career you may have more money to save, but now the commodity you have is time. Your total savings at retirement are going to be influenced in a massive way by both of these factors. A good strategy is save SOMETHING early in your career even if it feels like an insignificant amount. Then save larger amounts later in your career when you are earning more, but have less time for your investments to grow and less tolerance for high risk/high growth investments.\""}
{"id": "361639", "text": "Nice idea. When I started my IRAs, I considered this as well, and the answer from the broker was that this was not permitted. And, aside from transfers from other IRAs or retirement accounts, you can't 'deposit' shares to the IRA, only cash."}
{"id": "361717", "text": "First off, this is a post for /r/personalfinance.   Second off, if you want to think of this like an accountant/financier, those are the bank's 10233 dollars, not your's, and you are paying them 6% to keep that money. If you are confident that you are going to make more than 6% interest on any investments you make with that money, it makes sense to do so, although your return will be 6% less in reality. You also assume the risk of losing money on the investment and not having enough money to repay your loans.             tl;dr Pay off the loan."}
{"id": "361832", "text": "I say again, more than a trillion dollars in student loan debt represents tremendous leverage if people in debt would form a consumer group and threaten to withhold payments until Congress retroactively gives them a much lower interest rate and brings back the ability to get out from under huge debt via bankruptcy, just like corporations do."}
{"id": "362060", "text": "I am not an accountant, but I have a light accounting background, despite being primarily an engineer.  I also have a tiny schedule C business which has both better and worse years.  I am also in the United States and pay US taxes.  I assume you are referring to the US Form 1040 tax return, with the attached Schedule C.  However little I know about US taxes, I know nothing about foreign taxes. You are a cash-basis taxpayer, so the transactions that happen in each tax year are based on the cash paid and cash received in that year.  You were paid last year, you computed your schedule C based on last year's actual transactions, and you paid taxes on that income. You can not recompute last years schedule C based on the warranty claim. You might want to switch to an accrual accounting method, where you can book allowances for warranty claims.  It is more complex, and if your business is spotty and low volume, it may be more trouble than it is worth. At this point, you have two months to look for ways to shift expenses into next year or being income into this year, both of which help offset this loss. Perhaps a really aggressive accountant would advise otherwise (and remember, I am not an accountant), but I would take the lumps and move on. This article on LegalZoom (link here) discusses how to apply a significant net operating loss (NOL) in this year to the previous two years, and potentially carry it forward to the next two years.  This does involve filing amended returns for the prior two years, showing this year's NOL.  For this to be relevant, your schedule C loss this year must exceed your other W2 and self-employment income this year, with other tests also applied. Perhaps a really aggressive accountant would advise otherwise (and remember, I am not an accountant), but I would take the lumps and move on."}
{"id": "362468", "text": "\"I've never heard of a loan product like that. Yes, if they keep the funds in an account, it is no risk to the bank, but they would essentially need to go through the loan process twice for the same loan: when you pick a house, they need to reevaluate everything, along with appraising and approving the house.  Even if you did find a bank that would do this for you, there are a few problems with this scheme. You would be paying interest before you have a need for this money, negating the savings you might achieve if the interest rates go up. In addition, your \"\"balance\"\" will go down as \"\"payments\"\" are deducted from your loan, and when you finally find a home to buy, you might not have enough for the house you want. You'll need to borrow more than you need, which will further negate any possible savings.  It is impossible to know how fast rates will climb. If I were you, I would stick to saving for your down payment, and just get the best rate you can when you are ready to buy.  Another potential idea for you is to lock an interest rate. When you apply for a mortgage, the interest rate is often locked for as much as 60 days, to protect the borrower in the event that the rates go up. You could ask the bank if you can pay a fee to lock the rate even longer. I don't know if that is possible or not. And, of course, the fee would eat into your potential savings.\""}
{"id": "362532", "text": "The catch is in the Premium amount you pay. In a pure term insurance, there is no survival benefit. You get paid only for the event, i.e. when you die during the policy term, the sum assured is paid to your nominee. The money back on the other hand, charges a huge premium, typically 5X more than the pure term, part of it is for the risk cover. The balance is then invested in safe instruments and at the end if you survive you would get that money. Typical calculations would show that if you had yourself invested the difference in premium even in CD's you would get much more money back. The reason this product is available in the market is more of people cannot part with money when they don't get anything back. To these vast majority, it looks like insurance company is taking all their money and doesn't give them back if they survive. Hence to make it seem better to these vast majority, there is money back. Hence people all over the world buy these policy much more than a pure term policy."}
{"id": "362579", "text": "Cost.  If an investor wanted to diversify his portfolio by investing in the companies that make up the S&P 500, the per-share and commission costs to individually place trades for each and every one of those companies would be prohibitive. I can buy one share of an exchange-traded fund that tracks the S&P 500 for less than the purchase price of a single share in some of the companies that make up the index."}
{"id": "362762", "text": "For exchange contracts, yes. A trader can close a position by taking an offsetting position. CME's introduction to Futures explains it quite well (on page 22).  Exiting the Market Jack entered the market on the buy side,   speculating that the S&P 500 futures price would move higher. He has   three choices for exiting the market:"}
{"id": "363024", "text": "I'm not disagreeing with you about math.  But what you keep focusing on is your assumption people *need* $100 more per month to spend on energy.  Some people may, but can you see how your solution makes an assumption that most likely misses the point?"}
{"id": "363753", "text": "Don't over think about your choices. The most important thing to start now and keep adjusting and tuning your portfolio as you move along in your life. Each individual's situation is unique. Start with something simple and straight forward, like 100 - your age, in Total Stock market Index fund and the remaining total bond market index fund. For your 401k, at least contribute so much as to get the maximum employer match. Its always good if you can contribute the yearly maximum in your 401k or IRA. Once you have built up a substantial amount of assets (~ $50k+) then its time to think more about asset allocation and start buying into more specific investments as needed. Remember to keep your investment expenses low by using index funds. Also remember to factor in tax implications on your investment decisions. eg. buying an REIT fund in a tax advantaged account like 40k is more tax efficient than buying it in a normal brokerage account."}
{"id": "363798", "text": "\"I don't understand why he couldn't just log onto his account online, see the \"\"current balance\"\" and pay that?   I've got 4-5 credit cards (2 of them are Chase) and they *ALL* have an online portal which will show you a daily-calculated \"\"current balance\"\" right on your screen... you can then enter in your checking account and transfer over that amount to pay the whole thing off virtually instantly.   Does Chase continue to charge interest even after the balance goes to $0?\""}
{"id": "363817", "text": "Interest rates can't remain this low. It's like having extremely low blood pressure. When you raise the rates, banks are incented to loan money and that movement of capital is good for the economy. It forces us to become savers instead of spenders, and our pensions, 401ks, social security are all getting killed by not being able to use debt to get safer stable returns.  Interest rates have to come back up."}
{"id": "363919", "text": "I buy or sell a few shares whenever I have a small amount of money to transfer into out of my mutual funds. Since I'm not paying transaction fees, there is no reason not to, when that is what makes sense. If you are paying a fee for each transaction, of course it makes sense to try to wait until you have a larger amount to move so the overhead per share is lower."}
{"id": "363960", "text": "Most of the time, your tax only reduces by the current marginal rate - meaning you would only reduce your tax by 28% to 25% depending on which part of the bracket you're in. However, in the area around 100k, there are cases where reductions will have more of a marginal effect than that.  You'll never reduce it more than 100%, but you can reduce it by 35-40% despite being in the 25% bracket. That is because of certain deductions and credits which phase out beginning around 80k-120k; things like the IRA deduction, the Child Tax Credit, Childcare Tax Credit, and similar.  Since many of them phase out in this range, additional dollars cost you your marginal rate (25%) plus the percentage of the credits or deductions which phase out here, which might bring you up another 10% or so."}
{"id": "364219", "text": "You report each position separately. You do this on form 8949. 7 positions is nothing, it will take you 5 minutes. There's a tip on form 8949 that says this, though: For Part I (short term transactions):  Note. You may aggregate all short-term transactions reported on   Form(s) 1099-B showing basis was reported to the IRS and for which no   adjustments or codes are required. Enter the total directly on   Schedule D, line 1a; you are not required to report these transactions   on Form 8949 (see instructions). For Part II (long term transactions): Note. You may aggregate all long-term transactions reported on Form(s)   1099-B showing basis was reported to the IRS and for which no   adjustments or codes are required. Enter the total directly on   Schedule D, line 8a; you are not required to report these transactions   on Form 8949 (see instructions). If the 1099B in your case shows basis for each transaction as reported to the IRS - you're in luck, and don't have to type them all in separately."}
{"id": "364370", "text": "&gt;And how did this cause the MBS to get wiped out, was it a written clause or did they just collapse from the value dropping so hard?   It was written into the debt instruments.  MBS and CDOs are broken down into tranches with descending priority of claims to the collateral pool.  When it comes time for payment, the top tranche gets paid out 100% before the one below it is entitled to a single cent, and so on and so forth.  Here's an example of how one might be organized:    Foo | Bar | text ---|---|---- Tranche | Size | Credit Rating Class A | 750MM | AAA Class B | 100MM | AA Class C | 60MM | A Class D | 50MM | BBB Class E | 40MM | Not Rated  In this example, lets say that 5% of the loans defaulted, meaning that of the $1B, only $950MM was available to get paid out (assuming no over-collateralization, which most had, but that's besides the point here).  The Class A would get the full 750 they're due, the Class B would get the full 100, and the Class C would get the full 60.  At this point there is only 40MM left, so the Class D would get 40 of the 50 due (a 20% write-down), and Class E would get nothing, getting completely wiped out.  &gt;I dont know what subordination level means Subordination level basically just means how much debt it below it on the capital structure--how much needs to get completely wiped out before any particular tranche starts sharing in the losses.  &gt; Did defaults reaching 8% meaning that 8% of loan takers defaulted?   Yeah more or less.  Technically I think it's that 8% of the value of the mortgages defaulted, but I believe they were set up to be relatively the same size within each instrument, so there's not really much distinction between 8% of the loan takers and 8% of the aggregate value."}
{"id": "364411", "text": "Im not sure if its normal/sensical/healthy, and that is kind of opinion based. But there is a reason for it. Certain rules and regulations passed recently are causing companies or institutions to shift to bonds from cash. Fidelity, for example, is completely converting its $100 billion dollar cash fund to short term bills. Its estimated that over $2 trillion that is now in cash may be converted to bills, and that will obviously put upward preasure on the price of them. The treasury is trying to issue more short term debt to balance out the demand. read more here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/money-funds-clamor-for-short-term-treasurys-1445300813"}
{"id": "364445", "text": "I don't think that there is any good way a study can average this and bring a useful result: The core problem is that there are people that will spend more money than they should, if they become technically able to, and the credit card is just one of the tools they abuse for that (similar to re-financing with cash-outs, zero percent loans, etc.).  On the other side, there are people who control and understand their spending, and again, the mechanism of payment is irrelevant for them. Studies measure some mix between the groups, and come up with irrelevant correlations that have no causality. If you think any tool or mechanics got you in financial trouble, think again: your spending habits and lack of understanding or care get you in financial trouble - nothing else. In a world where it is considered cool to 'don't understand math', it is no surprise that so many people can't control their finances."}
{"id": "364543", "text": "It depends on if it is a non-refundable deposit, retainer, etc. The remaining $1,500 is not included in that quarter's sales, because you have not yet received it and it is not guaranteed. The question is really if you should count the $500 toward the quarter where it is received, or during the quarter where you invoice. This deposit might be categorized as a liability until you invoice, and there is no sales tax to be calculated until the invoice for the total. I say 'might' because this can vary by state and the type of transaction or business. For example, if someone makes a cash down payment on a lease for a car, some states will require that sales tax be charged on this."}
{"id": "364642", "text": "In day trading, you're trying to predict the immediate fluctuations of an essentially random system.  In long-term investing, you're trying to assess the strength of a company over a period of time. You also have frequent opportunities to assess your position and either add to it or get out."}
{"id": "364666", "text": "Fund your retirement accounts first.  Even as an intern, it is still worthwhile to open a Roth IRA and start contributing to it. See my answer to a similar question: Best way to start investing, for a young person just starting their career?"}
{"id": "364802", "text": "\"In your shoes, I would  pay off the mortgage with the after tax investments and be done. You have different goals than I do in that you want to keep the debt.  So, I would  start calling mortgage brokers and asking for someone who does \"\"manual underwriting\"\".    Manual underwriting essentially means they use common sense and look at your situation for what it is instead of saying \"\"income=10K means disapprove mortgage\"\".   It may be that your situation is different enough from mortgage guidelines that you can't now get a conforming mortgage (i.e. one that is readily re-sellable to another mortgage holder).   If that is the case, you can look for a small bank or credit union that would be interested in adding your loan to their portfolio and not reselling it.\""}
{"id": "365025", "text": "\"Finding statistics is exceedingly hard, because the majority of traders lose money. That is, not only they don't \"\"beat the markets\"\", not only they don't \"\"beat the benchmark\"\" (S&P 500 being used a lot as reference): they just lose money. Finding exact numbers, quality statistics and so on is very difficult. Finding recent ones, is almost impossible. With enormous effort I have found two references that might help make an idea. One is very recent, Forex \"\"centered\"\" and has been prepared by a large finance group for the the Europen Central Bank (ECB). It's available on their website, at an obscure download location. The document is stated to be confidential, but its download location has been disclosed to the public by CNBC. I can't post CNBC's link because I have just joined this Stack Exchange portal so I don't have enough reputation. You can find it by looking for their article about FXCM Forex broker debacle due to the Swiss Central Bank removing the EUR/CHF peg at 1.20. The second is a 2009-ish paper about Taiwanese retail traders profitability statistics published by Oxford University Press and talks about stocks. Both documents focus on retail traders. I strongly suggest you to immediately save those documents because they tend to disappear after a while. We had a fantastic and complete statistics report made by a group of German Banks in 2011... they pulled it off in 2012.\""}
{"id": "365167", "text": "\"There are only two ways to increase your savings: You are young, and both of these are likely to spontaneously happen - you will be promoted and get raises, and your loans will be paid off, removing the loan payment. It would seem that you need only to wait a year or so, and there will a lot more than $87 left over each month, and your savings will grow almost without any action from you. But somehow, that is not what happens in real life. As people get older they \"\"need\"\" more than they did before (larger home, more expensive \"\"things\"\", etc) and they never manage to get around to saving. So it's great that you are wondering how to do it. But you are not truly making it a priority. You mention that you also pay/spend for friends, the internet, play & joy, cloth, gifts, book, etc. And this armwavy entirely optional spending is the difference between 72.85 (such precision!) and 90% of your salary. In other words it is 17-18% or more than your rent. Think about that for a moment. Every month you spend more than your rent on friends, play, joy, books and good old etc. If you were to cut that in half, you could save 8 or 9% of your salary. Maybe after your next raise you can get that up to 10%. How can you cut that optional \"\"fun\"\" stuff in half? Well, I don't know, because I don't know what it is, and I suspect you don't either. So track it, for a month or two. Are you getting takeout food or coffee every day? Are you always the one who pays when you go out with friends? Do you eat in restaurants a lot? Do you always wear the latest fashions, buy $500 shoes, pay people to do your nails or dye your hair, buy a new phone every year, have the top end phone plan, top end cable plan, ... You have to know where that rent's-worth of money goes every month. Then you can figure out how to send some of it to savings instead.  In some ways you are in a hard generation. Your parents didn't need to save for their retirement because they had you, and they know you will send money home for them. But you probably don't expect the same from the children you don't have yet, so you have to save for yourself. This is a challenge. If you were saving the money you send your parents, you'd be fine. Yet you don't want to reduce what you send, they need it. Still, people have faced bigger challenges and overcome them. Start by understanding where your fun money is going, then look at how to send some (aim for half) of that to savings instead. You won't regret it.\""}
{"id": "365298", "text": "\"Diversify into leveraged short/bear ETFs and then you can quit your job and yell at your boss \"\"F you I'm short your house!\"\" edit: this is a quote from Greg Lippmann and mentioned in the book \"\"The Big Short\"\"\""}
{"id": "365410", "text": "This article may be a good place to start [Introduction to Smart Pricing: How Google, Priceline, and Leading Businesses Use Pricing Innovation for Profitability](http://www.ftpress.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1569334)   It gives a brief overview of three pricing strategies, cost plus, competition based pricing and consumer based pricing.  **Edit** -This may also be helpful [Social Science Research Network](http://www.ssrn.com/en/)"}
{"id": "365456", "text": "There are quite a few questions as to how you are recording your income and expenses.   If you are running the bakery as a Sole Proprietor, with all the income and expense in a business account; then things are easy. You just have to pay tax on the profit [as per the standard tax bracket].   If you running it as individual, you are still only liable to pay tax on profit and not turnover, however you need to keep a proper book of accounts showing income and expense. Get a Accountant to do this for you there are some thing your can claim as expense, some you can't."}
{"id": "365462", "text": "It's not the legitimate checks or bounced checks that are the problem, it's phony checks issued against real accounts with actual money in them.  All the security measures on the check don't amount to crap if someone can print up some legitimate looking checks with bogus amounts on them, or even just steal some printed checks and sign something resembling the authorized signature."}
{"id": "365597", "text": "\"For person A to be protected (meaning able to recover some or all of the money should the other party try to welsh on the deal), the two of them must have entered into a valid, binding contract where both parties acknowledge and agree to the debt and the terms. Such a contract is subject to the Statute of Frauds, a collection of laws governing contracts which is mostly borrowed from English common law. The basics are that in all cases, a \"\"contract\"\" is only formed when both parties agree, technically when one party accepts an offer made by the other party. Both the offer and acceptance must be made sincerely. For a contract, once entered, to be enforceable, proof of the contract's existence and terms must itself exist. Certain types of transactions (real estate, large amounts of money) require contracts to be in written form, and witnessed by a trusted third party (in most cases this party is required to be a notary public). And contracts must have a certain amount of quid-pro-quo; contracts that provide a unilateral benefit can be thrown out on a case-by-case basis. A contract that simply states that Person B owes Person A money, without stating what benefit Person A had provided Person B in return for the money (in this case A gives B the money to begin with), is unenforceable. The benefits must of course be legal on both sides; a contract to deliver 5 tons of cocaine will not be upheld by any court in any free country, and neither will any contract attempting to enforce hush money, kickbacks, bribery etc (though some toe the line; one could argue that a signing bonus is tantamount to bribery). In some cases even seemingly benign clauses, like \"\"escape clauses\"\" allowing one party a \"\"free out\"\", can make the contract unenforceable as they could be abused to the severe detriment of one party. There are also jurisdiction-specific rules, such as limits on \"\"finance charges\"\" for debts not owed to a \"\"bank\"\" (a bar, for instance, cannot charge 10% on an outstanding tab in the United States). This is HUGE for your example, because if Person A had specified an interest rate in excess of the allowed rate for non-bank lenders, not only will the contract get thrown out even though Person B agreed to the terms, but Person A could find themselves on the hook for punitive damages payable to Person B, FAR in excess of the contracted amount. Given that the agreement meets all tests of validity for a contract, if either party fails to perform in accordance with the contract, causing a loss or \"\"tort\"\" for the other party, the injured party can sue. Generally the two options are \"\"strict performance\"\" (the injuring party is ordered by the court to comply exactly with the terms of the contract), or payment of net actual damages and dissolution of the contract. In your example, if Person A had lent Person B money, strict performance would mean payment of the debt in the installments agreed, at the rate agreed; actual damages would be payment of the outstanding balance plus current interest charges (without any further penalty). Notice that it's \"\"net\"\" damages; if Person A was to issue the loan in installments, and missed one, causing Person B to suffer damages from the loss of expected cash flow directly resulting in their failure to pay according to the terms, then Person B's proven damages are subtracted from A's; very often, the plaintiff in a suit to recover money can end up owing the defendant for a prior failure to perform. There are further laws governing bankruptcy; basically, if the other person cannot satisfy the contract and cannot pay damages, they will pay what they can, and the contract is terminated with prejudice (\"\"no blood from a turnip\"\").\""}
{"id": "365603", "text": "Completely different. Canadians can be deemed non-residents by severing their residential ties with Canada and emigrating to another country, and no longer required to file unless they have certain sources of Canadian income. *See* http://travel.gc.ca/travelling/living-abroad/taxation   No such classifications exist with US citizenship. You file a return no matter what, even if you haven't stepped foot in the US in decades."}
{"id": "365648", "text": "\"In addition to Alex B's excellent overview, I'd like to add a few more bits of advice. First of all, one term you should know is \"\"commercial real estate\"\" - which is precisely what this is. There is a business element, but it is strictly (and almost entirely) intertwined to the underlying real estate, which makes this a special category of business which is generally considered simply \"\"commercial real estate\"\" (just like office buildings, shopping malls, etc). All real estate and businesses value are based on alternatives - what other options are there? In appraisal, these are generally called \"\"comparables\"\". A professional appraiser is generally available for commercial real estate of this type. While a full, official commercial appraisal can run into the thousands, many/most (all?) appraisers are willing to sell you a simplified version of their service, which can be called a \"\"letter of opinion\"\" and can help you get an idea for the market price (what other similar commercial properties are running for). A loan company would strictly require this, but if you are thinking of an all cash or form of seller-financing this would technically be optional. Your best bet is to read about some of what is involved in commercial real estate appraisal and evaluation, and you may even want to speak with commercial loan officers - even if you don't know that you want to get a loan to acquire the property! It's their job to help inform you about what is required and what they look for, so they can be a potential resource beyond your own research as well. With this said, the only way to estimate value (and, conveniently, the best way) is to look at other properties! And by \"\"others\"\", I mean that you should really not consider buying absolutely anything until you've viewed at least 6-10 other options in some depth - and you probably want to double or triple that number if you are looking to make this the last big business transaction of your life. If you don't you'll be relying on little more than dumb luck to carry you through - which in this area of business, you don't want to do because the dollar amounts and liabilities involved can bankrupt you in no time flat. With that general advice out of the way, here's a tiny nutshell version of valuation of commercial real estate. There are a few key parts involved in commercial real estate: land, improvements (buildings, docks, stuff like that), income, and wages.  Land: the value of the land is based upon what you could sell it for, as-is. That is to say - who else might want it? This alone has many important factors, such as zoning laws, the neighborhood (including your neighbors), water/utilities, pacts on the land (someone may have insisted the land not be paved into a parking lot, or really anything like that), alternative uses (could you put a golf course on it, or is the land suitable for a big building or farming?), etc. And is this in a growing area, where you might hope the value will increase over the next decade, or decrease, or basically stay flat (and possibly cause losses compared to inflation)? Improvements: anything on the land is both an asset and a liability. It's an asset because it could add to the value of the land, but it might also reduce the land value if it interferes with alternate land uses. It's a liability, both in the legal sense and in that it requires maintenance. If you want to rent them out, especially, that means concern about any foundations involved, termites, roofs, sewage/septic tanks, utilities that are your responsibility (pipes, poles, wires), as well as any sort of ac/heating you may have, docks, and so on. These things are rarely free and absolutely can eat you alive. Income: Ah, the best part, the constant influx of cash! But wait, is it a constant influx? Some businesses are purely seasonal (summer only, winter only), some are year-round but have peak times, and others don't really have a \"\"peak\"\" to speak of. If you are renting, are there issues collecting, or with people over-staying? How about damage, making a mess, getting rowdy and disturbing others? Regardless, there is obviously some income, and this is usually the most dangerous part of the equation. I say \"\"dangerous\"\", because people absolutely lie like dogs on this part, all the time. It's easy to cook the books, assuming they even attempt to keep proper books in the first place! Businesses of this form often have a lot of cash business that's easy to hide (from Uncle Sam, or sometimes even the owners themselves if there are employees involved) - and fake! And some people are just shoddy bookkeepers and the info is just wrong. But, there will clearly be some kind of yearly income involved. What does this matter? Well...how much is there? How much is tied to the owners (personal friends do business and they will leave if the ownership/management changes)? In commercial real estate the income will be calculated for a fiscal year, and then there is something called a \"\"multiple\"\", which is market dependent. Let's say the whole place takes in $100k in rent a year. As part of buying this business, you are buying not just assets, but expected future income. In some commercial areas the multiple is as little as .5 to 2 - which means that the going rate is about 6-24 months worth of income, as part of the purchase price. So with 100k rent a year, that means 50k-200k of the purchase price is attributable to the income of the business. And if business is half of what you thought it would be? That means the net value of the whole enterprise decreases by 25k-100k - on top of the reduced income every year you own it! Income provides cash flow, which should pay all the expenses (cleaning up from wind storms, replacing windows that are broken, hauling off trash, replacing a well that ran dry), and then the extra that remains is positive cash flow. If you take out a loan, then ideally the cash flow would also pay that completely so long as you don't have any big unexpected expenses in the year - and still have some left over for yourself. Wages: Well, that money doesn't collect itself! There's sales, keeping the books, collecting the rent, performing maintenance, customer service, cleaning, paying the bills, keeping the insurance people happy, handling emergencies, and everything else involved with running the business. Someone is going to do it, and the biggest error people make here is not to put any value on their time - and to make it so they can never afford to take a vacation again! Pay yourself, and give yourself the flexibility to pay others when you can't (or don't want) to do it all yourselves. So, what's the point of all this? How do you actually make any money? In two ways: 1) selling the whole thing later, and 2) cash flow. For 1, it's important that you not be in a situation where you are betting that in the future there will be a \"\"person richer, and dumber, than I am now\"\". If the current owner wanted 2 million, then 1 mil, then less, over multiple years...this suggests either he is delusional about the value of his place (and most property owners are), or that its actually hard to find a buyer for such a business. You are going to want to make sure you understand why that is, because most of the value of real estate is...well, in the real estate itself! For 2, you need cash coming in that's considerably more than the cost of running the place. Also, cash flow can strongly change the value of the business for resale (depending on the multiple, this can make a huge difference or prevent you from selling the thing at all).  You mentioned you want to put in more cabins, more marketing/sales efforts, etc. That's great, but first, that would mean added investment beyond the purchase price. Is it legally and physically practical to add more cabins, and what is their current utilization rate? If they are only renting 10% of their current capacity, increasing capacity may be premature. This will also vary through the year, so you may find there is a problem with being sold out sometimes...but only for a small percentage of the time. Which means you'll be adding buildings only to have them used for a fraction of the year, which will be very hard to make a profit from. If cash flow is good, ideally even being enough to cover a loan payment to help cover the purchase price (and remember that commercial real estate loans are much smaller loan-to-value ratios than in residential real estate), there is one final barrier to making money: the damn non-regular maintenance! Roofs, wells, and wooden walls all have a sad tendency to cost you nothing right up until the point they cost you $30k+ on a single day. Is there enough cash flow to make these sort of certainties (and if you plan to be there for years, they are a certainty) not put you in the poor house? This was rather long, but I hope this overview helps you appreciate all that you'll need to look into and be cautious of during your future en-devour! Commercial real estate is generally costly and high-risk, but also can be high reward. You'll need to compare many opportunities before you can get a \"\"feel\"\" for what is a good deal and what is a terrible one. You'll need to consider many factors, such as resale value and cash flow/income (which they will have to tell you and you can assume is not true, due to ignorance or malice), as well as maintenance and liabilities, before you can begin to really estimate the value of an enterprise of this sort. There are people who can help you, like appraisers and commercial brokers, but ultimately you'll need to do a lot of research and comparisons yourself to help you make a good decision.  Finally, there is no very simple method for evaluating commercial real estate value. You need a variety of information, and you must be skeptical of what you are told because of the very large sums of money involved. It is doable (lots of people do it), but you must take care and do your due diligence so you don't get bankrupted by a single bad purchase.\""}
{"id": "365752", "text": "Hope you figure it out.  There wouldn't be a different RFR / discount rate because you're assuming a return on parked cash - that's what it's for.  Since both situations would theoretically happen simultaneously you use the same rate unless you would do something different with cash in each instance."}
{"id": "366146", "text": "I would say yes, it makes sense to keep some money in taxable accounts.  Retirement accounts are for retirement, and the various early withdrawal penalties are designed to enforce that.  If you're anticipating using the money before retirement (e.g., for home purchase), it makes sense to keep it out of retirement accounts. On the other hand, be aware that, regardless of what kind of account it is in, you face the usual risk/return tradeoff.  If you put your money in the S&P 500 and the S&P 500 tanks just before you were going to buy a house, your down payment evaporates and you will have to wait and buy a house later.  You can manage this by shifting the allocation of this money and perhaps cashing it out if a certain amount is gained (i.e., it grows to the level of your target down payment) and you are close enough to the house purchase time that you don't want to risk it anymore. Basically, if you invest money for a pre-retirement use, you may want to keep it in a taxable account, but you also need to take account of when you'll need it and manage the risk accordingly."}
{"id": "366309", "text": "\"I think this is a bit too simplistic, because you need to keep in mind that Buffet was managing the money as his career. Had he paid the 1% fee he could have \"\"made more money\"\" doing something else.    People who hire money managers usually do so because it A. saves them time managing their own portfolios and B. because they don't believe they would do a better job managing it themselves.\""}
{"id": "366327", "text": "\"I did sort of the same thing as you after a some time in consulting. The biggest annoyance for me was how poorly I thought the most basic, obvious bullshit through. Figure out how you'll bill for travel -- when do you fly vs. drive, what's your mileage rate, etc. Get your proposal template looking razor sharp, and have a standardized invoice ready (don't say \"\"net 30\"\" or 45 or whatever, some clients won't understand what you're talking about and there's no way to explain it without sounding like a douche). Be prepared to negotiate heavily at first. Until you start to get a steady client base, people are going to lowball you, perhaps rightfully so. Consider the consequences of establishing yourself at a low rate, or being considered unreasonable and inflexible.   Also, since you're working with a partner, figure out how you're going to register your business by considering your financial situations or, preferably, hiring an accountant. I also *strongly* recommend working with your partner and an attorney to draft an operating agreement. I've seen so many horror stories with people who either didn't have one, made their own shitty one, or otherwise got screwed on technicalities.\""}
{"id": "366560", "text": "Your question is missing too much to be answered directly. Instead - here are some points to consider. Short term gains taxed at your marginal rates, whereas long term gains have preferable capital gains rates (up to 20% tax rate, instead of your marginal rate). So if you're selling at gain, you might want to consider to sell FIFO and pay lower capital gains tax rate instead of the short term marginal rate. If you're selling at loss and have other short term gains, you would probably be better selling LIFO, so that the loss could offset other short term gains that you might have.  If you're selling at loss and don't have short term gains to offset, you can still offset your long term gains with short term losses, but the tax benefit will be lower. In this case - FIFO might be a better choice again. If you're selling at loss, beware of the wash sale rules, as you might not be able to deduct the loss if you buy/sell within too short a window."}
{"id": "366583", "text": "Can someone please explain the following in more detail please. I'm not exactly sure how and why synthetics work. &gt; Instead of having credit default swap reference a single company like Exxon, J.P Morgan bundled together a large, diversified basket of credit derivatives that referenced hundreds of corporate credits... those who invested in J.P Morgan's invention didn't own a piece of the actual corporate loan. Instead, they owned credit default swaps - the performance of which was determined by the performance of the underlying corporate credits.  This is from *All the Devils are Here* by Bethany Mclean and Joe Nocera"}
{"id": "366594", "text": "\"Other answers didn't seem to cover it, but most \"\"0%\"\" bank loans (often offered to credit card holders in the form of balance transfer checks), aside from less-obvious fees like already-mentioned late fees, also charge an actual loan fee, typically 2-3% (or a minimum floor amount) - that was the deal with every single transfer 0% offer I ever saw from a bank. So, effectively, even if you pay off the loan perfectly, on time, and within 0% period, you STILL got a 3% loan and not 0% (assuming 0% period lasts 12 months which is often the case).\""}
{"id": "366626", "text": "For an investor , I understand its a higher return on investment; but I was wondering if an investor is actually investing in the minerals, or the means of delivery such as ports, rail, trucks, roads, etc; or is that abstracted away"}
{"id": "366753", "text": "Suppose that the fixed overhead costs of delivering a service, not related to the actual volume of sales, are $50 million per year. Suppose the variable costs on top are $100 per customer per year. Suppose further that 1% of the population buys the service. In the US, 3.2 million people buy the service, and it costs $116 per person to deliver it ($100 plus $50 million divided by 3.2 million). In Australia, 230,000 people buy it, and it costs $317 per person per year to deliver it ($100 plus $50 million divided by 230,000). The larger your market, the cheaper everything is, and Australia is a very small market compared with the USA, the EU, China or India."}
{"id": "367047", "text": "I recently bought a stock -  which was priced exactly as your question ponders, to the 1/100 cent. I happened to buy 2000 shares, but just a round lot of 100 would be enough to create no need for rounding.  It's common for industry to price this way as well, where an electronic component purchased by the thousands, is priced to the tenth or hundredth of a cent.  There's nothing magic about this, and you'll have more to ponder when your own lowest unit of currency is no longer minted. (I see you are in UK. Here, in the US, there's talk of dropping our cent. A 5 cent piece to be the smallest value coin. Yet, any non-cash transactions, such as checks, credit card purchases, etc, will still price to the penny.) To specifically answer the question - it's called decimal currency. 1/10, 1/100 of a cent."}
{"id": "367137", "text": "Imagine that the existing interest rate is 5%. So on a bond with face value of 100, you would be getting a $5 coupon implying a 5% yield. Now, if let's say the interest rates go up to 10%, then a new bond issued with a face value of 100 will give you a coupon of $10 implying a 10% yield. If someone in the bond market buys your bond after interest price adjustment, in order to make the 10% yield (which means that an investor typically targets at least the risk-free rate on his investments) he needs to buy your bond at $50 so that a $5 coupon can give a 10% yield. The reverse happens when interest rates go down. I hope this somewhat clears the picture. Yield = Coupon/Investment Amount Update: Since the interest rate of the bond does not change after its issuance, the arbitrage in the interest rate is reflected in the market price of the bond. This helps in bringing back the yields of old bonds in-line with the freshly issued bonds."}
{"id": "367216", "text": "It is, even when we were bidding major projects we could pretty much guess who was going to get the contract before hand. We only put bids in on the ones we might not win because often times the major project would get broken up into several smaller ones because one manufacturer couldn't produce fast enough, or didn't have  enough stock for the client's entire job.  Our major projects guys had inconsistently difficult jobs, one month they would be in the office until midnight. The next month they would be playing golf at 2pm on a Wednesday."}
{"id": "367272", "text": "One thing you didn't mention is whether the 401(k) offers a match. If it does, this is a slam-dunk. The $303 ($303, right?) is $3636/yr that will be doubled on deposit. It's typical for the first 5% of one's salary to capture the match, so this is right there.  In 15 years, you'll still owe $76,519. But 15 * $7272 is $109,080 in your 401(k) even without taking any growth into account. The likely value of that 401(k) is closer to $210K, using 8% over that 15 years, (At 6%, it drops to 'only' $176K, but as I stated, the value of the match is so great that I'd jump right on that.) If you don't get a match of any kind, I need to edit / completely rip my answer. It morphs into whether you feel that 15 years (Really 30) the market will exceed the 4% cost of that money. Odds are, it will. The worst 15 year period this past century 2000-2014 still had a CAGR of 4.2%."}
{"id": "367313", "text": "You sell when you think the stock is over valued, or you need the money, or you are going to need the money in the next 5 years. I buy and hold a lot.  I bought IBM in 8th grade 1980.  I still own it.  I bought 3 share it from $190 and its now worth $5,000 do to dividend reinvestment and splits.  That stock did nothing for a thirteen years except pay a dividend but then it went up by 1800% the next 20 and paid dividends.  So I agree with other posters the whole pigs get slaughtered thing is silly and just makes fund managers more money. Think if you bought aapl at $8 and sold at $12.  The thing went to 600 and split 7-1 and is back to $120.   My parents made a ton holding Grainger for years and I have had good success with MMM and MSFT owning those for decades."}
{"id": "367556", "text": "\"There are two types of 401(k) contributions: \"\"elective contributions,\"\" which are the part put in by the employee and \"\"nonelective contributions,\"\" which are the part put in by the company.  Elective contributions are summed across all the plans she is contributing to.  So she can contribute $18,000 minus whatever she put in her 403(b). Additionally she can contribute 20% of the net profit of the company (before the elective contributions) as nonelective contributions (these contributions must be designated as such). You will notice that the IRS document says 25%, but that's what you can do if her business is incorporated.  For a sole proprietorship, nonelective contributions  ends up being limited at 20% of profit. Additionally, the sum of these two and her contribution to her 403(b) cannot exceed $53,000. Example: line 31 of her schedule C is $30,000 and she has contributed $10,000 to her 403(b). Maximum contribution to her solo 401(k) is ($18,000 - $10,000) + 0.2 * $30,000 = $14,000 Her total contributions for the year are $10,000 from her 403(b) plus $14,000 in her solo 401(k).  This is less than $53,000 so this limit does not bind.  If she made a ton of 1099 money, her contribution maximum would follow the above until it hit $53,000 and then it would stop there. The IRS describes this in detail in Publication 560, which also has a worksheet for figuring out your maximum explicitly.  It's unpleasant reading and the worksheets are painful, but if you do it right, it will end up being as I just described it.  Using the language of that publication, hers is a \"\"qualified plan\"\" of the \"\"defined contribution\"\" variety.\""}
{"id": "367562", "text": "I can only answer about the U.S. For question 2, I believe the answer is no. If you are a non-resident alien for tax purposes, then only income connected to the U.S. is reported as income on the tax return. Unless there were any non-deductible contributions to your pre-tax IRAs, when you convert to Roth IRA, the entire amount of the conversion is added to your income. So the tax consequence is the same as if you had that much additional U.S. income. If you are a non-resident alien with no other income in the U.S., then the income you have to report on your U.S. tax return will basically consist of the conversion. Non-resident aliens do not have a standard deduction. However, all people have a personal exemption. If we take 2013 as an example, the exemption is $3900 per person. We will assume that you will file as single or married filing separately (non-resident aliens cannot file as married filing jointly). The first $3900 of income is covered by the exemption, and is not counted in taxable income. For single and MFS, the next $8925 of income is taxed at 10%, then next $27325 of income is taxed at 15%, and so on. So if you convert less than the personal exemption amount every year ($3900 in 2013), then in theory you do not pay any taxes. If you convert a little bit more, then some of the conversion will be taxed at 10%, etc."}
{"id": "367880", "text": "My small business has developed a relationship with a larger branch of a regional bank. I generally work on site or at home,  so when I need a space for interviews etc. I just call the bank and reserve the meeting room there."}
{"id": "368010", "text": "You're not missing any concepts! It sounds like you are contributing a piece of collateral to the business, and you want to know a fair way to value how much this contribution of collateral is worth. Technically the economic answer would be the difference in interest between a secured loan and an unsecured loan.  So for example suppose that the business could get a loan at 17% without the collateral (maybe just on a credit card) but with the duplex as collateral it is able to get the loan at 10.5%. In principle, the value of this collateral is (17% - 10.5%) or 6.5%, because it has allowed the business to pay 6.5% less interest on its loan."}
{"id": "368044", "text": "\"It is not clear to me why you believe you can lose more than you put in, without margin. It is difficult and the chances are virtually nil. However, I can think of a few ways. Lets say you are an American, and deposit $1000. Now lets say you think the Indian rupee is going to devalue relative to the Euro. So that means you want to go long EURINR. Going long EURINR, without margin, is still different than converting your INRs into Euros. Assume USDINR = 72. Whats actually happening is your broker is taking out a 72,000 rupee loan, and using it to buy Euros, with your $1000 acting as collateral. You will need to pay interest on this loan (about 7% annualized if I remember correctly). You will earn interest on the Euros you hold in the meantime (for simplicity lets say its 1%). The difference between interest you earn and interest you pay is called the cost of carry, or commonly referred to as 'swap'. So your annualized cost of carry is $60 ($10-$70). Lets say you have this position open for 1 year, and the exchange rate doesnt move. Your total equity is $940. Now lets say an asteroid destroys all of Europe, your Euros instantly become worthless. You now must repay the rupee loan to close the trade, the cost of which is $1000 but you only have $940 in your account. You have lost more than you deposited, using \"\"no margin\"\". I would actually say that all buying and selling of currency pairs is inherently using margin, because they all involve a short sale. I do note that depending on your broker, you can convert to another currency. But thats not what forex traders do most of the time.\""}
{"id": "368165", "text": "This is business as usual, except that you need to keep in mind that the corporate entity is separate from the individual. As such - all the background checks and references should be with regards to the actual renter - the corporation. You should be cautious as it is not so easy to dissolve an individual (well... Not as easy, and certainly not as legal), as it is to dissolve the corporation. So you may end up with a tenant who doesn't pay and doesn't have to pay because the actual renter, the corporation, no longer exists. So check the corporation background - age, credit worthiness, tax returns/business activity, judgements against, etc etc, as you would do for an individual."}
{"id": "368338", "text": "Short time horizon, small pot of money, and low appetite for risk?  That smells like low return situation to me. I guess it depends on how low your appetite for risk is, though.  You could open a brokerage account (free) and purchase $10K worth of a fully diversified ETF like VTI, optionally putting maybe 20% of it in a diversified bond ETF.  I consider that a reasonably conservative investment, but if you are of the mindset that you cannot tolerate a drop in your wealth, it's not going to work.  Plus if you don't have any other investments, this will be the thing that requires you to report capital gains to the IRS, and that paperwork is never fun. As an alternative, you have CD's, which will make you very little.  Or a high-ish interest rate electronic savings account like Capital one 360 or Emigrant Direct (there are probably newer ones now that outcompete even these).  Still, with anything in this paragraph you will be lucky to beat inflation.  The real interest rate was negative last time I checked, so every risk-free investment will lose money in purchasing power terms.  To beat inflation you will need to take on nonnegligible risk."}
{"id": "368504", "text": "Have you looked at conventional financing rather than VA?  VA loans are not a great deal.  Conventional tends to be the best, and FHA being better than VA.  While your rate looks very competitive, it looks like there will be a .5% fee for a refinance on top of other closing costs.   If I have the numbers correct, you are looking to finance about 120K, and the house is worth about 140K.  Given your salary and equity, you should have no problem getting a conventional loan assuming good enough credit.   While the 30 year is tempting, the thing I hate about it is that you will be 78 when the home is paid off.  Are you intending on working that long?  Also you are restarting the clock on your mortgage.  Presumably you have paid on it for a number of years, and now you will start that long journey over. If you were to take the 15 year how much would go to retirement?  You claim that the $320 in savings will go toward retirement if you take the 30 year, but could you save any if you took the 15 year? All in all I would rate your plan a B-.  It is a plan that will allow you to retire with dignity, and is not based on crazy assumptions.  Your success comes in the execution.  Will you actually put the $320 into retirement, or will the needs of the kids come before that?  A strict budget is really a key component with a stay at home spouse. The A+ plan would be to get the 15 year, and put about $650 toward retirement each month.  Its tough to do, but what sacrifices can you make to get there?  Can you move your plan a bit closer to the ideal plan? One thing you have not addressed is how you will handle college for the kids.  While in the process of long term planning, you might want to get on the same page with your wife on what you will offer the kids for help with college.  A viable plan is to pay their room and board, have them work, and for them to pay their own tuition to community college.  They are responsible for their own spending money and transportation.   Thank you for your service."}
{"id": "368590", "text": "what other pieces of info should I consider If you don't have liquid case available for unexpected repairs, then you probably don't want to use this money for either option.  The 7% return on the stocks is absolutely not guaranteed. There is a good amount of risk involved with any stock investment. Paying down the mortgage, by contrast, has a much lower risk. In the case of the mortgage, you know you'll get a 2.1% annual return until it adjusts, and then you can put some constraints on the return you'll get after it adjusts. In the case of stocks, it's reasonable to guess that it will return more than 2.1% annually if you hold it long enough. But there will be huge swings from month to month and from year to year. The sooner you need it, the more guaranteed you will want the return to be. If you have few or no stock (or bond)-like assets, then (nearly) all of your wealth is in your house, and that is independent of the remaining balance on your mortgage. If you are going to sell the house soon, then you will want to diversify your assets to protect you against a drop in home value. If you are going to stay in the house forever, then you will eventually need non-house assets to consume. Ultimately, neither option is inherently better; it really depends on what you need."}
{"id": "368698", "text": "\"Whether your financial status is considered \"\"OK\"\" depends on your aspirations.  You aren't spending more than you earn and have no debt.  That puts you in the category of OK in my book, but the information in your post indicates that you would benefit from some financial advice--100 grand sounds like a lot of money to have in a bank unless you are on the verge of spending it. Financial advisors come in various shapes and sizes.  Many will charge you a lot for what turns out to be helpful advice in the first meeting, but very little value-added thereafter.  Some don't have the best incentives (they may be incentivized to encourage you to put your money into certain funds, for example). There are many financial advisors (of sorts) that you have access to that won't cost you anything.  For example, if you have a 401(k) at work, I bet there is a representative from the plan administrator that will meet with you for free.  If you open a brokerage account or IRA at any place (Fidelity, Vanguard, etc.) you can easily talk with one of their reps and get all sorts of advice.  My personal take is to meet with anyone who will meet with me for free, but not to pay anyone for this service.  It's too easy to get good advice and paying for it doesn't guarantee that you get better advice. Your financial situation will depend primarily on a few things you have not mentioned here.  For example, How much are you setting aside for retirement and what are your retirement goals?  This is something lots of people can give you advice on, but we don't know what market returns will be going forward so we don't really know.  One bit of advice that may benefit you is how to set aside money for retirement in the most tax advantaged way. How much do you feel that you need saved up for large expenses?  Thinking of starting a family?  How many months worth of income are you comfortable having set aside? What is your tolerance of risk?  If you put your money in risky assets, you may make more, but you may also actually lose money.  Those are the questions a financial advisor will ask about.  Once you have his/her advice--and preferrably after talking to a few advisors--you can make your own decision. Basically, your options are: Rules of thumb: Save only what makes sense to save in banks given your expected needs for cash. Put a lot in tax advantaged accounts (don't give Uncle Sam any gifts). Then look at financial and real investments. There are a number of free resources on the internet.  For example FutureAdvisor.  Or you can hit up the forums at BogleHeads.  Those guys give and receive financial advice as a hobby.  They aren't professionals, but you can get a lot of varying ideas and make up your own mind, which to me is better than (just) asking a professional. BTW, regarding the ESPP: these plans often give you a discount on stock and can therefore be a good idea.  Just be sure you don't hold the stock longer than you need to.  It's generally a bad idea to concentrate your wealth in any single investment, especially one highly correlated with your background risk (i.e., if the company does poorly you will already be worse off because you may lose your job or see fewer advancement opportunities. No need to add losses in your savings to that).  1 Please note: I am neither advocating nor discouraging buying guns, gold, or other controversial real assets.  I'm just giving examples of items some people buy as part of their wealth-preservation strategy.\""}
{"id": "369437", "text": "SeekingAlpha has an article about short squeezes that states: The higher the number of days to cover means the possibility for a short squeeze is greater, and the potential size of the short squeeze is also greater Logically, this makes sense. A short squeeze occurs when a lack of supply meets excess demand for a stock, so the potential for a squeeze increases when supply and demand begin to get out of equilibrium. Think of two things that would cause the days to cover to increase and what effect they would have on supply and demand.  The current short interest (numerator) increases. This implies that if some event triggers short sellers to cover their position, there are a higher number of short sellers who will need to do so. This heightens the chances that demand will exceed supply.  The average daily volume (denominator) decreases. This implies that fewer investors are trading the stock, so if an event triggers short sellers to cover their positions, there might not be enough traders in the market willing to sell their shares. (Obviously, if a short-squeeze occurs, volume may increase because traders who were unwilling to sell their shares become willing)."}
{"id": "369439", "text": "If your returns match the market, that means their rate of return is the same as the market in question. If your returns beat the market, that means their rate of return is higher. There's no one 'market', mind you. I invest in mutual funds that track the S&P500 (which is, very roughly, the U.S. stock market), that track the Canadian stock market, that track the international stock market, and which track the Canadian bond market. In general, you should be deeply dubious of any advertised investment option that promises to beat the market. It's certainly possible to do so. If you buy a single stock, for example, that stock may go up by 40% over the course of a year while the market may go up by 5%. However, you are likely taking on substantially more risk. So there's a very good chance (likely, a greater chance) that the investment would go down, losing you money."}
{"id": "369577", "text": "If this is something you plan to continue doing it would make sense to create it as it's own business entity and then to get non-profit status eg: 501c3.   Otherwise I'm pretty sure you have to think of it as YOU receiving the money as a sole proprietor - and file a couple more tax forms at the end of the year. I think it's a Schedule C.  So essentially if you bring in $10,000, then you spend that $10,000 as legit business expenses for your venture your schedule C would show no profit and wouldn't pay taxes on it. BUT, you do have to file that form. Operating this way could have legal implications should something happen and you get sued. Having the proper business entity setup could help in that situation."}
{"id": "370494", "text": "My employer matches 1 to 1 up to 6% of pay. They also toss in 3, 4 or 5 percent of your annual salary depending on your age and years of service. The self-directed brokerage account option costs $20 per quarter. That account only allows buying and selling of stock, no short sales and no options. The commissions are $12.99 per trade, plus $0.01 per share over 1000 shares. I feel that's a little high for what I'm getting. I'm considering 401k loans to invest more profitably outside of the 401k, specifically using options. Contrary to what others have said, I feel that limited options trading (the sale cash secured puts and spreads) can be much safer than buying and selling of stock. I have inquired about options trading in this account, since the trustee's system shows options right on the menus, but they are all disabled. I was told that the employer decided against enabling options trading due to the perceived risks."}
{"id": "370815", "text": "The guarantee's value to you is whatever you have to pay to get the guarantee, assuming that you don't decide it's too expensive and look for another guarantor or another solution entirely. How much are you willing to pay for this loan, not counting interest and closing costs? That's what it's worth. See past answers about the risks of co-signing for a realistic view of how much risk your guarantor would be accepting and why they should hold out for a very substantial reimbursement for this service."}
{"id": "370995", "text": "\"My theory is that for every stock you buy, you should have an exit strategy and follow it.  It is too hard to let emotions rule if you let your default strategy be \"\"let's see what happens.\"\" and emotional investing will almost never serve you well.  So before buying a stock, set a maximum loss and maximum gain that you will watch for on the stock, and when it hits that number sell.  At the very least, when it hits one of your numbers, consciously make a decision that you are effectively buying it again at the current price if you decide to stay in. When you do this, set a new high and low price and repeat the above strategy.\""}
{"id": "371012", "text": "I was merely trying to be helpful - Conceptually, you have dump this idea that something is skewed. It isn't. Firm A sold for $500 (equity value aka purchase price to shareholders) + debt (zero) - cash (50) for 450.  Enterprise value is the cash free, debt free sale price.  The implied ev multiple is 4.5x on A - that is the answer. The other business sold for a higher multiple of 5x.  If you would pile on more cash onto A, the purchase price would increase, but the EV wouldn't.      The idea is to think hard about the difference between equity value and enterprise value when examining a transaction."}
{"id": "371195", "text": "\"The only general rule is \"\"If you would buy the stock at its current price, hold and possibly buy. If you wouldn't, sell and buy something you believe in more strongly.\"\" Note that this rule applies no matter what the stock is doing. And that it leaves out the hard work of evaluating the stock and making those decisions. If you don't know how to do that evaluation to your own satisfaction, you probably shouldn't be buying individual stocks. Which is why I stick with index funds.\""}
{"id": "371238", "text": "In your shoes, I would approach a CPA familiar with back tax issues and have them prepare your old returns, gathering as much information as they can.   Only once you have all your forms and payment ready, approach the IRS ready to settle up."}
{"id": "371392", "text": "\"I think the real answer to your question here is diversification.  You have some fear of having your money in the market, and rightfully so, having all your money in one stock, or even one type of mutual fund is risky as all get out, and you could lose a lot of your money in such a stock-market based undiversified investment.  However, the same logic works in your rental property.  If you lose your tennant, and are unable to find a new one right away, or if you have some very rare problem that insurance doesn't cover, your property could become very much not a \"\"break even\"\" investment very quickly.  In reality, there isn't any single investment you can make that has no risk.  Your assets need to be balanced between many different market-investments, that includes bonds, US stocks, European stocks, cash, etc.  Also investing in mutual funds instead of individual stocks greatly reduces your risk. Another thing to consider is the benefits of paying down debt.  While investments have a risk of not performing, if you pay off a loan with interest payments, you definitely will save the money you would have paid in interest.   To be specific, I'd recommend the following plan -\""}
{"id": "371579", "text": "\"The Investment Entertainment Pricing Theory (INEPT) has this bit to note: The returns of small growth stocks are ridiculously low\u2014just 2.18   percent per year since 1927 (versus 17.47 percent for small value,   10.06 percent for large growth, and 13.99 percent for large value). Where the S & P 500 would be a blend of large-cap growth and value so does that meet your \"\"beat the market over the long term\"\" as 1927-1999 would be long for most people.\""}
{"id": "371625", "text": "$1 more an hour = $160 a month...a few matching expenses and it probably increases payroll less than $200 an employee a month. Does anyone really believe that there is no money in personal care/health care? For evey 5 employees it is $1K more a month. That kind of money is next to insignificant in the industry, and the bosses probably spent more on that on food on the company card."}
{"id": "371758", "text": "There are a few loan programs that grant exceptions to bankruptcy requirements in the event of extenuating circumstances that can be proven to be outside of your control (i.e. massive medical bills that you used bankruptcy to settle, etc.) however, in order to make the case for this exemption, you would need to make a strong case for your solvency, shown the ability to re-establish your credit reputation since the discharge of your bankruptcy, and would almost certainly have to go through a bank that offers manual underwriting. Additionally, if you are Native American, the HUD-184 program is a great option for your situation as it allows for a wide latitude in terms of underwriter discretion and is always manually underwritten as there is no automated underwriting system developed for the loan program. There are several great lenders that offer nationwide financing (as long as you're in a HUD-184 eligible area) and would be a great potential solution if you meet the qualifying parameter of being Native American."}
{"id": "371821", "text": "Make sure to check the language describing the 'discount'. The company may be matching your contribution by 5% instead of a discount.  You will likely be taxed on the match as compensation and your benefit would net to less than 5%.   The next risk is that you've increased your exposure if your company does poorly.  In the worst case scenario you could lose your wages to a layoff and your portfolio to a falling share price.  Investing in other companies will diversify this risk. As for benefits, you get the 5% (less taxes) for free which isn't a bad thing in my book. Just don't put everything you own into the stock.  It should be part of your overall investing strategy."}
{"id": "371886", "text": "The matching funds are free money, so it is a very good idea to take that money off the table.  Look at it as free 100% return: you deposit $1000, your employer matches that $1000, you now have $2000 in your 401(k).  (Obviously, I'm keeping things simple.  Vesting schedules mean that the employer match isn't yours to keep immediately, but rather after some time; usually in chunks.) Beyond the employer match, you need to consider what is available for investment in a 401(k).  Typically, your options are more limited then in an IRA.  The cost of the 401(k) should be considered, as it isn't trivial for most.  (The specifics will of course vary, but in large IRA accounts are cheaper.) So, it's about the opportunity costs.  Up to the employer match, it doesn't matter as much that your investment choices are more limited in a 401(k), because you're getting 100% return just on the matching funds.  Once that is exhausted, you have more opportunity for returns, due to having more options available to you, by going with an account that provides more choices. The overall principle here is that you have to look at the whole picture.  This is similar to the notion that you should pay-down your high interest debt before investing, because from the perspective of investing the interest you're paying represent a loss, or negative return on investment, since money is going out of your accounts.  Specific to your question, you have to consider the various types of investment vehicles available to you.  It is not just about 401(k) and IRA accounts.  You may also consider a straight brokerage account, a savings account, CDs, etc.  The costs and returns that you can typically expect are your guides through the available choices."}
{"id": "372657", "text": "\"Let's talk interest rates on your junk bonds. Even after all that the US has been through (and is still going through), the United States dollar is widely regarded as one of the safest safe havens for your money. As such it serves as a de facto baseline against which all other investments can be measured, the bar everyone has to pass: if you could earn 4% on a 5-year US Treasury bond, or earn 4% on anything else over the next 5 years, you pick the Treasury bond. In many ways this means that the interest rate on a Treasury bond is the closest single measure we have to the price of money all by itself. If someone is loaning you money, they could be loaning it to the Treasury instead; they are losing out by making this loan to you, and must charge you at least this rate just to break even. But most people/governments/countries aren't as credit-worthy as the US Treasury. A few are (the US treasury isn't magical, after all, just really good at what it does), but generally they are not. There is a possibility when loaning money to these entities that you will not get your money back. That is risk. All entities have some risk (even the US treasury!), and some have more than others; \"\"junk bonds\"\" have a somewhat elevated level of this risk. Now, you don't just take a risk on for free (unless you're being charitable or something, but I hope you can find better beneficiaries of charity than the average junk bond). You need to be compensated for that risk. Lenders will demand compensation commensurate with that risk - or they will just walk away without making any loans or buying any bonds because it's not worth it. The difference between the interest rate on a US Treasury bond and the interest rate on another bond, such as a junk bond, is the risk premium - the cost of carrying that risk. Therefore you can see that the interest rate on a junk bond is the price of money plus the risk premium. Now, the Federal Reserve adjusts the price of money from time to time, by buying and selling US Treasury bonds until the price is something they like. This means that one component of interest rate on a junk bond is the interest rate on the US Treasury bond, and it is effectively controlled by the Federal Reserve (through that layer of indirection). The other component of the interest rate on a junk bond is the risk premium. It's not generally possible to know in advance whether or not some company will actually default. People have to guess, and decide how comfortable they are taking that risk. This means that risk is more expensive (and interest rates are higher) when they think the companies in question are going through some hard times, and risk will also be more expensive when people decide that they can't take as many risks (perhaps they've already lost some money and need to take additional steps to protect the rest). It's definitely very hard for an individual to decide what the risk on a particular bond is. The good news is that you generally don't have to. There are a bunch of rich jerks, hedge funds, retirement funds, insurance companies, and other investment entities out there who spend all day looking at things like bonds, trying to estimate the risk. Their willingness to exploit minuscule differences between the interest rate on a bond and the real risk means that the average bond on the market will be fairly priced, according to what all those people think. Plenty of them can still be wrong, mind you (cf. mortgage-backed securities) but in the general case the price of any security reflects all the information everyone in the world has on it on average, so if you're wrong you're in good company. When you buy a nice diversified bond fund, you have access to a bunch of bonds at a pretty-standard price.  So that's interest rates for you. But you asked about prices. As it turns out, they're the same thing! - just expressed slightly differently.  One way or another a bond is essentially meant to be a stream of payments worth a certain amount in the end - this is why you'll hear them referred to sometimes as a \"\"fixed-income security\"\". The interest rate is essentially the difference between the price you pay now, and the value you receive later, except expressed as a rate. Technically, you could structure the bonds differently (e.g. does the bond pay little bits of interest as you go along, or just pay one big lump sum in the end?) but you can use Math to convert between these two situations, and figure out how much money is worth which when, so it doesn't really matter. Anyway. This means that rising interest rates means lower bond prices on bonds you already own (and falling interest rates means higher bond prices). So if the Federal Reserve increases interest rates, the face value of your bond funds will fall. Also, if people think that the companies issuing the bonds are too risky, the face value of those bonds will also fall. (You were probably expecting the latter effect, though.) Mind you, you will still get the same amount of future money out of them as you would otherwise: that's why they're fixed-income securities. However, a higher interest rate means \"\"I can get more money in the future for less money now\"\", and so people will be willing to pay you less for your bond in the present. This is known as interest rate risk. It is higher on longer term bonds, because those have more time to earn interest.\""}
{"id": "372787", "text": "The ABA number you speak of is more accurately called the Routing Transit Number.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routing_transit_number A routing transit number (RTN) is a nine digit bank code, used in the   United States, which appears on the bottom of negotiable instruments   such as checks identifying the financial institution on which it was   drawn. This code was designed to facilitate the sorting, bundling, and   shipment of paper checks back to the drawer's (check writer's)   account. The RTN is also used by Federal Reserve Banks to process Fedwire funds   transfers, and by the Automated Clearing House to process direct   deposits, bill payments, and other such automated transfers. The RTN number is derived from the bank's transit number originated by   the American Bankers Association, which designed it in 1910.[1] I am going to assume that the euphemistic ABA Number has been shortened by whoever told you about it and called it the ABN.  Perhaps American Bank Number.  Either way, the technical term is RTN. Perhaps a comment or editor can straighten me out about the ABN. There is an international number known as the SWIFT number that serves the same purpose worldwide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_9362 ISO 9362 (also known as SWIFT-BIC, BIC code, SWIFT ID or SWIFT code)   defines a standard format of Business Identifier Codes approved by the   International Organization for Standardization (ISO). It is a unique   identification code for both financial and non-financial   institutions.[1] The acronym SWIFT stands for the Society for   Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. When assigned to a   non-financial institution, the code may also be known as a Business   Entity Identifier or BEI. These codes are used when transferring money   between banks, particularly for international wire transfers, and also   for the exchange of other messages between banks. The codes can   sometimes be found on account statements."}
{"id": "372921", "text": "\"Basically, the easiest way to do this is to chart out the \"\"what-ifs\"\". Applying the amortization formula (see here) using the numbers you supplied and a little guesswork, I calculated an interest rate of 3.75% (which is good) and that you've already made 17 semi-monthly payments (8 and a half months' worth) of $680.04, out of a 30-year, 720-payment loan term. These are the numbers I will use. Let's now suppose that tomorrow, you found $100 extra every two weeks in your budget, and decided to put it toward your mortgage starting with the next payment. That makes the semi-monthly payments $780 each. You would pay off the mortgage in 23 years (making 557 more payments instead of 703 more). Your total payments will be $434,460, down from $478.040, so your interest costs on the loan were reduced by $43,580 (but, my mistake, we can't count this amount as money in the bank; it's included in the next amount of money to come in). Now, after the mortgage is paid off, you have $780 semi-monthly for the remaining 73 months of your original 30-year loan (a total of $113,880) which you can now do something else with. If you stuffed it in your mattress, you'd earn 0% and so that's the worst-case scenario. For anything else to be worth it, you must be getting a rate of return such that $100 payments, 24 times a year for a total of 703 payments must equal $113,880. We use the future value annuity formula (here): v = p*((i+1)n-1)/i, plugging in v ($113880, our FV goal), $100 for P (the monthly payment) and 703 for n (total number of payments. We're looking for i, the interest rate. We're making 24 payments per year, so the value of i we find will be 1/24 of the stated annual interest rate of any account you put it into. We find that in order to make the same amount of money on an annuity that you save by paying off the loan, the interest rate on the account must average 3.07%. However, you're probably not going to stuff the savings from the mortgage in your mattress and sleep on it for 6 years. What if you invest it, in the same security you're considering now? That would be 146 payments of $780 into an interest-bearing account, plus the interest savings. Now, the interest rate on the security must be greater, because you're not only saving money on the mortgage, you're making money on the savings. Assuming the annuity APR stays the same now vs later, we find that the APR on the annuity must equal, surprise, 3.75% in order to end up with the same amount of money. Why is that? Well, the interest growing on your $100 semi-monthly exactly offsets the interest you would save on the mortgage by reducing the principal by $100. Both the loan balance you would remove and the annuity balance you increase would accrue the same interest over the same time if they had the same rate. The main difference, to you, is that by paying into the annuity now, you have cash now; by paying into the mortgage now, you don't have money now, but you have WAY more money later. The actual real time-values of the money, however, are the same; the future value of $200/mo for 30 years is equal to $0/mo for 24 years and then $1560/mo for 6 years, but the real money paid in over 30 years is $72,000 vs $112,320. That kind of math is why analysts encourage people to start retirement saving early. One more thing. If you live in the United States, the interest charges on your mortgage are tax-deductible. So, that $43,580 you saved by paying down the mortgage? Take 25% of it and throw it away as taxes (assuming you're in the most common wage-earner tax bracket). That's $10895 in potential tax savings that you don't get over the life of the loan. If you penalize the \"\"pay-off-early\"\" track by subtracting those extra taxes, you find that the break-even APR on the annuity account is about 3.095%.\""}
{"id": "373043", "text": "\"Not sure I understood, so I'll summarize what I think I read: You got scholarship X, paid tuition Y < X, and you got 1098T to report these numbers. You're asking whether you need to pay taxes on (X-Y) that you end up with as income. The answer is: of course. You can have even lower tax liability if you don't include the numbers on W2, right? So why doesn't it occur to you to ask \"\"if I don't include W2 in the software, it comes up with a smaller tax - do I need to include it?\"\"?\""}
{"id": "373059", "text": "No, as a director normally you can't. As a director of a Limited company, all those payments should be accounted for as directors' remuneration and have been subject to PAYE and NIC, even if you are self-employed. Currently there is no legislation which prevents a director from receiving self-employment income from a company in which he is a director, however the default position of HMRC's is that all the payments derived from the directorship are subject to PAYE. In other words, it's possible only invoice from an unconnected business or in a consultancy role that's not directly related to the trade of business. But it really depends on the circumstances and the contracts in place. Sources: Monsoon at AAT forum, David Griffiths at UKBF, Paula Sparrow and Abutalib at AW  More sources: If a person does other work that\u2019s not related to being a director, they may have an employment contract and get employment rights. Source: Employment status as director at Gov.uk In principle, it is possible for an employee or office holder to tender for work with their employer outside their normal duties, in circumstances where that individual will not be providing service as an employee or office holder but as a self-employed contractor. Where there is any doubt about whether service is provided constitutes employment or self-employment, see the Employment Status Manual (ESM). Source: Section 62 ITEPA 2003 at HMRC"}
{"id": "373119", "text": "How can I use $4000 to make $250 per month for the rest of my life? This means the investment should generate close to 6.25% return per month or around 75% per year. There is no investment that gives this kind of return. The long term return of stock market is around 15-22% depending on the year range and country."}
{"id": "373149", "text": "That interesting. It seems like an apt building could use that for its residents. I think I saw the amount quoted at $470/month, but since there isn't a market it's probably speculative to say anything about what it would cost a consumer or group of consumers."}
{"id": "373180", "text": "A tax liability account is a common thing. In my own books I track US-based social insurance (Medicare and Social Security) using such an account.  At the time I pay an employee, a tax liability is incurred, increasing my tax liability account; at the same time, on the other end of the double-entry, I increase a tax expense account. Notably, though, the US IRS does not necessarily require that the tax is paid at the time it is incurred.  In my case I incur a liability twice a month, but I only have to pay the taxes quarterly.  So, between the time of incurring and the time of remitting/paying, the amount is held in the tax liability account.  At the time that I remit payment to the IRS, the transaction will decrease both my checking account and also, on the other end of the double-entry, my liability account. To answer your question in short, use an expense account for your other-side-account."}
{"id": "373226", "text": "Illustrating with a shorter example:  Suppose I deposit 1,000 USD. Every year I deposit another 100 USD. I want to know how much money will be on that savings account in 4 years.  The long-hand calculation is Expressed with a summation  And using the formula derived from the summation (as shown by DJohnM) So for 20 years Note in year 20 (or year 4 in the shorter example) the final $100 deposit does not have any time to accrue interest before the valuation of the account."}
{"id": "373360", "text": "Currently, in the US, you won't be able to get 4% return on a risk free investment (savings account, CDs, treasury bonds). If the banking system in India guarantees your money and the cost of transferring them to India is not prohibitive, that's the safest option. Buying a house usually is only worth it if you plan to live in it for a while, 5 years or more being the commonly cited figure. Every case is different, if you rent is very high, it might be worth to buy. I suggest posting another question specifically about that with more details about your situation. If you can tolerate a bit more risk, you might want to talk to a financial adviser and invest in the stock market."}
{"id": "373501", "text": "The minimum at Schwab to open an IRA is $1000. Why don't you check the two you listed to see what their minimum opening balance is? If you plan to go with ETFs, you want to ask them what their commission is for a minimum trade.  In Is investing in an ETF generally your best option after establishing a Roth IRA? sheegaon points out that for the smaller investor, index mutual funds are cheaper than the ETFs, part due to commission, part the bid/ask spread."}
{"id": "373554", "text": "If what you are paying in interest on the debt is a higher percentage than what your investments are returning, the best investment you can make is to pay off the debt. If you're lucky enough to be paying historically low rates (as I am on my mortgage) and getting good returns on the investments so the latter is the higher percentage,  the balance goes the other way and you'd want to continue paying off the debt relatively slowly -- essentially treating it as a leveraged investment.  If you aren't sure, paying off the debt should probably be the default prefrence."}
{"id": "373585", "text": "My understanding is that all ETF options are American style, meaning they can be exercised before expiration, and so you could do the staggered exercises as you described."}
{"id": "373620", "text": "I spent a while looking for something similar a few weeks back and ended up getting frustrated and asking to borrow a friend's Bloombterg.   I wish you the best of luck finding something,  but I wasn't able to.   S&amp;P and Morningstar have some stuff on their site,  but I wasn't able to make use of it.  Edit: Also,  Bloomberg allows shared terminals.  Depending on how much you think as a firm,  these questions might come up,  it might be worth the 20k / year"}
{"id": "373697", "text": "\"Are there still people who keep significant amounts of money in a bank savings account? You could get ~1% by just choosing the right bank. ING Direct, for example, gives 0.8%, 4 times more than your credit union, with the same FDIC insurance! If you do want to invest in something slightly more long-term, you can get a CD. At the same ING Direct, you can get a 5-year CD with 1% APR. Comes with the same FDIC insurance. Note that I mention ING Direct just because I accidentally had their site open right in front of me, their rates are definitely not the highest right now. If you want to give up the FDIC insurance and take some more risks, you can invest your money in municipal bonds or various kinds of \"\"low risk\"\" mutual funds, which may yield 3-5% a year. If you want to take even more risks - there's a whole stock market available for you, with ETF's, mutual funds and individual stocks. Whether you should - that only you can tell. But you can have a NO-RISK investment yielding 4-5 times more than what you have right now, just saying.\""}
{"id": "373730", "text": "No, you were not the stupid one.    Yes many of these mortgage companies will only work with you if you are behind. . . no idea why, but I will say that yes I have seen it.   You do not have to deal with the stress. . . . working with mortgage companies is not a fun proposition, they don't know what they are doing half the time.  You can leave and move whenever you want. . . even if their payments are better now who knows how long till they can actually see the place for enough to move.    I work in bankruptcy I have seen the stresses this causes. . .  it is not fun, even if they are doing better now, try not to envy them, it is not fun."}
{"id": "373946", "text": "Do you have a spouse? You can contribute to a spouse's IRA if you guys are filling a joint tax return"}
{"id": "373966", "text": "\"The likely reason the mortgage is \"\"tricky to get\"\" is the adviser is probably recommending an interest-only mortgage in which there is no repayment of principle before maturity.  That would allow you to deduct the amount of the interest expense from your taxable income.  Your investment grows compound tax deferred and the principal invested (the mortgage balance) is completely tax free since it never qualifies as income for tax purposes. Example ideal scenario: Refinance $100,000 on a 5/1 ARM-interest only at 3%.  Invest the $100,000 at 6%.  Each year you effectively pay taxes on only the gains greater than interest.  If you reinvest the profits it looks something like: Net Profit:    $12,309 Effective Tax Rate:  13.21%\""}
{"id": "374149", "text": "You need to know your costs. Some are fixed. Review them.  There are some expenses that are variable. Review the amount and if it is reasonable.  Review your large orders. Are they increasing?  Ask him how he thinks people will steal from the company. Did he see a large order and the customer will default?"}
{"id": "374199", "text": "No fucking shit. Since it is their money that Greece is spending, I think they have a right to put some stipulations on it. Imaging trying to indefinitely keep Greece's ponzi scheme going if they didn't cut debts? Even if that could work (which I doubt) it would be too expensive to be feasible."}
{"id": "374264", "text": "I am not an accountant, but I do run a business in the UK and my understanding is that it's a threshold thing, which I believe is \u00a32,500. Assuming you don't currently have to submit self assessment, and your additional income from all sources other than employment (for which you already pay tax) is less than \u00a32,500, you don't have to declare it. Above this level you have to submit self assessment. More information can be found here I also find that HMRC are quite helpful - give them a call and ask."}
{"id": "374676", "text": "\"For example, if I have an income of $100,000 from my job and I also   realize a $350,000 in long-term capital gains from a stock sale, will   I pay 20% on the $350K or 15%? You'll pay 20% assuming filing single and no major offsets to taxable income. Capital gains count towards your income for determining tax bracket. They're on line 13 of the 1040 which is in the \"\"income\"\" section and aren't adjusted out/excluded from your taxable income, but since they are taxed at a different rate make sure to follow the instructions for line 44 when calculating your tax due.\""}
{"id": "374867", "text": "Does this make sense? I'm concerned that by buying shares with post tax income, I'll have ended up being taxed twice or have increased my taxable income. ... The company will then re-reimburse me for the difference in stock price between the vesting and the purchase share price. Sure.  Assuming you received a 100-share RSU for shares worth $10, and your marginal tax rate is 30% (all made up numbers), either: or So you're in the same spot either way.  You paid $300 to get $1,000 worth of stock. Taxes are the same as well.  The full value of the RSU will count as income either way, and you'll either pay tax on the gains of the 100 shares in your RSU our you'll pay tax on gains on the 70 shares in your RSU and the 30 shares you bought.  Since they're reimbursing you for any difference the cost basis will be the same (although you might get taxed on the reimbursement, but that should be a relatively small amount). This first year I wanted to keep all of the shares, due to tax reasons and because believe the share price will go up. I don't see how this would make a difference from a tax standpoint. You're going to pay tax on the RSU either way - either in shares or in cash.  how does the value of the shares going up make a difference in tax? Additionally I'm concerned that by doing this I'm going to be hit by my bank for GBP->USD exchange fees, foreign money transfer charges, broker purchase fees etc.  That might be true - if that's the case then you need to decide whether to keep fighting or decide if it's worth the transaction costs."}
{"id": "375089", "text": "\"Right... so the fundamental question is if the roll-over cessation will cause short term interest rates to decouple from the Fed's say-so.  This is otherwise known as a bond auction failure.  The fed wants the treasury debt off their books, but they don't want to raise interest rates to make that happen.  So, they're going to experiment with uptake outside of the Fed to see if they can \"\"boil the frog\"\".  If the frog starts to squirm, I guarantee you that they're going to take the pot off the burner.  At their the proposed roll-over suspension rate, it'll take approximately 12 to 16 years to to get that two trillion off their books... and that assumes that nothing bad happens during that time.  &gt; Do you know of any good writeups that would back your side?  The closest you're going to find would be anything written about the JCB post 1995... but it looks like their program of direct stock market participation (technically, they're using ETFs, probably for financial cryptography purposes) [began in earnest in 2010](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-19/japan-bourse-head-turns-surprise-critic-of-kuroda-etf-purchases)  [this piece ](https://blog.kurtosys.com/central-banks-unthinkable-buying-stocks/) indicates that the Japanese aren't the only ones doing this.  England, The Swiss and even the EU is doing the same thing across multiple exchanges.  As the article points out, there's a two pronged effect of suppressing FX stock price correlations (strengthening or weakening of currencies raising or lowering stocks listed on associated bourses) and reducing volatility through market intervention (AKA plunge protection teams).   They also reference an Investco survey of  central bank reserve managers.\""}
{"id": "375372", "text": "Walmart just installed all new self checkout with belts for bigger shopping away from the regular self check out at the store near me. It sounds absurd that your local grocer couldn't sort out oversight. Or like Walmart they check receipts like Sam's now."}
{"id": "376246", "text": "\"You should be able to pay back whenever; what's the point of an arbitrary timeline? Cash flow is the life blood of any business.  When banks loan money, they are expecting a steady cash flow back. If you just pay back \"\"whenever\"\" - the bank has no idea what they'll be getting back month-to-month.  When they can set the terms of the loan (length, rate, payment amount), they know how much cash flow they expect to get.  What does [the term of the loan] even mean and what difference in the world does it make? In addition to the predictable cash flow needs above, setting a term for the loan determines how long their money will be tied up in the loan. The longer a bank has money tied up in a loan, the more risk there is that the borrower will default, so the bank will require a greater return (interest rate) for that extra risk. What you have described is effectively a revolving line of credit.  The bank let you borrow money arbitrarily, charges you a certain rate of interest, and you can pay them back at your schedule.  If you pay all of the interest for that month, everything else goes to principal. If you don't pay all of the interest, that interest is added to the balance and gets interest compounded on top of it.  Both are perfectly viable business models, and bank employ them both, but they meed different needs for the bank.  Fixed-term loans help stabilize cash flow, and lines of credit provide convenience for customers.\""}
{"id": "376392", "text": "http://www.irs.gov/publications/p936/ar02.html#en_US_2010_publink1000229891 If you still own it, you get to deduct all of it. In my taxes I did online with TaxAct, it asked if I lived there or not and it just mattered which form it filed for me.  With having tenants it was a 'business' form and I assume it would be a standard schedule A for personal.  Either way the deductions are still mine to take."}
{"id": "376579", "text": "Such loans are of course possible. They exist because the lender gains something other than interest from them: What would happen to the economy if these were common? These are common, common as anything. In fact where it's not banks lending the money, these are the default. So, nothing would happen to the economy, this is one of the ways the economy works all over the world. If you're more interested in a loan from a bank or other financial institution, made to you for whatever purpose you want - here's $10,000, have fun, give it back ten years from now - ask yourself what the bank would get from that? Perhaps they could do it as a perk when you do something else with them like get a mortgage or keep $1000 in your chequing account all the time. But in the absence of any other relationship, what would be their reason for taking on the overhead and paperwork of approving you for a loan and keeping track of whether you're paying it back or not, for no return, whether financial or intangible? No return? It doesn't happen."}
{"id": "376800", "text": "The top long-term capital gains tax rate will rise to 20% effective 1 Jan, 2011, unless Congress decides to do something about it before then. (Will they? Who knows!! There's been talk about it, but, well, it's Congress. They don't even know what they're going to do.)  Anyway. The rules about when you can sell stock are mostly concerned with when you can realize a capital loss: if you sell a stock at a loss and then re-buy it for tax purposes within 30 days, it's a wash sale and not eligible for a deduction. However, I don't believe this applies to any stocks once you realize a gain - once you've realized the gain and paid your tax for it, it's all yours, locked in at whatever rate. Your replacement stock will be subject to short-term capital gains for the next year afterwards, and you might need to be careful with identifying the holding period on different lots of your stock, but I don't believe there will be any particular trouble. Please do not rely entirely on my advice and consult also with your tax preparer or lawyer. :) And the IRS documentation: Special Addendum for Nov/Dec 2012! Spoiler alert! Congress did indeed act:   they extended the rates, but only temporarily, so now we're looking at   tax hikes starting in 2013 instead, only the new top rate++ will be something   like 23.8% on account of an extra 3.8% medicare tax on passive earnings (brought to you via Obamacare   legislation). But the year and the rates' specifics aside, same thing   still applies. And the Republican house and Democratic senate/President are still duking it out. Have fun. ++ 3.8% surtax applies to the lesser of (a) net investment income (b) income over $200,000 ($250k if married). 20% tax rate applies to people in the 15% income tax bracket for ordinary income or higher. Additional tax discounts for property held over 5 years may be available. Consult tax law and your favorite tax professional and prepare to be confused."}
{"id": "377061", "text": "Switch to cash for a few months. No debit. No credit. This will help for two reasons: Once you've broken the bad habits, you should be able to go back to cards for the convenience factor."}
{"id": "377335", "text": "\"Employers are not supposed to give cash gifts to their employees, even if you try to call it a \"\"gift\"\" for tax purposes. Presumably, the reason your wife's employer gave her cash was to be nice and save her taxes on that amount. Her employer already paid tax on that money so that your wife doesn't have to. If she plans to declare it anyway, then she should instead give it back and ask for it to be added to the W2 as an end of year bonus. This way her employer could then deduct the payment and pay her a larger amount of money. (The additional amount would be approximately their tax rate minus about 7.45% for FICA.) In fact, if your wife's tax rate is more than 15% lower than her employer's, then this is actually mathematically best for both parties.\""}
{"id": "377547", "text": "\"As a minor you certainly can pay tax, the government wants its cut from you just like everyone else :-) However you do get the personal allowance like everyone else, so you won't have to pay income tax until your net income reaches \u00a310,800 (that's the figure for the tax year from April 2015 to April 2016, it'll probably change in future years). Once you're 16, you will also have to pay national insurance, which is basically another tax, at a lower threshold. The current rates are \u00a32.80/week if you are making \u00a35,965 a year or more, and also 9% on any income above \u00a38,060 (up to \u00a342,385). Your \"\"net income\"\" or \"\"profits\"\" are the income you receive minus the expenses you have to support that income. Note that the expenses must be entirely for the \"\"business\"\", they can't be for personal things. The most important thing to do immediately is to start keeping accurate records. Keep a list of the income you receive and also the expenses you pay for hardware etc. Make sure you keep receipts (perhaps just electronic ones) for the expenses so you can prove they existed later. Keep track of that net income as the year goes on and if it starts collecting at the rate you'd have to pay tax and national insurance, then make sure you also put aside enough money to pay for those when the bill comes. There's some good general advice on the Government's website here: https://www.gov.uk/working-for-yourself/what-you-need-to-do In short, as well as keeping records, you should register with the tax office, HMRC, as a \"\"sole trader\"\". This should be something that anyone can do whatever their age, but it's worth calling them up as soon as you can to check and find out if there are any other issues. They'll probably want you to send in tax returns containing the details of your income and expenses. If you're making enough money it may be worth paying an accountant to do this for you.\""}
{"id": "377944", "text": "Brokerage->Brokerage 13-16 The loss from the previous purchase will be added to the cost basis of the security for the second purchase. Since you sold it at a loss again it would increase your losses. Your loss from the first sale will be disallowed. Your loss will be added to the cost basis of the next purchase. Your gains will be taxed on the total of the cost basis which will reduce your gains. Which you will taxed 'less'. Your gains will be taxed. Your loss is allowed. You will be taxed on both.  Wash Sales really only applies to losses. If you sell for gain, the tax man will be happy to take his share. From my understanding, it does not matter if it is IRA or Brokerage, the wash sale rule affects them all. Check this link: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/understanding-the-wash-sale-rules-2015-03-02"}
{"id": "378075", "text": "It would involve manual effort, but there is just a handful of exclusions,  buy the fund you want, plug into a tool like Morningstar Instant X Ray,  find out your $10k position includes $567.89 of defense contractor Lockheed Martin,  and sell short $567.89 of Lockheed Martin.  Check you're in sync periodically (the fund or index balance may change); when you sell the fund close your shorts too."}
{"id": "378110", "text": "\"In general, scholarship income that you receive that is not used for tuition or books must be included in your gross income and reported as such on your tax return.  Scholarship income you receive that is used for those kinds of expenses may be excludable from your gross income.  See this IRS information and this related question. I believe that as represented on the 1098-T, this generally means that if Box 5 (Scholarships and Grants) is greater than Box 1 or 2 (only one of which will be used on your 1098-T), you received taxable scholarship income.  If Box 5 is less than or equal to Box 1/2, you did not receive taxable scholarship income.  This TaxSlayer page draws the same conclusion. However, you should realize that the 1098-T is not what makes you have to pay or not pay taxes.  You incur the taxes by receiving scholarship money, and you may reduce your tax liability by paying tuition.  The 1098-T is simply a record of payments that have already been made. For instance, if you received $10,000 in scholarship money --- that is, actually received checks for that amount or had that amount deposited into your bank account --- then your income went up by $10,000.  If you yourself paid tuition, it is likely that you can exclude the amount of the tuition from your taxable income, reducing the tax you owe (see the IRS page linked above).  However, if you received $10,000 in actual money and in addition your tuition was paid by the scholarship (with money you never actually had in your own bank account), then the entire $10,000 would be taxable.  You do not give enough information in your question to be sure which of these situations is closer to your own.  However, you should be able to decide by looking at your bank account: look at how much money you received and how much you spent on tuition.  If you received more scholarship money than the tuition you paid out of pocket, you owe taxes on the remainder.  (I emphasize that this is just a general rule of thumb and should not be taken as tax advice; you should review the IRS information and/or consult a tax professional to determine what part of your scholarship income is taxable.) In addition, as this (now rather old) article from the New York Society of CPAs notes, \"\"many colleges and universities prepare 1098-Ts incorrectly and report tuition and related expenses inconsistently\"\".  This means you should be careful to reconcile the 1098-T with your own financial records of what money you actually received and paid.  When I was in grad school there was a good deal of hand-wringing and hair-pulling each year among the students as we tried to determine what relationship (if any) the 1098-T bore to the financial facts.\""}
{"id": "378161", "text": "\"That argument is an argument for investing generally, not peer-to-peer lending per se, and the argument as phrased (\"\"thus you should invest your money at a Peer-to-peer loan platform\"\") is a false dichotomy. That said, as soon as one is investing as opposed to just getting a small but guaranteed return, then risk comes into play.  In that sense, any savings account is fundamentally different from any investment, and, in that reading, the two shouldn't be compared as different approaches to \"\"investing\"\".  Peer-to-peer lending as an investment could be aptly compared with stock market investing, for one.\""}
{"id": "378173", "text": "\"If you are already invested in a particular stock, I like JoeTaxpayer's answer. Think about it as if you are re-buying the stocks you own every day you decide to keep them and don't set emotional anchor points about what you paid for them or what they might be worth tomorrow. These lead to two major logical fallacies that investor's commonly fall prey to, Loss Aversion and Sunk Cost, both of which can be bad for your portfolio in the long run. To avert these natural tendencies, I suggest having a game plan before you purchase a stock based on on your investment goals for that stock. For example a combination of one or more of the following: I'm investing for the long term and I expect this stock to appreciate and will hold it until (specific event/time) at which point I will (sell it all/sell it gradually over a fixed time period) right around the time I need the money. I'm going to bail on this stock if it falls more than X % from my purchase price. I'm going to cash out (all/half/some) of this investment if it gains more than x % from my purchase price to lock in my returns. The important thing is to arrive at a strategy before you are invested and are likely to be more emotional than rational.  Otherwise, it can be very hard to sell a \"\"hot\"\" stock that has suddenly jumped in price 25% because \"\"it has momentum\"\" (gambler's fallacy). Conversely it can be hard to sell a stock when it drops by 25% because \"\"I know it will bounce back eventually\"\" (Sunk Cost/Loss Aversion Fallacy).  Also, remember that there is opportunity cost from sticking with a losing investment because your brain is saying \"\"I really haven't lost money until I give up and sell it.\"\" When logically you should be thinking, \"\"If I move my money to a more promising investment I could get a better return than I am likely to on what I'm holding.\"\"\""}
{"id": "378484", "text": "To quote the answer you linked to: Perhaps the simplest way to think about this is you can only deduct an expense that you actually incur. In other words, the expense should show up on a bank or CC statement. So, if your business purchased the $1000 gift card for $800, you should see a $800 charge appearing on a business CC or bank statement. You would therefore be able to deduct the $800, but not the full $1000 of items that you purchase with it. Side Notes:"}
{"id": "378527", "text": "No. You can sell anytime. I am in pedantic mode, sorry, the way the question is worded implies that you can sell only if it rises. You are welcome to sell at a loss, too.  Yes. The fund will not issue a dividend with every dividend it receives. It's more typical that they issue dividends quarterly. So the shares will increase by the amount of the undistributed dividends and on the ex-div date, drop by that amount. The remaining value goes up and down, of course, I am speaking only of the extra value created by the retained dividends."}
{"id": "378594", "text": "The most tax efficient way to get some cash would be to sell some stocks from the Fidelity account that have the lowest capital gains. The tax will typically be 15% of the capital gains. This will be a one-time cost which should save you money compared to paying 7.5% on the loan year after year. Tax on selling the stock options will probably be higher, since you imply there would be high capital gains, and some of the proceeds might even be taxed as income, not capital gains."}
{"id": "378906", "text": "Short answer: No, it only matters if you want to use covered calls strategies. The price of a share is not important. Some companies make stock splits from time to time so that the price of their shares is more affordable to small investors. It is a decision of the company's board to keep the price high or low. More important is the capitalization for these shares. If you have lots of money to invest, the best is to divide and invest a fixed pourcentage of your portfolio in each company you choose.  The only difference is if you eventually decide to use covered call strategies. To have a buy write on Google will cost you a lot of money and you will only be able to sell 1 option for every 100 shares. Bottom line: the price is not important, capitalization and estimated earnings are. Hope this answers your question."}
{"id": "379232", "text": "\"$36 dividend/900 DJIA = 4% 5.5% bond yield = ($36 dividend/660 DJIA) Graham wrote this at a very different time in financial markets- interest rates were much higher, and the DJIA much lower. In addition, bonds were yielding more than stocks, unlike today when the DJIA % the 10yr Treasury yield 2.63% and 2.13% respectively. In addition, his \"\"weigher of the odds\"\" suggests waiting to invest until equity prices are lower (usually dividends aren't reduced), and therefore the DJIA dividend yield would rise relative to bond yields.\""}
{"id": "379546", "text": "It sounds like you are interested in investing in the stock market but you don't want to take too much risk. Investing in an Index EFT will provide some diversification and can be less risky than investing in individual stocks, however with potentially lower returns. If you want to invest your money, the first thing you should do is learn about managing your risk. You are still young and you should spend your time now to increase your education and knowledge. There are plenty of good books to start with, and you should prepare an investment plan which incorporates a risk management strategy. $1000 is a little low to start investing in the stock market, so whilst you are building your education and preparing your plan, you can continue building up more funds for when you are ready to start investing.  Place your funds in an high interest savings account for now, and whilst you are learning you can practice your strategies using virtual accounts. In fact the ASX has a share market game which is held  2 or 3 times per year. The ASX website also has some good learning materials for novices and they hold regular seminars. It is another good source for improving your education in the subject.  Remember, first get educated, then plan and practice, and then invest."}
{"id": "379639", "text": "\"What is my best bet with the 401K? I know very little about retirement   plans and don't plan to ever touch this money until I retire but could   this money be of better use somewhere else? If you don't know your options, I would suggest reading some material on it that might be a little more extensive than an answer here (for instance, http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/ has some good and free information about a myriad of financial topics).  With retirement accounts you can roll it over or leave it in the current account.  Things to look at would be costs of the accounts, options you have in each account, and the flexibility of moving it if you need to.  Depending on what type of retirement account it is (Roth 401K, Traditional 401K, etc, you may have some advantages with moving it to another type). The student loans.... pay them off in one shot? I have the extra money   and it would not be a hardship to do so unless that money can be best   used somewhere else? Unless I was making more money in a savings/investing/business opportunity, I would pay off the student loans in a lump sum.  The reason is basic opportunity cost (economics) - if a better opportunity isn't on the horizon with your money, kill the interest you're paying because it's money you're losing every month. With the money just sitting in the bank I get a little sick feeling   thinking that I can be doing something better with that. Outside of general savings you could look at investing in stocks, ETFs, mutual funds, currencies, lending club loans (vary by state), or something similar.  Or you could try to start a business or invest in a start up directly (though, depending on the start up, they may not accept small investors).  Otherwise, if you don't have a specific idea at this time, it's best to have money in savings while you ponder where else it would serve you. Keep in mind, having cash on hand, even if it's not earning anything, can bail you out in emergencies or open the door if an opportunity arises.  So, you're really not \"\"losing\"\" anything by having it in cash if you're patiently waiting on opportunities.\""}
{"id": "379660", "text": "And just as easily, someone could find a reason for such a derivative to exist.  Let's say I'm a vendor of memorabilia for a given sports team, but unlike most vendors I'm only a vendor for a particular team.  Given that there is a large lead time between orders placed and memorabilia received (perhaps on the order of a month between order and receipt), it is inherently risky to order large orders towards the end of a season.  However, if they're going to be in the playoffs, there's a huge opportunity to sell, but if they don't, you'd be left with tons of surplus inventory.  So, wouldn't it be handy for there to be a way to hedge that risk?    We've actually seen times when such things aren't unreasonable.  Large risks are [hedged away](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303877604577380593015786140.html), even in sports."}
{"id": "379732", "text": "\"I cannot answer the original question, but since there is a good deal of discussion about whether it's credible at all, here's an answer that I got from Bank of America. Note the fine difference between \"\"your account\"\" and \"\"our account\"\", which does not seem to be a typo: The payment method is determined automatically by our system.  One of   the main factors is the method by which pay to recipients prefer to   receive payments.  If a payment can be issued electronically, we   attempt to do so because it is the most efficient method.   Payment methods include: *Electronic:  Payment is sent electronically prior to the \"\"Deliver By\"\" date.  The funds for the payment are deducted from your account on the   \"\"Deliver By\"\" date. *Corporate Check:  This is a check drawn on our account and is mailed to the pay to recipient a few days before the \"\"Deliver By\"\" date.  The   funds to cover the payment are deducted from your account on the   \"\"Deliver By\"\" date. *Laser Draft Check: This is a check drawn on your account and mailed to the pay to recipient a few days before the \"\"Deliver By\"\" date.  The   funds for the payment are deducted from your account when the pay to   recipient cashes the check, just as if you wrote the check yourself. To determine how your payment was sent, click the \"\"Payments\"\" button in   your Bill Pay service.  Select the \"\"view payment\"\" link next to the   payment.  Payment information is then displayed.  \"\"Transmitted   electronically\"\" means the payment was sent electronically.  \"\"Payment   transaction number\"\" means the payment was sent via a check drawn from   our account.  \"\"Check number\"\" means the payment was sent as a laser   draft check. Each payment request is evaluated individually and may change each   time a payment processes.   A payment may switch from one payment   method to another for a number of reasons.  The merchant may have   temporarily switched the payment method to paper, while they update   processing information.  Recent changes or re-issuance of your payee   account number could alter the payment method. In my case, the web site reads a little different: Payment check # 12345678 (8 digits) was sent to Company on 10/27/2015 and   delivered on 10/30/2015. Funds were withdrawn from your (named)   account on 10/30/2015. for one due on 10/30/2015; this must be the \"\"corporate check\"\". And for another, earlier one, due on 10/01/2015, this must be the laser draft check: Check # 1234 (4 digits) from your (named) account was mailed to Company on   09/28/2015. Funds for this payment are withdrawn from your account   when the Pay To account cashes the check. Both payments were made based on the same recurring bill pay payment that I set up manually (knowing little more of the company than its address).\""}
{"id": "379759", "text": "It depends to some extent on how you interpret the situation, so I think this is the general idea. Say you purchase one share at $50, and soon after, the price moves up, say, to $55. You now have an unrealized profit of $5. Now, you can either sell and realize that profit, or hold on to the position, expecting a further price appreciation. In either case, you will consider the price change from this traded price, which is $55, and not the price you actually bought at. Hence, if the price fell to $52 in the next trade, you have a loss of $3 on your previous profit of $5. This (even though your net P&L is calculated from the initial purchase price of $50), allows you to think in terms of your positions at the latest known prices. This is similar to a Markov process, in the sense that it doesn't matter which route the stock price (and your position's P&L) took to get to the current point; your decision should be based on the current/latest price level."}
{"id": "379786", "text": "You also may want to consider how this interacts with the stepped up basis of estates.  If you never sell the stock and it passes to your heirs with your estate, under current tax law the basis will increase from the purchase price to the market price at the time of transfer.   In a comment, you proposed:   Thinking more deeply though, I am a little skeptical that it's a free lunch: Say I buy stock A (a computer manufacturer) at $100 which I intend to hold long term. It ends up falling to $80 and the robo-advisor sells it for tax loss harvesting, buying stock B (a similar computer manufacturer) as a replacement. So I benefit from realizing those losses. HOWEVER, say both stocks then rise by 50% over 3 years. At this point, selling B gives me more capital gains tax than if I had held A through the losses, since A's rise from 80 back to 100 would have been free for me since I purchased at 100. And then later thought  Although thinking even more (sorry, thinking out loud here), I guess I still come out ahead on taxes since I was able to deduct the $20 loss on A against ordinary income, and while I pay extra capital gains on B, that's a lower tax rate. So the free lunch is $20*[number of shares]*([my tax bracket] - [capital gains rates]) That's true.  And in addition to that, if you never sell B, which continues to rise to $200 (was last at $120 after a 50% increase from $80), the basis steps up to $200 on transfer to your heirs.   Of course, your estate may have to pay a 40% tax on the $200 before transferring the shares to your heirs.  So this isn't exactly a free lunch either.  But you have to pay that 40% tax regardless of the form in which the money is held.  Cash, real estate, stocks, whatever.  Whether you have a large or small capital gain on the stock is irrelevant to the estate tax.   This type of planning may not matter to you personally, but it is another aspect of what wealth management can impact."}
{"id": "379859", "text": "I think you're missing a couple of things. First - why do you think its a reverse mortgage? More likely than not its a regular mortgage - home equity loan. If so, if they expect the stock market to rise significantly more than the amount of interest they pay on the loan - then its a totally sensible course of action. Second - the purchase in cash only to take out a loan later can definitely be a sensible way to do things. For example, if the seller wants to close fast, or if there are competing offers where not having a contingency is the tipping point. Another reason might be purchasing in an entity name (for example holding the title as an LLC), and in this case it is easier to get a loan if you already have the house, since the banks see the owner's actual commitment and not just promises."}
{"id": "379866", "text": "If the customer pays 20% of the payment in advance, then he is he owns 20% of the house and the bank owns 80%. Now they say he pays the rest of the amount and also the rent of the house until he becomes the sole owner of the house."}
{"id": "380254", "text": "It turns out that in this special case for New York, they have a law that says that if you are changing your filing status from resident to nonresident, you must use the accrual method for calculating capital gains. So in this case, the date on the papers is the important one."}
{"id": "380270", "text": "\"It's not consistent across the states. Most states have some implementation of these functions but fully regulated states don't have all of them and many are \"\"functions\"\" but are owned by the same entity.  Look at the southeast, the rockies, the PNW, AZ there are zero or few opportunities for merchant anything.\""}
{"id": "380351", "text": "Specific stock advice isn't permitted on these boards. I'm discussing the process of a call spread with the Apple Jan 13 calls as an example.  In effect, you have $10 to 'bet.' Each bet you'd construct offers a different return (odds). For example, If you bought the $750 call at $37.25, you'd need to look to find what strike has a bid of $27 or higher. The $790 is bid $27.75. So this particular spread is a 4 to 1 bet the stock will close in January over $790, with a $760 break even.  You can pull the number from Yahoo to a spreadsheet to make your own chart of spread costs, but I'll give one more example.  You think it will go over $850, and that strike is now ask $18.85. The highest strike currently listed is $930, and it's bid $10.35. So this spread cost is $850, and a close over $930 returns $8000 or over 9 to 1.  Again, this is not advice, just an analysis of how spreads work. Note, any anomalies in the pricing above is the effect of a particular strike having no trades today, not every strike is active so 'last trade' can be days old.   Note: My answer adds to AlexR's response in that once you used the word bet and showed a desire to make a risky move, options are the answer. You acknowledged you understand the basic concept, but given the contract size of 100 shares, these suggestions are ways to bet under your $1000 limit and profit from the gain in the underlying stock you hope to see."}
{"id": "380387", "text": "People are downvoting you, but the reality is that a cushion isn't a bad idea.  Not a perpetual thing, but until the OP gets set up with a job place to live etc.  They know the job is going to work out etc., they might want to have some cash, as they are likely not going to forgo eating etc... that said I would treat it as money to be used in place of a credit card (with the high rates) etc...   Again I am not saying spend the money, I am being realistic, that it takes money to secure an apt, and unless you can borrow cheaper than 6% elsewhere (I know I could probably get unsecured money cheaper than that where I live, but I don't know the OPs situation).  I wouldn't invest it given the situation personally.  If you have a great job, it won't matter, you will build up past 1200 soon and can then start to invest a portion of that cash.  If you don't, then you shouldn't be risking debt money, especially if your level of sophistication in the market has you here asking the question.  That 6% savings is tax free as well, so you need to gross it up based on your tax situation.  Also make note of any currency conversions that would need to happen, so depending on what you want to invest in, currency risk could be a real concern as well.  One other reason I think getting down at least a portion of the debt could be good is simplification.  Can't spend money you don't view yourself as having.  Some people might be more disciplined to reign in spending when they see a lower number in their account.  I'm personally not one of those people, but again, I would likely kill the debt off now just to have one less thing on my mind... but only as soon as I am stable (know where I am going to live, have enough to eat, and relatively sure that will continue in the future...)"}
{"id": "380415", "text": "I doubt it has to do with the check though. Old people can be slow sometimes. I bet a younger person could write the check in a Reasonable amount of time. I lost my debt card a while back and needed groceries before I got my replacement it only added about a minute of transaction time for $200 in groceries which already takes a few minutes just to ring up."}
{"id": "380473", "text": "The main points shine a very bright light on the need for healthcare policy reform, FIR EVERYONE, not just the poor.   - Using a conservative de\ufb01nition, 62.1% of all US bankruptcies in 2007 were medical.  - Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations.  - Three-quarters **had health insurance**.  - Illness and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of US bankruptcies."}
{"id": "380759", "text": "Reinvestment creates a nightmare when it comes time to do taxes, sadly. Tons of annoying little transactions that happened automatically... Here's one article trying to answer your question: http://www.smartmoney.com/personal-finance/taxes/figuring-out-your-cost-basis-when-youve-lost-the-statements-9529/ You could also try this thing: http://www.gainskeeper.com/us/BasisProIndividual.aspx But I couldn't tell you if it would help. If it makes you feel better, brokerages are now required by the IRS to track your basis for you, so for new transactions and assets you shouldn't end up in this situation. Doesn't help with the old stuff ;-)"}
{"id": "380839", "text": "They're basing it off data from Seattle, [where a minimum wage increase was approved in 2015](http://www.seattle.gov/laborstandards/ordinances/minimum-wage), and has not been fully implemented yet (and won't be until 2021, although large employers will hit $15 before then).    Seems a bit premature to me."}
{"id": "381116", "text": "In general I'd advise you to do it the other way around in the future:   Know what your plan is and what you need for it *before* reaching out publicly. That way you can respond more quickly and answer questions more easily.   As for the meeting: you basically need to prepare three things.   1. What do you need to know when the meeting is over? 2. What can you offer the client? 3. What is a fair price for your time?  Under 1: What kind of website do they want? Do you have complete freedom, or do you have to work within their existing branding? Can you deliver what they're asking? For example, if they want a CMS to manage their portfolio, can you build that?  Under 2: What's your own portfolio like? What can you use to convince the client you have the capabilities to deliver what they're asking? (Note the difference with 1: that's if you can actually do it, this is if you can convince them of that fact).   Under 3: Determine what you'd find a fair hourly wage, so that during the meeting you can estimate what the total price should be and when you should consider backing out.   Finally you should consider what you'll do if you run into complications. As it's your first client, it's good to give it some thought ahead of time, but it probably won't come up during the meeting.  As for being convincing: if you get #2 right you should be confident that you can actually do what you promise. If your portfolio is limited, you can look up websites yourself for other interior designers before the meeting so that you can go over them with the client. Ask which elements the client does and doesn't like, summarize it in the end and affirm you can deliver something combining those things."}
{"id": "381268", "text": "I was emailing back and forth with a manager in a different department on how real returns are being calculated, and he said that the industry standard is 1 + real returns*(1+inflation) - fees, and to not use my formula because it can double count inflation, making fees lower. However, real returns are not observable in the future, and I do not why he uses that formula. The returns were used in an Excel spreadsheet.   What are your thoughts about this?"}
{"id": "381341", "text": "\"Banks often offer cash to people who open savings accounts in order to drive new business. Their gain is pretty much as you think, to grow their asset base. A survey released in 2008 by UK-based Age Concern declared that only 16% of the British population have ever switched their banks\u201a while 45% of marriages now end in divorce.  Yip, till death do most part. In the US, similar analysis is pointing to a decline in people moving banks from the typical rate of 15% annually. If people are unwilling to change banks then how much more difficult for online brokers to get customers to switch? TD Ameritrade is offering you 30 days commission-free and some cash (0.2% - 0.4% depending on the funds you invest).  Most people - especially those who use the opportunity to buy and hold - won't make much money for them, but it only takes a few more aggressive traders for them to gain overall. For financial institutions the question is straightforward: how much must they pay you to overcome your switching cost of changing institutions?  If that number is sufficiently smaller than what they feel they can make in profits on having your business then they will pay. EDIT TO ELABORATE: The mechanism by which any financial institution makes money by offering cash to customers is essentially one of the \"\"law of large numbers\"\".  If all you did is transfer in, say, $100,000, buy an ETF within the 30-day window (or any of the ongoing commission-free ones) and hold, then sell after a few years, they will probably lose money on you.  I imagine they expect that on a large number of people taking advantage of this offer.   Credit card companies are no different.  More than half of people pay their monthly credit balance without incurring any interest charges. They get 30 days of credit for free.  Everyone else makes the company a fortune. TD Ameritrade's fees are quite comprehensive outside of this special offer.  Besides transactional commissions, their value-added services include subscription fees, administration fees, transaction fees, a few extra-special value-added services and, then, when you wish to cash out and realise your returns, an outbound transfer fee. However, you're a captured market.  Since most people won't change their online brokers any more often than they'd change their bank, TD Ameritrade will be looking to offer you all sorts of new services and take commission on all of it. At most they spend $500-$600 to get you as a customer, or, to get you to transfer a lot more cash into their funds.  And they get to keep you for how long?  Ten years, maybe more?  You think they might be able to sell you a few big-ticket items in the interim? Maybe interest you in some subscription service? This isn't grocery shopping.  They can afford to think long-term.\""}
{"id": "381610", "text": "You're effectively looking for a mortgage for a new self-build house.  At the beginning, you should be able to get a mortgage based on the value of the land only.  They may be willing to lend more as the build progresses. Try to find a company that specializes in this sort of mortgage."}
{"id": "381757", "text": "\"You are conflating two different types of risk here.  First, you want to invest money, and presumably you're not looking at the \"\"lowest risk, lowest returns\"\" end of the spectrum. This is an inherently risky activity.  Second, you are in a principal-agent relationship with your advisor, and are exposed to the risk of your advisor not maximizing your profits. A lot has been written on principal-agent theory, and while incentive schemes exist, there is no optimal solution.  In your case, you hope that your agent will start maximizing your profits if they are 100% correlated with his profits. While this idea is true (at least according to standard economic theory, you could find exceptions in behavioral economics and in reality), it also forces the agent to participate in the first risk.  From the point of view of the agent, this does not make sense. He is looking to render services and receive income for it. An agent with integrity is certainly prepared to carry the risk of his own incompetence, just like Apple is prepared to replace your iPhone should it not start one day. But the agent is not prepared to carry additional risks such as the market risk, and should not be compelled to do so. It is your risk, a risk you personally take by deciding to play the investment gamble, and you cannot transfer it to somebody else.  Of course, what makes the situation here more difficult than the iPhone example is that market-driven losses cannot be easily distinguished from incompetent-agent losses. So, there is no setup in which you carry the market risk only and your agent carries the incompetence risk only. But as much as you want a solution in which the agent carries all risk, you probably won't find an agent willing to sign such a contract. So you have to simply accept that both the market risk and the incompetence risk are inherent to being an investor.  You can try to mitigate your own incompetence by having an advisor invest for you, but then you have to accept the risk of his incompetence. There is no way to depress the total incompetence risk to zero.\""}
{"id": "381813", "text": "I receive checks from my tenant. Also, from our medical reimbursement account. I'm sure there's an option somewhere to get that direct deposited, just haven't yet. My wife will write checks for school functions. Funny, they haven't cashed one since february, and this is the one item to look for every time I reconcile her account. A few select others don't take credit or debit cards. Our tailor (losing weight, needed pants pulled in), among others. The number of checks is surely down an order of magnitude over the years, but still not zero."}
{"id": "381830", "text": "The VAT number should be equivalent from the point of view of your client. The fact that you are a sole trader and not a limited liability doesn't matter when it comes down to pay VAT. They should pay the VAT to you and you will pay it to the government. I'll guess that their issue is with tax breaks, it is a bit more tricky to receive a tax break on paid taxes if you buy something abroad (at least it is here in Finland). If they won't pay you because of that, you could open a LTD or contract the services of a 'management company' which will do the job of invoicing, receiving the money and passing it back to you, for a fee."}
{"id": "381849", "text": "\"You sound like you know what you're talking about, but you say:  \"\"foreign buyers will laugh at them\"\"  But the Wall Street Journal, 9/20/12, says that in the last quarter FOREIGN INVESTORS ARE FLOCKING TO BUY JAPANESE BONDS IN RECORD LEVELS even though the yields are very much below other industrialized countries. LOL\""}
{"id": "381859", "text": "Show your Bank passbook, preferably signed one, to relevant money sender."}
{"id": "382236", "text": "\"The most common use of non-deductible Traditional IRA contributions these days, as JoeTaxpayer mentioned, is as an intermediate step in a \"\"backdoor Roth IRA contribution\"\" -- contribute to a Traditional IRA and then immediately convert it to a Roth IRA, which, if you had no previous pre-tax money in Traditional or other IRAs, is a tax-free process that achieves the same result as a regular Roth IRA contribution except that there are no income limits. (This is something you should consider since you are unable to directly contribute to a Roth IRA due to income limits.) Also, I want to note that your comparison is only true assuming you are holding tax-efficient assets, ones where you get taxed once at the end when you take it out. If you are holding tax-inefficient assets, like an interest-bearing CD or bond or a stock that regularly produces dividends, in a taxable account you would be taxed many times on that earnings, and that would be much worse than with the non-deductible Traditional IRA, where you would only be taxed once at the end when you take it out.\""}
{"id": "382286", "text": "Being a guarantor means you have explicitly agreed that you will make the loan payments if the primary borrower doesn't. That means you have given them permission to demand those payments, which means they can force you to sell things if you can't find the money any other way.  Essentially, you have promised to buy the loan from the bank if they decide it's a bad loan. Where you would find the money to pay for it is your problem. Obviously, this is not a situation you want to get into if you don't trust that the borrower will do everything in their power to protect you or repay you, or if you aren't willing to make them a gift of the money if they can't or don't, or if you can't afford to lend them the money yourself."}
{"id": "382295", "text": "Since you were a nonresident alien student on F-1 visa then you will be considered engaged in a trade or business in the USA. You must file Form 1040NR.  Here is the detailed instruction by IRS - http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Taxation-of-Nonresident-Aliens"}
{"id": "382384", "text": "\"Investing is always a matter of balancing risk vs reward, with the two being fairly strongly linked.  Risk-free assets generally keep up with inflation, if that; these days advice is that even in retirement you're going to want something with better eturns for at least part of your portfolio. A \"\"whole market\"\" strategy is a reasonable idea, but not well defined. You need to decide wheher/how to weight stocks vs bonds, for example, and short/long term. And you may want international or REIT in the mix; again the question is how much. Again, the tradeoff is trying to decide how much volatility and risk you are comfortable with and picking a mix which comes in somewhere around that point -- and noting which assets tend to move out of synch with each other (stock/bond is the classic example) to help tune that. The recommendation for higher risk/return when you have a longer horizon before you need the money comes from being able to tolerate more volatility early on when you have less at risk and more time to let the market recover. That lets you take a more aggressive position and, on average, ger higher returns. Over time, you generally want to dial that back (in the direction of lower-risk if not risk free) so a late blip doesn't cause you to lose too much of what you've already gained... but see above re \"\"risk free\"\". That's the theoretical answer. The practical answer is that running various strategies against both historical data and statistical simulations of what the market might do in the future suggests some specific distributions among the categories I've mentioned do seem to work better than others. (The mix I use -- which is basically a whole-market with weighting factors for the categories mentioned above -- was the result of starting with a general mix appropriate to my risk tolerance based on historical data, then checking it by running about 100 monte-carlo simulations of the market for the next 50 years.)\""}
{"id": "382415", "text": "\"There's not nearly enough information here for anyone to give you good advice. Additionally, /r/personalfinance will probably be a bit more relevant and helpful for what you're asking.   Aside from that, if you don't know what you're doing, stay out of currency trading and mutual funds. If you don't care about losing your money, go right ahead and play in some markets, but remember there are people paid millions of dollars/year who don't make consistent profit.   What are the chances a novice with no training will perform well?  My $.02, pay your debt, make a general theory about the economy a year from now (e.g. \"\"Things will be worse in Europe than they are now\"\") and then invest your money in an index fund that matches that goal (e.g. Some sort of Europe-Short investment vehicle). Reassess a year from now and don't stress about it.\""}
{"id": "382558", "text": "\"Short Answer: You're going to end up paying taxes on it. Despite the home being your primary residence, you don't meet the ownership test, and it isn't noted that you have had a change in employment, health, or other unforeseen circumstances that are \"\"forcing\"\" you to sell. Otherwise, you could qualify for a reduced maximum exclusion that might allow you to walk away without owing taxes, or with a reduced tax bill. You can't even do a 1031 exchange to re-invest into a new primary residence. You should check with a tax professional to see what adjustments you can make to the cost basis of the property to minimize your reported net profits. During the 5-year period prior to the sale, you must have: These periods do not necessarily have to coincide (You don't to live in it as your main house for 2 consecutive years, just 2 years worth of time of the last 5).\""}
{"id": "382657", "text": "Yes on the August expenses, No on the April; the expenses must have happened after the HSA was opened.  Also, note that you're limited to (in 2015) $3350 of deposits to the HSA in a single year, so you can only put $2350 more into the HSA. The IRS form for HSAs looks something like this:   1) How much money did you take from your HSA? 2) How much were your qualified medical expenses? 3) If (1) > (2), give us a bunch of money."}
{"id": "382764", "text": "This article is so dumb. Passive investors should be concerned about poor corporate governance just as much as anyone else. The whole point is that active investors are more hesitant to put their money into companies like snap. Inclusion into an index could lead to technical buying. By ensuring the bare minimum standard in terms of corporate governance, S&amp;P is actually protecting passive investors."}
{"id": "382908", "text": "Can I work on 1099 from my own company instead of on W2? The reason is   on W2 I can't deduct my commute, Health Insurance and some other   expenses while on 1099 I think I can able do that. Since I am going to   client place to work not at my own office, I am not sure whether I   should able to do that or not. If you have LLC, unless you elected to tax it as a corporation, you need neither 1099 nor W2. For tax purposes the LLC is disregarded. So it is, from tax perspective, a sole proprietorship (or partnership, if multiple members). Being a W2 employee of your own LLC is a bad idea. For all these above expenses, which can I use company's debit/credit   card or I need to use only my personal debit/credit card? It would be better to always use a business account for business purposes. Doesn't matter much for tax per se, but will make your life easier in case of an audit or a legal dispute (limited liability protection may depend on it). If I work on 1099, I guess I need to file some reasonable taxes on   quarterly basis instead of filing at year end. If so, how do I pay my   tax on quarterly basis to IRS? I mean which forms should I file and   how to pay tax? Unless you're a W2 employee, you need to do quarterly estimate payments using form 1040-ES. If you are a W2 employee (even for a different job, and even if it is not you, but your spouse with whom you're filing jointly) - you can adjust your/spouse's withholding using form W4 to cover the additional tax liability. This is, IMHO, a better way than paying estimates. There are numerous questions on this, search the site or ask another one for details."}
{"id": "383162", "text": "\"EDIT: It was System Disruption or Malfunctions August 24, 2015 2:12 PM EDT   Pursuant to Rule 11890(b) NASDAQ, on its own motion, in conjunction   with BATS, and FINRA has determined to cancel all trades in security   Blackrock Capital Investment. (Nasdaq: BKCC) at or below $5.86 that   were executed in NASDAQ between 09:38:00 and 09:46:00 ET. This   decision cannot be appealed. NASDAQ will be canceling trades on the   participants behalf. A person on Reddit claimed that he was the buyer. He used Robinhood, a $0 commission broker and start-up.  The canceled trades are reflected on CTA/UTP and the current charts will differ from the one posted below.  It is an undesired effect of the 5-minute Trading Halt.  It is not \"\"within 1 hour of opening, BKCC traded between $0.97 and $9.5\"\".  Those trades only occurred for a few seconds on two occasions.  One possible reason is that when the trading halt ended, there was a lot of Market Order to sell accumulated.  Refer to the following chart, where each candle represents a 10 second period. As you can see, the low prices did not \"\"sustain\"\" for hours.   And the published halts.\""}
{"id": "383287", "text": "The original post's $16 has two errors: Here is the first scenario: .                                                 Tax Liability($) on   Net .                        Cash    # of     Price    Paper     Realized   Value Time:                     ($)    Shares   ($/sh)   Profits    Profits    ($) 1. Start with:            100        -      n/a         -          -      100 2. After buy  10@10$/sh:    -       10       10         -          -      100 3. Before selling:          -       10       12        (5)         -      115 4. After sell 10@12$/sh:  120        -      n/a         -         (5)     115 5. After buy  12@10$/sh:    -       12       10         -         (5)     115 6. Before selling:          -       12       12        (6)        (5)     133 7. After sell 12@12$/sh:  144        -      n/a         -        (11)     133 8. After buy  14@10$/sh:    4       14       10         -        (11)     133 9. Before selling:          4       14       12        (7)       (11)     154 10.After sell 14@12$/sh:  172        -      n/a         -        (18)     154  At this point, assuming that all of the transactions occurred in the same fiscal year, and the realized profits were subject to a 25% short-term capital gains tax, you would owe $18 in taxes.  Yes, this is 25% of $172 - $100."}
{"id": "383863", "text": "some of that article is misleading, some of it is just plain wrong. Very wrong... like you end up drawing an incorrect conclusion type wrong.  Corporate transaction accounts, whose balances are up recently due to TAG (expires 12/31), are subject to reserve requirements.  When you purchase something with a credit card, the bank's asset of your credit increases and the bank's asset of cash decreases (it goes wherever you purchased).  There is no change to your deposit account and no change to reserves.  The incoming bank's cash account and liability account associated with that business transaction account increase, and it is trivial to transfer the % of cash necessary to reach minimum reserve requirements to the Fed.  Secondly, anyone with a smidgen of accounting can tell that his balance sheet won't balance."}
{"id": "383921", "text": "Based on what you've said I think buying a rental is risky for you. It looks like you heard that renting a house is profitable and Zillow supported that idea. Vague advice + a website designed for selling + large amounts of money = risky at the very least. That doesn't mean that rental property is super risky it just means that you haven't invested any time into learning the risks and how you can manage them. Once you learn that your risk reduces dramatically. In general though I feel that rental property has a good risk/reward ratio. If you're willing to put in the time and energy to learn the business then I'd encourage you to buy property. If you're not willing to do that then rentals will always be a crap shoot. One thing about investing in rental property is you have the ability to have more impact on your investment than you do dropping money in the stock market which is good and bad."}
{"id": "383978", "text": "To me it looks pretty good (10% per year is a pretty good return). Lagging behind the indexes is normal, it is hard to beat the indexes over a long period of time, the longer the period - the lesser the chances to succeed. However, half a year is a relatively short period of time, and you should check your investments a little bit deeper. I'm assuming you're not invested in one thing, so you should check per investment, how it is performing. If you have funds - check each fund against the relevant index for that fund, if you have stocks - check against the relevant industry indexes, etc. Also, check the fees you pay to each fund and the plan, they come out of your pocket, lowering the return."}
{"id": "384098", "text": "Your reasoning is backwards. As others have pointed out, you cannot just decide how much you charge irrespective of the market. Let me paraphrase a little economics 101 to underline why you also should not think like this: You can see a rental property like your house (the same reasoning is usually explained with the example of hotel rooms) as a series of perishable goods. Your house represents the potential sale of the January rent (which perishes once January is over), plus the February rent etc. Your approach was to compute the total costs (all fixed and variable costs of owning that house as well as costs associated to renting specifically) and average them over the time period so that you know how much to ask at least. Assuming that you are only looking to rent it out, not sell it or let a family member live there, you can't think like this. Most of those costs that you averaged are what economists call sunk costs. You have already incurred the mortgage costs and they are not affected by your decision to rent or not to rent. These costs are irrelevant to your decision making process. You only need to think about marginal costs: those additional costs that you have when you rent but not when you don't. Look at the market prices for renting similar properties in that region and compare them with your marginal costs. As long as they are higher than your marginal costs, rent it out. This does not mean that you are sure to make profits, but it means that you are sure to make less losses than in your only alternative of not renting."}
{"id": "384230", "text": "I agree with you but I will say that $25,000 would be an adequate down payment on a new home in many parts of the country so while it's not the equivalent of a mortgage it still delays home buying for graduates which is evident in the housing market weakness."}
{"id": "384345", "text": "The volume required to significantly move the price of a security depends completely on the orderbook for that particular security. There are a variety of different reasons and time periods that a security can be halted, this will depend a bit on which exchange you're dealing with. This link might help with the halt aspect of your question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trading_halt"}
{"id": "384371", "text": "There are banks that will do 5-year fixed. Alternatively, if you pay off a 15-year mortgage as if it were a five-year fixed, with the extra money going to pay down principal, the cost isn't very different and you have more safety buffer. Talk to banks about options, or find a mortgage broker who'd be willing to research this for you. Just to point out an alternative: refinancing at lower rate but without shortening the duration would lower your payments; investing the difference, even quite conservatively, is likely to produce more income than the loan would be costing you at today's rates. This is arguably the safest leveraged investment you'll ever have the opportunity to make. (I compromised: I cut my term from 20 years to 15ish, lowered the interest rate to 3.5ish, and am continuing to let the loaned money sit in my investments and grow.)"}
{"id": "384607", "text": "SPY does not reinvest dividends.  From the SPY prospectus: No Dividend Reinvestment Service  No dividend reinvestment service is   provided by the Trust. Broker-dealers, at their own discretion, may   offer a dividend reinvestment service under which additional Units are   purchased in the secondary market at current market prices. SPY pays out quarterly the dividends it receives (after deducting fees and expenses).  This is typical of ETFs. The SPY prospectus goes on to say: Distributions in cash that are reinvested in additional Units through   a dividend reinvestment service, if offered by an investor\u2019s   broker-dealer, will be taxable dividends to the same extent as if such   dividends had been received in cash."}
{"id": "384658", "text": "The loan is very likely to be syndicated, yes. I only state 7-10 because all of our loans to this point have been 7 year terms. And in many ways, this loan is just one of those loans, multiplied out in a modular sense."}
{"id": "384772", "text": "\"It would take an unusual situation.   They exercise certain types of option, which come in as regular income rather than capital gains, and are holding the stock \"\"long\"\" (perhaps they are not allowed to sell because of an insider-trading freeze window; like right before earnings announcements).  And then the stock tanks.  Their company is acquired.   They get stock options in their unicorn at $1/share, which blows up to $1000/share right as HugeFirm buys it. Options are swapped dollar-for-dollar for HugeFirm stock (at $250/share) so 4 shares for 1.   I heard this happened a lot in the 1999-2000 boom/bust.   And the problem was, this type of stock-option had historically only been offered to $20-million salary CEOs and CFO's, who retained professional legal and financial counsel and knew how to deal with the pitfalls and traps of this type of option.  During the dot-com boom, it was also offered to rank-and-file $50k salary tech employees who didn't even know the difference between a 401K and a Roth.   And it exploded in their faces, making a big mess for everyone including the IRS -- now struggling to justify to Congressmen why they were collecting $400,000 in taxes on entirely phantom, never-realized income from a 24 year old tech guy earning $29k at a startup and eating ramen.  When that poor guy never had a chance of understanding the financial rocks and shoals, and even if he did, couldn't have done anything about it (since he wasn't a high executive involved in the decisions).  And even the company who gave him the package didn't intend to inflict this on him.  It was a mistake.  Even the IRS dislikes no-win situations.   Some laws got changed, some practices got changed, etc. etc., and the problem isn't what it used to be.\""}
{"id": "384850", "text": "\"My Broker and probably many Brokers provide this information in a table format under \"\"Course of Sale\"\". It provides the time, price and volume of each trade on that day. You could also view this data on a chart in some charting programs. Just set the interval to \"\"Tick by Tick\"\" and look at the volume. \"\"Tick by Tick\"\" will basically place a mark for every trade that is taken and then the volume will tell you the size of that trade.\""}
{"id": "385013", "text": "Yes and i told you that bitcoin could also be perceived as valuable too, like seashells did in the past.   Personally, i think bitcoin has value because it is a giant money laundering scheme. All the big players are investing into it because they need to funnel their drug money."}
{"id": "385080", "text": "\"A good answer to the question really depends on where you want to live, ultimately. Where you want to live pretty much dictates your investment priorities. If you want to invest in \"\"terrain\"\" so you can build a house next to all the \"\"cool,\"\" people in Guayaquil that should be your first priority. Your new wife may have an opinion on that matter, you should consult her. In real life, most people are less concerned about their absolute level of wealth than with \"\"keeping up\"\" with their friends, or other reference group. If you don't buy the \"\"terrain,\"\" the danger is that in five years, it may go up three, four, five times and be out of your reach, even if your other investments do well on the absolute standard.  While it's fairly easy to invest the equivalent of $250K in Ecuadorian land, it's hard to invest that much in Ecuadorian stocks. If you want to buy stocks with that kind of money, it will be U.S., European, or maybe other Latin American, e.g., Brazilian stocks. That kind of asset allocation would tell me that you are thinking of leaving your country at some point. If you're \"\"undecided,\"\" a sensible allocation might be 50-50. But in any event, first decide how you want to live your life, then adopt the investment strategy that best supports that life.\""}
{"id": "385095", "text": "\"I primarily intend to add on to WBT's answer, which is good. It has been shown that \"\"momentum\"\" is a very real, tangible factor in stock returns. Stocks that have done well tend to keep doing well; stocks that are doing poorly tend to keep doing poorly. For a long-term value investor, of course fundamental valuation should be your first thing to look at - but as long as you're comfortable with the company's price as compared to its value, you should absolutely hang onto it if it's been going up. The old saying on Wall Street is \"\"Cut your losses, and let your winners ride.\"\" As WBT said, there may be some tangible emotional benefit to marking your win while you're ahead and not risking that it tanks, but I'd say the odds are in your favor. If an undervalued company starts rising in stock price, maybe that means the market is starting to recognize it for the deal it is. Hang onto it and enjoy the fruits of your research.\""}
{"id": "385130", "text": "The purpose is to be a racket. Assuming you're in the same tax bracket, you pay exactly as much tax later as you would now. If you're in a higher bracket, you pay more! And even if you pay less (assuming they don't change tax law before you retire) you give up direct control of your assets in exchange for a promise which may not be honored."}
{"id": "385310", "text": "Let me restate question for clarity. Facts: Question: Are there any taxes for this transaction? Answer: (Added improvements provided by Eric) Generally No. Generally, it is not considered income until you sell and the sale price is greater than the purchase price. But with currency differences, there is an additional complication, section 988 rules apply. It could result in ordinary income or loss."}
{"id": "385600", "text": "For some ideas on investing priority guidelines, see Oversimplify it for me: the correct order of investing. Congratulations on being debt free!  My advice to you is to do what you can to remain debt free. You could certainly invest the money; it will earn much more over the long-term in a stock mutual fund than it would left in a savings account.  However, if you need any of this money in the next few years, it would be a shame if it lost money in the short-term. How much do you need to finish grad school?  Don't invest that money in the stock market, because you will need it over the next few years. Likewise, think about other expenses that are coming up.  Will your car need to be replaced in the next couple of years?  Will you have enough income to meet your living expenses while you are in grad school, or will you need some of this to money to help with that?   Finally, it would be good to keep some extra as an emergency fund, so you can easily pay for any unexpected expenses that come up. If you can make it through grad school debt free, you will be much better off than if you invest all the money but take out student loans in the process. After you've accounted for all of that, whatever is left of the money could definitely be invested.  If your goal is to start a retirement fund, an index mutual fund invested inside a Roth IRA is a great place to start."}
{"id": "385881", "text": "It's clearly a risk, but is it any different than investing in your own business? Yes, it is different.  If you own a business, you determine the path of the business.  You determine how much risk the business takes.  You can put in extra effort to try to make the business work.  You can choose to liquidate to preserve your capital.   If you invest without ownership, perhaps the founder retains a 50% plus one share stake, then whomever controls the business controls all those things.  So you have all the risks of owning the business (in terms of things going wrong) without the control to make things go right.  This makes investing in someone else's business inherently riskier.   Another problem that can occur is that you could find out that the business is fraudulent.  Or the business can become fraudulent.  Neither of those are risks if you are the business owner.  You won't defraud yourself.   Angel investing, that is to say investing in someone else's startup, is inherently risky.  This is why it is difficult to find investors, even though some startups go on to become fabulously wealthy (Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.).  Most startups fail.  They offer the possibility of great returns because it's really hard to determine which ones will fail and which will succeed.  Otherwise the business would just take out the same loan that Jane's getting, and leave Jane out of it."}
{"id": "386095", "text": "I have only been comfortable using my credit unions online bill payment system where the service they use already has the target in the database. When I enter the name of the company and the zip code from the bill, the system responds with the address that matches what is on the bill. In most cases the money is not sent via mail, but it is sent electronically. This eliminates the case of somebody finding the check. Though electronic delivery doesn't guarantee that I didn't type the wrong account number. When adding a new target, I like to pick those that also have an online system that I can check in a few days to make sure the money was received and properly credited. Recently a company failed to credit my account in a timely manner, my credit union actually noticed that the payment hadn't been cashed, and alerted me. I asked the credit union about mistakes, either by me or by them. They claimed that the payment is treated like any other check, and that if there was a problem the money could be pulled back, and my account credited with the funds. Your bank should have a disclosure document stating the risks and protections with the service."}
{"id": "386128", "text": "\"Have you ever tried adding up all your mortgage payments over the years? That sum, plus all the money that you put as a down payment (including various fees paid at closing) plus all the repair and maintenance work etc) is the amount that you have \"\"invested\"\" in your house. (Yes, you can account for mortgage interest deductions if you like to lower the total a bit).  Do you still feel that  you made a good \"\"investment\"\"?\""}
{"id": "386131", "text": "That's why I said you can do a weighted average and take into account other factors. The initial average calculation is just a simple, high level average to compare betas across different listings. For a more precise calculation you would have to weigh different factors."}
{"id": "386264", "text": "In general no, if you just have one employer and work there with the same salary for the whole year.  Typically an employer does tax withholding by extrapolating your monthly income to the entire year and withholding the right amount so that at the end, what is withheld is what you owe.  It's not a surprise to them when your income crosses a tax bracket threshold, because they knew how much they were paying you and knew when you would cross into another bracket, so they factored that in. If you have multiple jobs or only worked for part of the year, or if your income varied from month to month (e.g., you got a raise) there could be a discrepancy between what is withheld and what you owe, because each employer only knows about what it's paying you, not what money you may have earned from other sources.  (Even here, though, the discrepancy wouldn't be due to the tax brackets per se.)  You can adjust your withholdings on form W-4 if needed, to tell the employer to withhold more or less than they otherwise would."}
{"id": "386487", "text": "This would otherwise be a comment, but I wish to share an image. A stock I happened to own, gapped up on the open to $9.20 and slowly worked its way down to $8.19 where it closed up 6% but near its low for the day.  This is an addendum to my comment above, warning about buying a stock on the open when news is coming out. Or more important, to be mindful of that news and the impact it might have on the stock. In this case, when the news came out and the stock had closed at $7.73, one would need to decide if he wished to buy it at any cost, or place a limit order.  I've redacted the name of the company, as this discussion has nothing to do with any particular stock, I'm just offering an example of the effect I warned about, three weeks ago. (Full disclosure, I got out at $8.70 in the first minutes of trading.)"}
{"id": "386567", "text": "Here in Germany there is a special case. I am studying (and working a little on the side) and still receiving child benefits from the state which is like 190\u20ac/m. Because I am getting this I don't have to pay tuition which is 1k/y. If my side income would get over the boundary (which is like 9k/y) I would lose those benefits (~3.3k) and would have to pay insurance myself (I dont know how much that would be. 50-100/m I guess.) So getting a raise from 8k to 10k sounds nice as it is a 25% raise, but it actually means getting less."}
{"id": "386818", "text": "This is a state by state thing, and I'm cheating because I know you are in New York State:"}
{"id": "386994", "text": "The main reason for paying your mortgage off quickly is to reduce risk should a crisis happen.  If you don't have a house payment, you have much higher cash flow every month, and your day-to-day living expenses are much lower, so if an illness or job loss happens, you'll be in a much better position to handle it. You should have a good emergency fund in place before throwing extra money at the mortgage so that you can cover the bigger surprises that come along. There is the argument that paying off your mortgage ties up cash that could be used for other things, but you need to be honest with yourself: would you really invest that money at a high enough rate of return to make up your mortgage interest rate after taxes?  Or would you spend it on other things?  If you do invest it, how certain are you of that rate of return?  Paying off the mortgage saves you your mortgage interest rate guaranteed. Finally, there is the more intangible aspect of what it feels like to be completely debt free with no payments whatsoever.  That feeling can be a game-changer for people, and it can free you up to do things that you could never do when you're saddled with a mortgage payment every month."}
{"id": "387010", "text": "\"New York will want to you to pay taxes on income from \"\"New York sources\"\". I'm not sure what this means to a freelance web developer.  If your wife is doing freelance web development under the same business entity as she did in New York (ie. a New York sole proprietor, corporation, etc), you probably do need to file. From nonresident tax form manual: http://tax.ny.gov/pdf/2011/inc/it203i_2011.pdf If you were a nonresident of New York State, you are subject to New   York State tax on income you received from New York State sources in   2011. If you were a resident of New York State for only part of 2011, you are subject to New York State tax on all income you received while   you were a resident of the state and on income you received from New   York State sources while  you were a nonresident.  To compute the amount of tax due, use Form IT-203, Nonresident and   Part-Year Resident Income Tax Return. You will compute a base tax as   if you were a full-year  resident, then determine the percentage of   your income that is subject to New York State tax and the amount of   tax apportioned to New York State.\""}
{"id": "387030", "text": "While the other answers are good, I wanted to expand a little on why I feel a ROTH is a bad way to go unless you are young. First, let's pretend you have a 25% tax rate. And your investments will go up 5% per year for 10 years. You contribute 6% of income for one year. You can do a traditional or a roth 401k/IRA. Here's the math: Traditional: 6% of income invested. Grows at 5% for 10 years. Taxed at 25% on withdrawl. = (Income * 6%) * (1.05 ^ 10) * (100% - 25%) = (Income * 6%) * 1.63 * .75 = 7.33% of your original income - but this is after taxes ROTH: Taxes taken out of income. Then 6% of that goes into the fund(s). Still grows at 5% for 10 years. Not taxed at withdrawl. = (Income * (100% - 25%) * 6%) * (1.05 ^ 10) = (Income * 75% * 6%) * 1.63 = 7.33% of your original income - again this is after taxes. Look familiar? They are the same. It's the simple transitive property of mathematics. So why do a traditional vs. a ROTH? The reason is that your tax bracket changes. This changes because your income changes. Say when you retire you plan to have your home or vehicle paid for. You expect to be able to live on $50,000 per year. This means when you make MORE than $50,000 you should do a traditional plan and when you make less than this you should do a ROTH plan. Example: You make $100,000 and your upper bracket is now 30%. You save 30% by doing a traditional and then pay back 10, 20, and 30% as you withdraw a salary of $50,000. Traditional = better. Example: You make $30,000 annually. Your upper bracket is 20%. You pay 20% on a roth. Then you withdraw funds to get to $50,000 anually and never pay the higher bracket. Roth = better. ROTH advocates typically bring up tax rates. Of course they will go up they insist. So you always should do a ROTH. Not so fast. Taxes have gone down in recent years (No one please start a political debate with me. Some went up, some went down, but overall, federal income rates dropped). Even if taxes rose 5%, a traditional will still be better than a ROTH in many cases."}
{"id": "387035", "text": "Your gain is $1408. The difference between 32% of your gain and 15% of your gain is $236.36 or $1.60 per share. If you sell now, you have $3957.44 after taxes.  Forget about the ESPP for a moment. Are you be willing to wager $4000 on the proposition that your company's stock price won't go down more than $1.60 or so over the next 18 months? I've never felt it was worth it. Also, I never thought it made much sense to own any of my employer's stock. If their business does poorly, I'd prefer not to have both my job and my money at risk. If you sell now: Now assuming you hold for 18 months, pay 15% capital gains tax, and the stock price drops by $1.60 to $23.40:"}
{"id": "387071", "text": "Only one plan is reliable - be offspring of boss.  It's your failure if you didn't plan sufficiently.  Failure is guaranteed, otherwise.    (understand, I'm assuming you want to be paid a living wage.  the other options already being proposed don't provide that function)"}
{"id": "387273", "text": "Look into commodities futures & options. Unfortunately, they are not trivial instruments."}
{"id": "387338", "text": "With a Roth IRA, you can withdraw the contributions at any time without penalty as long as you don't withdraw the earnings/interest. There are some circumstances where you can withdraw the earnings such as disability (and maybe first home). Also, the Roth IRA doesn't need to go through your employer and I wouldn't do it through your employer. I have mine setup through Fidelity though I'm not sure if they have any guaranteed 3% return unless it was a CD. All of mine is in stocks. Your wife could also setup a Roth IRA so over 2 years, you could contribute $20,000. If I was you, I would just max out any 403-b matches (which you surely are at 25% of gross income) and then save my down payment money in a normal money market/savings account. You are doing good contributing almost 25% to the 403-b. There are also some income limitations on Roth IRAs. I believe for a married couple, it is $160k."}
{"id": "387573", "text": "Many of the Financial intermediaries in the business, have extraordinary high requirements for opening an account. For example to open an account in Credit Suisse  one will need 1 million US dollars."}
{"id": "387715", "text": "Buying is not always better than renting, even if you aren't mobile! That depends on local market conditions.  If you're investing the money reasonably you may do as well as or better than the house-buyer, and your funds will be tremendously more liquid."}
{"id": "387886", "text": "You have stumbled upon a classic trading strategy known as the carry trade. Theoretically you'd expect the exchange rate to move against you enough to make this a bad investment. In reality this doesn't happen (on average). There are even ETFs that automate the process for you (and get better transaction costs and lending/borrowing rates than you ever could): DBV and ICI."}
{"id": "388036", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/dc-economics-experts-too-much-dc--not-enough-economics?E) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; California has spent the last several decades taxing just about every business in their state - out of their state.  &gt; Rather than lobby those awful states for better tax policy - The Retailers lobbied DC for worse.  &gt; &amp;quot;Republicans should abandon the so-called border-adjustable tax. A border tax is a poison pill for the tax plan: It divides the very business groups that the party needs to rally behind tax reform. Retailers like Walmart will never go along.\"\"   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6goal1/dc_economics_experts_too_much_dc_not_enough/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~141896 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **tax**^#1 **state**^#2 **business**^#3 **Rather**^#4 **reform**^#5\""}
{"id": "388396", "text": "\"Yes I thought his flow charts did a nice job with a complex system.  Some thoughts:  * he makes the \"\"if your house ran a blah blah blah\"\".  That is a horrible analogy to make for an economy.  * He quotes the revenue to debt ratio as if it is static.  We are spending much more now then we traditionally do at the same times as revenues are lower than historic levels.  Ratios change over time.  * Either he chooses to ignore, or doesn't know, that a lot of the issues with the PIIGS comes from the aggressive use of derivative products to clean their books for the joining of the EU.  Like his ARM example, now the rates have changed and those trades have moved against the sovereigns.   * His lists the outcome of current monetary policy as binary.  Either we inflate to infinity, and the world explodes, or we default and the world explodes.  One outcome that comes to my mind is that we ease out of aggressive capital injection and move through this liquidity issue.  We then pay back our debt and live on.  I am sure there are many other outcomes  * Almost all the problems seemed to be supply side ideas.  \"\"banks just won't lend\"\".  I would argue banks and even corporations have cash, but lack demand for NPV positive projects and thus are sitting on it.  And or they are waiting for things to play out so they can invest with better certainty.  * I thought his discussion on Current accounts was very good.  We also need to remember in many of these countries you have weak and corrupt tax systems which make it hard to fund your way out of these issues.   I only point these things out for others who may watch the video and want some counter points to what the speaker says.\""}
{"id": "388704", "text": "\"Generally if you're a sole S-Corp employee - it is hard to explain how the S-Corp earned more money than your work is worth. So it is reasonable that all the S-Corp profits would be pouring into your salary. Especially when the amounts are below the FICA SS limits when separating salary and distributions are a clear sign of FICA tax evasion. So while it is hard to say if you're going to be subject to audit, my bet is that if you are - the IRS will claim that you underpaid yourself. One of the more recent cases dealing with this issue is Watson v Commissioner. In this case, Watson (through his S-Corp which he solely owned) received distributions from a company in the amounts of ~400K. He drew 24K as salary, and the rest as distributions. The IRS forced re-characterizing distributions into salary up to 93K (the then-SS portion of the FICA limit), and the courts affirmed. Worth noting, that Watson didn't do all the work himself, and that was the reason that some of the income was allowed to be considered distribution. That wouldn't hold in a case where the sole shareholder was the only revenue producer, and that is exactly my point. I feel that it is important to add another paragraph about Nolo, newspaper articles, and charlatans on the Internet. YOU CANNOT RELY ON THEM. You cannot defend your position against IRS by saying \"\"But the article on Nolo said I can not pay SE taxes on my earnings!\"\", you cannot say \"\"Some guy called littleadv lost an argument with some other guy called Ben Miller because Ben Miller was saying what everyone wants to hear\"\", and you can definitely not say \"\"But I don't want to pay taxes!\"\". There's law, there are legal precedents. When some guy on the Internet tells you exactly what you want to hear - beware. Many times when it is too good to be true - it is in fact not true. Many these articles are written by people who are interested in clients/business. By the time you get to them - you're already in deep trouble and will pay them to fix it. They don't care that their own \"\"advice\"\" got you into that trouble, because it is always written in generic enough terms that they can say \"\"Oh, but it doesn't apply to your specific situation\"\". That's the main problem with these free advice - they are worth exactly what you paid for them. When you actually pay your CPA/Attorney - they'll have to take responsibility over their advice. Then suddenly they become cautious. Suddenly they start mentioning precedents and rulings telling you to not do things. Or not, and try and play the audit roulette, but these types are long gone when you get caught.\""}
{"id": "388713", "text": "As a new (very!) small business, the IRS has lots of advice and information for you. Start at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed and be sure you have several pots of coffee or other appropriate aid against somnolence.  By default a single-member LLC is 'disregarded' for tax purposes (at least for Federal, and generally states follow Federal although I don't know Mass. specifically), although it does have other effects. If you go this route you simply include the business income and expenses on Schedule C as part of your individual return on 1040, and the net SE income is included along with your other income (if any) in computing your tax. TurboTax or similar software should handle this for you, although you may need a premium version that costs a little more.  You can 'elect' to have the LLC taxed as a corporation by filing form 8832, see https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/limited-liability-company-llc . In principle you are supposed to do this when the entity is 'formed', but in practice AIUI if you do it by the end of the year they won't care at all, and if you do it after the end of the year but before or with your first affected return you qualify for automatic 'relief'. However, deciding how to divide the business income/profits into 'reasonable pay' to yourself versus 'dividends' is more complicated, and filling out corporation tax returns in addition to your individual return (which is still required) is more work, in addition to the work and cost of filing and reporting the LLC itself to your state of choice. Unless/until you make something like $50k-100k a year this probably isn't worth it. 1099 Reporting. Stripe qualifies as a 'payment network' and under a recent law payment networks must annually report to IRS (and copy to you) on form 1099-K if your account exceeds certain thresholds; see https://support.stripe.com/questions/will-i-receive-a-1099-k-and-what-do-i-do-with-it  . Note you are still legally required to report and pay tax on your SE income even if you aren't covered by 1099-K (or other) reporting. Self-employment tax. As a self-employed person (if the LLC is disregarded) you have to pay 'SE' tax that is effectively equivalent to the 'FICA' taxes that would be paid by your employer and you as an employee combined. This is 12.4% for Social Security unless/until your total earned income exceeds a cap (for 2017 $127,200, adjusted yearly for inflation), and 2.9% for Medicare with no limit (plus 'Additional Medicare' tax if you exceed a higher threshold and it isn't 'repealed and replaced'). If the LLC elects corporation status it has to pay you reasonable wages for your services, and withhold+pay FICA on those wages like any other employer. Estimated payments. You are required to pay most of your individual income tax, and SE tax if applicable, during the year (generally 90% of your tax or your tax minus $1,000 whichever is less). Most wage-earners don't notice this because it happens automatically through payroll withholding, but as self-employed you are responsible for making sufficient and timely estimated payments, and will owe a penalty if you don't. However, since this is your first year you may have a 'safe harbor'; if you also have income from an employer (reported on W-2, with withholding) and that withholding is sufficent to pay last year's tax, then you are exempt from the 'underpayment' penalty for this year.  If you elect corporation status then the corporation (which is really just you) must always make timely payments of withheld amounts, according to one of several different schedules that may apply depending on the amounts; I believe it also must make estimated payments for its own liability, if any, but I'm not familiar with that part."}
{"id": "388718", "text": "\"I'm not sure what you expect in terms of answers, but it depends on personal factors. It pretty well has to depend on personal factors, since otherwise everyone would want to do the same thing (either everyone thinks the current price is one to sell at, or everyone thinks it's one to buy at), and there would be no trades. You wouldn't be able to do what you want, except on the liquidity provided by market makers. Once that's hit, the price is shifting quickly, so your calculation will change quickly too. Purely in terms of maximising expected value taking into account the time value of money, it's all about the same. The market \"\"should\"\" already know everything you know, which means that one time to sell is as good as any other. The current price is generally below the expected acquisition price because there's a chance the deal will fall through and the stock price will plummet. That's not to say there aren't clever \"\"sure-fire\"\" trading strategies around acquisitions, but they're certain to be based on more than just timing when to sell an existing holding of stock. If you have information that the market doesn't (and assuming it is legal to do so) then you trade based on that information. If you know something the market doesn't that's going to be good for price, hold. If you know something that will reduce the price, sell now. And \"\"know\"\" can be used in a loose sense, if you have a strong opinion against the market then you might like to invest based on that. Nothing beats being paid for being right. Finally, bear in mind that expected return is not the same as utility. You have your own investment goals and your own view of risk. If you're more risk-averse than the market then you might prefer to sell now rather than wait for the acquisition. If you're more risk-prone than the market then you might prefer a 90% chance of $1 to 90c. That's fine, hold the stock. The extreme case of this is that you might have a fixed sum at which you will definitely sell up, put everything into the most secure investments you can find, and retire to the Caribbean. If that's the case then you become totally risk-averse the instant your holding crosses that line. Sell and order cocktails.\""}
{"id": "388745", "text": "Why did she say that? If you followed the worksheet and that's the number you calculated - go with it. I'm guessing you're getting the child credit for both kids, right? If so - 8 makes sense. Make sure you have withholding of at least the amount of tax you owed last year to avoid penalties (if this year you end up owing more, that is)."}
{"id": "388754", "text": "\"The question you are asking concerns the exercise of a short option position.  The other replies do not appear to address this situation. Suppose that Apple is trading at $96 and you sell a put option with a strike price of $95 for some future delivery date - say August 2016.  The option contract is for 100 shares and you sell the contract for a premium of $3.20. When you sell the option your account will be credited with the premium and debited with the broker commission.  The premium you receive will be $320 = 100 x $3.20.  The commission you pay will depend on you broker. Now suppose that the price of Apple drops to $90 and your option is exercised, either on expiry or prior to expiry.  Then you would be obliged to take delivery of 100 Apple shares at the contracted option strike price of $95 costing you $9,500 plus broker commission.  If you immediately sell the Apple shares you have purchased under your contract obligations, then assuming you sell the shares at the current market price of $90 you would realise a loss of $500 ( = 100x($95-$90) )plus commission.  Since you received a premium of $320 when you sold the put option, your net loss would be $500-$320 = $180 plus any commissions paid to your broker. Now let's look at the case of selling a call option.  Again assume that the price of Apple is $96 and you sell a call option for 100 shares with a strike price of $97 for a premium of $3.60.  The premium you receive would be $360 = 100 x $3.60.  You would also be debited for commission by your broker. Now suppose that the price of Apple shares rises to $101 and your option is exercised.  Then you would be obliged to deliver 100 Apple shares to the party exercising the option at the contracted strike price of $97.  If you did not own the shares to effect delivery, then you would need to purchase those shares in the market at the current market price of $101, and then sell them to the party exercising the option at the strike price of $97.  This would realise an immediate loss of $400 = 100 x ($101-$97) plus any  commission payable.  If you did own the shares, then you would simply deliver them and possibly pay some commission or a delivery fee to your broker.  Since you received $360 when you sold the option, your net loss would be $40 = $400-$360 plus any commission and fees payable to the broker. It is important to understand that in addition to these accounting items, short option positions carry with them a \"\"margin\"\" requirement.  You will need to maintain a margin deposit to show \"\"good faith\"\" so long as the short option position is open.  If the option you have sold moves against you, then you will be called upon to put up extra margin to cover any potential losses.\""}
{"id": "389004", "text": "Pool their money into my own brokerage account and simply split the gains/losses proportional to the amount of money that we've each   contributed to the account. I'm wary of this approach due to the tax   implications and perhaps other legal issues so I'd appreciate   community insight here. You're right to be wary. You might run into gift tax issues, as well as income tax liability and appropriation of earnings. Not a good idea at all. Don't do this. Have them set up their own brokerage account and have them give me the   login credentials and I manage the investments for them. This is   obviously the best approach from a tracking and tax perspective, but   harder for me to manage; to be honest I'm already spending more time   than I want to managing my own investments, so option 1 really appeals   to me if the drawbacks aren't prohibitive. That would also require you to be a licensed financial adviser, at least to the best of my understanding. Otherwise there's a lot of issues with potential liability (if you make investments that lose money - you might be required to repay the losses). You should do this only with a proper legal and tax advice - from an attorney and/or CPA/EA licensed in your state. There are proper ways to do this (limited partnership or LLC, for example), but you have to cover your ass-ets with proper operating agreements in place that have to be reviewed by legal counsel of each of the members/partners,"}
{"id": "389032", "text": "The value of a business without proven profits is really just a guess.  But to determine what % ownership the VC takes some measure must be used.  He is asking the OP to start the negotiations.  So you start high - higher than you will settle for. The value of the business should always be WAY more the $$ you have put into it ... because you have also invested your time (which has an opportunity cost) and assumed huge risk that you will never get those $$ back.   When you need the cash and only one person will give it to you, you are over a barrel.  You either take the terms they offer, or you let the business collapse.  So keep a show of strength and invent other funders. Or create a business plan showing that you can continue without their $$ (just at a smaller volume)."}
{"id": "389221", "text": "I've got a card that I've had for about 25 years now.  The only time they charged me interest I showed it was their goof (the automatic payment failed because of their mistake) and they haven't cancelled it.  No annual fee, a bit of cash back. The only cards I've ever had an issuer close are ones I didn't use."}
{"id": "389281", "text": "As you are 14, you cannot legally buy premium bonds yourself. Your parents could buy them and hold them for you, mind you. That said, I'm not a fan of premium bonds. They are a rather weird combination of a savings account and a lottery. Most likely, you'll receive far less than the standard interest rate you'd get from a savings account. Sure, they may pay off, but they probably won't. What I would suggest, given that you expect to need the money in five years, is simply place it in a savings account. Shop around for the best interest rate you can find. This article lists interest rates, though you'll want to confirm that it is up to date. There are other investment options. You could invest in a mutual fund which tracks the stock market or the bond market, for example. On average, that'll give you a higher rate of return. But there's more risk, and as you want the money in five years, I'd be uncomfortable recommending that at this time. If you were looking at investing for 25 years, that'd be a no-brainer. But it's a bit risky for 5 years. Your investment may go down, and that's not something I'd have been happy with when I was 14. There may be some other options specific to the UK which I don't know about. If so, hopefully someone else will chime in."}
{"id": "389347", "text": "As other people have said, a few thousand dollars isn't going to make any significant difference in what you pay - if you put an extra 1% down, and redraw all the documents accordingly, your payments are going to be roughly 1% less per month.  So, for example, $1800 per month would become $1780 or so per month.   You're much better off keeping the money as an emergency fund: When you buy a house, there are a lot of things that can go wrong (as is the case with your car, if you have one, and with medical expenses, and helping out a relative, not to mention losing your job, and so on).  It doesn't sound like you have all that much money, because if you did, you would have put 20% down and avoided Private Mortgage Insurance, saving yourself a lot more money than 1%. So having a few more thousand in the bank sounds like a good thing."}
{"id": "389446", "text": "Before starting to do this, make sure that you are squeaky clean in all aspects of your tax preparation and are prepared to back up any claims that you make with documentation. Home office deductions are a huge red flag that often trigger audits. Follow mbhunter's advice and be incredibly meticulous about following the rules and keeping records."}
{"id": "389562", "text": "If the period is consistent for company X, but occurs in a different month as Company Y, it might be linked to the release of their annual report, or the payment of their annual dividend. Companies don't have to end their fiscal year near the end of the Calendar year, therefore these end of year events could occur in any month. The annual report could cause investors to react to the hard numbers of the report compared to what wall street experts have been predicting. The payment of an annual dividend will also cause a direct drop in the price of the stock when the payment is made. There will also be some movement in prices as the payment date approaches."}
{"id": "389953", "text": "I have seen this happen with IRS checks, the bank told me that the IRS imposes the requirement.  Otherwise, though, I have frequently deposited checks made out to my wife into a joint checking account without her signature, they have never cared one bit."}
{"id": "390368", "text": "As a sole proprietor, the tax liability of your business is calculated based on combining your business income with your personal income together.  It is good advice to keep all personal and business financial matters separate. This makes it easier to prove to the IRS that all your business expenses are actually business related. In this case however, the two items [tax payment for personal income vs tax payment for business income] are inseparable. What you can do, however, for your own personal records, is calculate how much of your tax payment relates to your business. I wouldn't get complicated about this; I would simply take the net income of your business as a % of your taxable income, and multiply that against your tax payment. ie: if your business net income is $10,000, and your total taxable income is $50,000, and you paid $6,000 in taxes, I would record that 20% of the $6k was related to business income. If you have a separate bank account for your sole proprietorship, you could make a transfer to your personal account of $1,200, and then make the $6k payment from your personal account. Remember that tax payments for either your sole proprietorship and your personal income will be treated the same: federal tax payments are not tax deductible, and state tax payments are tax deductible, whether they were paid for your sole proprietorship or the rest of your personal income. So even though this method is simplistic [for example, it doesn't factor in that different investment income types earned personally will have a lower rate than your sole proprietorship income], any difference wouldn't have an impact on any future tax liability. This would only be for your own personal record keeping."}
{"id": "390435", "text": "If you itemize your deductions then the interest that you pay on your primary residence is tax deductible. Also realestate tax is also deductible. Both go on Schedule A. The car payment is not tax deductible.  You will want to be careful about claiming business deduction for home  or car. The IRS has very strict rules and if you have any personal use you can disqualify the deduction. For the car you often need to use the mileage reimbursement rates. If you use the car exclusively for work, then a lease may make more sense as you can expense the lease payment whereas with the car you need to follow the depreciation schedule.  If you are looking to claim business expense of car or home, it would be a very good idea to get professional tax advice to ensure that you do not run afoul of the IRS."}
{"id": "390598", "text": "Since recent changes to credit scoring (July 2017) it may not be necassary to do this, as more emphasis is placed on having a timely payment history and less emphasis is placed on having a low credit utilization ratio. Using what\u2019s known as trended data is the biggest change. The phrase   means credit scores will take into account the trajectory of a   borrower\u2019s debts on a month-to-month basis. In fact, having a low credit utilization ratio may even negatively effect you (if your available credit line value is high): ... VantageScore will now mark a borrower negatively for having   excessively large credit card limits, on the theory that the person   could run up a high credit card debt quickly. Those who have prime   credit scores may be hurt the most, since they are most likely to have   multiple cards open. But those who like to play the credit card   rewards program points game could be affected as well. source"}
{"id": "390614", "text": "If they charge a fee to accept an item, it's reasonable to assume the item has insignificant value, so the only tax-deductible bit would be the money you donated to their charity. What you describe sounds like a fee for service, not a charitable donation. The organization should provide a fee breakdown to show what percentage (if any) of the fee is a deductible contribution. There could be some additional PA-only tax benefit, but I didn't come across anything in my brief search."}
{"id": "390655", "text": "Pay the debt down. Any kind of debt equals risk. No debt equals no risk and a better chance to have that money earn you income down the road once it's invested. That and you will sleep so much better knowing you have ZERO debt. You 6 month emergency fund is probably good. Remember to keep it at 6 months living expenses (restaurants don't count as living expenses)."}
{"id": "390667", "text": "That's the way society works. I pay for my local schools (both in CA and OK). I'm okay with that because it is the kind of society I want to live in. I also pay a fuckload for the military. I'm not sure I'm getting good value for those payments."}
{"id": "390864", "text": "I sold it at 609.25 and buy again at 608.75 in the same day If you Sold and bought the same day, it would be considered as intra-day trade. Profit will be due and would be taxed at normal tax brackets. Edits Best Consult a CA. This is covered under Indian Accounting Standard AG51 The following examples illustrate the application of the derecognition principles of this Standard.   (e)  Wash sale transaction. The repurchase of a financial asset shortly after it has been sold is sometimes referred to as a wash sale. Such a repurchase does not preclude derecognition provided that the original transaction met the derecognition requirements. However, if an agreement to sell a financial asset is entered into concurrently with an agreement to repurchase the same asset at a fixed price or the sale price plus a lender's return, then the asset is not derecognised. This is more relevant now for shares/stocks as Long Term Capital Gains are tax free, Long Term Capital Loss cannot be adjusted against anything. Short Term Gains are taxed differentially. Hence the transaction can be interpreted as tax evasion, professional advise is recommended. A simple way to avoid this situation; sell on a given day and buy it next or few days later."}
{"id": "391243", "text": "\"Almost everyone needs an insurance, you should also probably buy it. If you are good at planning [which it seems from your question], you should stick to Pure \"\"Term\"\" insurance and avoid any other types / variants of CVLI.  CVLI is only advisable if one cannot commit to investing or is not good at saving money, or one feels that one loses money in Term Insurance. Otherwise term insurance is best.\""}
{"id": "391463", "text": "Short Answer: Go to the bank and ask them about your options for opening a business account. Talk to an attorney about the paperwork and company structure and taxes. Long Answer: You and your buddies jointly own an unincorporated business. This is called a partnership. Yes, there is paperwork involved in doing it properly and the fact that you guys are minors might complicate that paperwork a little bit. In terms of what type of account to open: A business account! Running a business through a personal account (joint or otherwise) is a sure way to get that account shut down. Your bank will want to know the structure of the business, and will require documentation to support that. For a partnership, they will probably want a copy of the partnership agreement. For an LLC, they'll probably want a copy of the filing with Ohio Secretary of State as well as the operating agreement etc. That said, pop into a local bank and ask a business banker directly what you should do. They deal with new businesses all the time, and would probably be best qualified to help you figure out the bank account aspect of it. Regarding business structure... this really impacts a lot more than just the type of bank account to open and how you file your taxes. It is something you guys should really discuss with an attorney. What happens if down the road one of you quits? What happens if you want to bring in a new partner later?  What if there is a disagreement about something?  These are all things that the attorney can help you address ahead of time - which is a heck of a lot easier (and cheaper) than trying to figure it out later. You're brining in enough that you should certainly be able to buy a couple hours of a lawyer's time. Getting the formation stuff right could save all of you a lot of money and heartache later."}
{"id": "391515", "text": "\"Note that the series you are showing is the historical spot index (what you would pay to be long the index today), not the history of the futures quotes. It's like looking at the current price of a stock or commodity (like oil) versus the futures price.  The prompt futures quote will be different that the spot quote. If you graphed the history of the prompt future you might notice the discontinuity more. How do you determine when to roll from one contract to the other? Many data providers will give you a time series for the \"\"prompt\"\" contract history, which will automatically roll to the next expiring contract for you.  Some even provide 2nd prompt, etc. time series.  If that is not available, you'd have to query multiple futures contracts and interleave them based on the expiry rules, which should be publicly available. Also is there not a price difference from the contract which is expiring and the one that is being rolled forward to? Yes, since the time to delivery is extended by ~30 days when you roll to the next contract. but yet there are no sudden price discontinuities in the charts. Well, there are, but it could be indistinguishable from the normal volatility of the time series.\""}
{"id": "391550", "text": "\"I am assuming that there is some arbitrary law preventing ordinary people from investing... because I have never seen a guaranteed 6% ROI YOY in my entire life.  Talk about the 1% of the 1%... lucky bastards!  Banks are puplicly traded corporations... what's stopping an investment company from creating a \"\"fake\"\" bank that takes investments from regular people and invests those into the federal reserve?  Returning 5.99% per year to their shareholders?\""}
{"id": "391605", "text": "\"Should I invest the money I don't need immediately and only withdraw it next year when I need it for living expenses or should I simply leave it in my current account? This might come as a bit of a surprise, but your money is already invested. We talk of investment vehicles. An investment vehicle is basically a place where you can put money and have it either earn a return, or be able to get it back later, or both. (The neither case is generally called \"\"spending\"\".) There are also investment classes which are things like cash, stocks, bonds, precious metals, etc.: different things that you can buy within an investment vehicle. You currently have the money in a bank account. Bank accounts currently earn very low interest rates, but they are also very liquid and very secure (in the sense of being certain that you will get the principal back). Now, when you talk about \"\"investing the money\"\", you are probably thinking of moving it from where it is currently sitting earning next to no return, to somewhere it can earn a somewhat higher return. And that's fine, but you should keep in mind that you aren't really investing it in that case, only moving it. The key to deciding about an asset allocation (how much of your money to put into what investment classes) is your investment horizon. The investment horizon is simply for how long you plan on letting the money remain where you put it. For money that you do not expect to touch for more than five years, common advice is to put it in the stock market. This is simply because in the long term, historically, the stock market has outperformed most other investment classes when looking at return versus risk (volatility). However, money that you expect to need sooner than that is often recommended against putting it in the stock market. The reason for this is that the stock market is volatile -- the value of your investment can fluctuate, and there's always the risk that it will be down when you need the money. If you don't need the money within several years, you can ride that out; but if you need the money within the next year, you might not have time to ride out the dip in the stock market! So, for money that you are going to need soon, you should be looking for less volatile investment classes. Bonds are generally less volatile than stocks, with government bonds generally being less volatile than corporate bonds. Bank accounts are even less volatile, coming in at practically zero volatility, but also have much lower expected rates of return. For the money that you need within a year, I would recommend against any volatile investment class. In other words, you might take whichever part you don't need within a year and put in bonds (except for what you don't foresee needing within the next half decade or more, which you can put in stocks), then put the remainder in a simple high-yield deposit-insured savings account. It won't earn much, but you will be basically guaranteed that the money will still be there when you want it in a year. For the money you put into bonds and stocks, find low-cost index mutual funds or exchange-traded funds to do so. You cannot predict the future rate of return of any investment, but you can predict the cost of the investment with a high degree of accuracy. Hence, for any given investment class, strive to minimize cost, as doing so is likely to lead to better return on investment over time. It's extremely rare to find higher-cost alternatives that are actually worth it in the long term.\""}
{"id": "391619", "text": "It would be unusual but it is possible that the expenses could be very high compared to your income. The IRS in pub 529 explains the deduction. You can deduct only unreimbursed employee expenses that are: Paid or incurred during your tax year, For carrying on your trade or business of being an employee, and Ordinary and necessary. An expense is ordinary if it is common and accepted in your trade,   business, or profession. An expense is necessary if it is appropriate   and helpful to your business. An expense doesn't have to be required   to be considered necessary. The next part lists examples. I have cut the list down to highlight ones that could be large. You may be able to deduct the following items as unreimbursed employee   expenses. Damages paid to a former employer for breach of an employment contract. Job search expenses in your present occupation. Legal fees related to your job. Licenses and regulatory fees. Malpractice insurance premiums. Research expenses of a college professor. Rural mail carriers' vehicle expenses. Tools and supplies used in your work. Work clothes and uniforms if required and not suitable for everyday use. Work-related education. If the term of employment was only part of the year, one or more of the these could dwarf your income for the year. Before deducting something that large be sure you can document it. I believe the IRS computers would flag the return and I wouldn't be surprised if they ask for additional proof."}
{"id": "391752", "text": "After searching a bit and talking to some investment advisors in India I got below information. So thought of posting it so that others can get benefited. This is specific to indian mutual funds, not sure whether this is same for other markets. Even currency used for examples is also indian rupee. A mutual fund generally offers two schemes: dividend and growth. The dividend option does not re-invest the profits made by the fund though its investments. Instead, it is given to the investor from time to time. In the growth scheme, all profits made by the fund are ploughed back into the scheme. This causes the NAV to rise over time. The impact on the NAV The NAV of the growth option will always be higher than that of the dividend option because money is going back into the scheme and not given to investors.  How does this impact us? We don't gain or lose per se by selecting any one scheme. Either we make the choice to get the money regularly (dividend) or at one go (growth). If we choose the growth option, we can make money by selling the units at a high NAV at a later date. If we choose the dividend option, we will get the money time and again as well as avail of a higher NAV (though the NAV here is not as high as that of a growth option). Say there is a fund with an NAV of Rs 18. It declares a dividend of 20%. This means it will pay 20% of the face value. The face value of a mutual fund unit is 10 (its NAV in this case is 18). So it will give us Rs 2 per unit. If we own 1,000 units of the fund, we will get Rs 2,000. Since it has paid Rs 2 per unit, the NAV will fall from Rs 18 to Rs 16. If we invest in the growth option, we can sell the units for Rs 18. If we invest in the dividend option, we can sell the units for Rs 16, since we already made a profit of Rs 2 per unit earlier. What we must know about dividends The dividend is not guaranteed. If a fund declared dividends twice last year, it does not mean it will do so again this year. We could get a dividend just once or we might not even get it this year. Remember, though, declaring a dividend is solely at the fund's discretion; the periodicity is not certain nor is the amount fixed."}
{"id": "391896", "text": "Your question is very widely scoped, making it difficult to reply to, but I can provide my thoughts on at least the following part of the question: I have a 401k plan with T. Rowe Price, should I use them for other investments too? Using your employer's decision, on which 401k provider they've chosen, as a basis for making your own decision on a broker for investing $100k when you don't even know what kind of investments you want seems relatively unwise to me, even if one of your focuses is simplicity.  That is, unless your $100k is tax-advantaged (e.g. an IRA or other 401k) and your drive for simplicity means you'd be happy to add $100k to any of your existing 401k investments.  In which case you should look into whether you can roll the $100k over into your employer's 401k program. For the rest of my answer, I'll assume the $100k is NOT tax-advantaged. I assume you're suggesting this idea because of some perceived bundling of the relationship and ease of dealing with one company & website?  Yes, they may be able to combine both accounts into a single login, and you may be able to interact with both accounts with the same basic interface, but that's about where the sharing will end.  And even those benefits aren't guaranteed.  For example, I still have a separate site to manage my money in my employer's 401k @ Fidelity than I do for my brokerage/banking accounts @ Fidelity.  The investment options aren't the same for the two types of accounts, so the interface for making and monitoring investments isn't either. And you won't be able to co-mingle funds between the 401k and non-tax-advantaged money anyway, so you'll have two different accounts to deal with even if you have a single provider.  Given that you'll have two different accounts, you might as well pick a broker/provider for the $100k that gives you the best investment options, lowest fees, and best UI experience for your chosen type/goal of investments. I would strongly recommend figuring out how you want to invest the $100k before trying to figure out which provider to use as a broker for doing the investment."}
{"id": "392041", "text": "\"Since these indices only try to follow VIX and don't have the underlying constituents (as the constituents don't really exist in most meaningful senses) they will always deviate from the exact numbers but should follow the general pattern. You're right, however, in stating that the graphs that you have presented are substantially different and look like the indices other than VIX are always decreasing. The problem with this analysis is that the basis of your graphs is different; they all start at different dates... We can fix this by putting them all on the same graph:  this shows that the funds did broadly follow VIX over the period (5 years) and this also encompasses a time when some of the funds started. The funds do decline faster than VIX from the beginning of 2012 onward and I had a theory for why so I grabbed a graph for that period. My theory was that, since volatility had fallen massively after the throes of the financial crisis there was less money to be made from betting on (investing in?) volatility and so the assets invested in the funds had fallen making them smaller in comparison to their 2011-2012 basis.  Here we see that the funds are again closely following VIX until the beginning of 2016 where they again diverged lower as volatility fell, probably again as a result of withdrawals of capital as VIX returns fell. A tighter graph may show this again as the gap seems to be narrowing as people look to bet on volatility due to recent events. So... if the funds are basically following VIX, why has VIX been falling consistently over this time? Increased certainty in the markets and a return to growth (or at least lower negative growth) in most economies, particularly western economies where the majority of market investment occurs, and a reduction in the risk of European countries defaulting, particularly Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain; the \"\"PIGS\"\" countries has resulted in lower volatility and a return to normal(ish) market conditions. In summary the funds are basically following VIX but their values are based on their underlying capital. This underlying capital has been falling as returns on volatility have been falling resulting in their diverging from VIX whilst broadly following it on the new basis.\""}
{"id": "392060", "text": "Every 90 days add an Initial Fraud Alert to each of the 3 major credit bureaus."}
{"id": "392285", "text": "\"Here is the way I would estimate your taxes.  Remember that a bi-weekly paycheck means that you get 26 paychecks per year. If the $1000 federal refund is too much for you, you can decrease your withholding to bring your refund down.  This can be done by increasing your exemptions claimed on your W-4.  See \"\"How can I adjust tax withholding so that I don't get a large Tax Refund?\"\" for more details. However, keep in mind that your state withholding is perfect right now, and if you increase your exemptions, you will likely owe tax to the state, unless you increase your state withholding at the same time.\""}
{"id": "392329", "text": "I already know of this method. I was creating a peer group and found 4-5 very similar companies, however one of them is a foreign public company with a subsidiary competing directly with a company I am trying to find the beta for. I guess I have to omit this company because it's strictly foreign?   Also, what do I do if I can't find any public companies that are similar to the company I am trying to value?"}
{"id": "392371", "text": "Does you job offer a retirement plan?  (401k, SIMPLE, etc)  Does your employer offer a match on contributions? Typically an employer will match what you put in, up to a certain percentage (e.g. 3%). So, say you contribute 3% of your paycheck into your retirement plan. If your employer mathes that, you've effectively contributed 6%. You've just doubled your money! The best thing a young professional can do is to contribute to your employer-matched retirement plan, up to the maximum amount they will match. You should do it immediately.  If not, you are leaving money on the table."}
{"id": "392484", "text": "You would report the overall income on your T1 general income tax return, and use form T2125 to report income and expenses for your business.  Form T2125 is like a mini income-statement where you report your gross revenue and subtract off expenses.  Being able to claim legitimate expenses as a deduction is an important tax benefit for businesses big and small. In terms of your second question, you generally need to register for a business number at least once you cross the threshold for GST / HST. If you earn $30,000/year (or spread over four consecutive quarters) then charging GST / HST is mandatory; see GST/HST Mandatory registration.  There are other conditions as well, but the threshold is the principal one. You can also register voluntarily for GST / HST even if you're below that threshold; see GST/HST Voluntary registration.  The advantage of registering voluntarily is that you can claim input tax credits (ITC) on any GST that your business pays, and remit only the difference.  That saves your business money, especially if you have a lot of expenses early on. Finally, in terms of Ontario specifically (saw that on your profile), you might want to check out Ontario Sole Proprietorship.  There are specific cases in which you need to register a business: e.g. specific types of businesses, or if you plan on doing business under a name other than your own. Finally, you may want to consider whether incorporating might be better for you.  Here's an interesting article that compares Sole Proprietorship Versus Incorporation.  Here's another article, Choosing a business structure, from the feds."}
{"id": "392503", "text": "Have you found a general contractor to rebuild your home? I would imagine that someone with a bit of expertise in the area is used to dealing with insurance companies, floating the money for a rebuild, and hitting the gates to receive payment for work accomplished.   Business are used to not receiving payment when work is accomplished and it is part of the risk of being in business.  They have to buy materials and pay employees with the expectation of payment in the future.  Much like workers go to work on a Monday for the work that day, three Friday's later, business often have to float costs but for longer periods of time. If you are looking to be your own general contractor then you will have to float the money on your own. The money should not be used for living expenses or mortgage payments, it should be used for down payments in order to get the work of rebuilding started."}
{"id": "392649", "text": "So why not talk to your employer, and ask them to pay you in gold dust? Then when tax time comes, just convert some gold dust into the amount of USD in taxes you owe.   Of course, you'd have to find farmers and shoemakers and electronic stores willing to accept payment in gold dust as well..."}
{"id": "392752", "text": "\"Why? Simply: because it has been mandated as law, and so you may have no choice in the matter whether to contribute or not. Quoting from GOV.UK \u2013 Workplace pensions: \u2018Automatic enrolment\u2019  A new law means that every employer must automatically enrol workers   into a workplace pension scheme if they: Next: even if you think you will work \"\"until you die\"\", you can still access the money saved in the pension scheme when you attain the required minimum age for withdrawals under your scheme. For instance, that may be age 55, but it may also vary by scheme. Becoming fully retired \u2014 as in stopping all work \u2014 is not a requirement to access retirement income from your pension scheme. In the eyes of a pension scheme, retirement is typically when you elect to take your income benefits according to the established rules of the scheme. Quoting from nidirect \u2013 Working past State Pension age: Continuing in work and your workplace pension  If you reached the age at which you can start claiming your workplace   pension scheme, you don't need to stop work in order to claim. You have   a number of options, including taking some of the pension you've built   up while continuing to work for the same employer. As to why things are set up this way: While some younger folk may, today, expect to continue working until death, for a variety of reasons that isn't always possible. Two typical such reasons are: disability, and involuntary unemployment (i.e. willing and able but still can't land the next job). Moreover, plans change. Young workers with health and vitality may expect they'll always feel invincible, but end up learning otherwise over time, and may come to appreciate the savings that were forced upon them. The \"\"forced savings\"\" aspect of state and state-sponsored pension schemes are meant to provide some safety net for those later years when it is a strong possibility that one can't continue to work. The alternative is to be a 100% burden on family and/or society.\""}
{"id": "392885", "text": "\"20-year Treasury Bonds are not equivalent to cash, not even close.  Even though the bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government, they are long-term debt and therefore their principal value will fluctuate considerably as market interest rates change. When interest rates rise, the market value of 20-year bonds will drop, and drop more than shorter-term bonds would.  Your principal is not protected in the short term.  Principal is only guaranteed returned at the 20-year maturity of those bonds.  But, oops, there is no maturity on the 20-year bond ETFs because every year the ETF rolls the 19-year positions into new 20-year positions! ;-) For an \"\"equivalent to cash\"\" piece of a portfolio, I'd want my principal to be intact over the short term, and continually reinvested at the higher short-term rates as rates are rising.  Reinvesting at short-term rates can be an inflation-hedge.  But, money locked in for 20-years is a sitting duck for inflation. Still, inflation aside, why do we want our \"\"equivalent to cash\"\" position to be relatively liquid and principal-protected? When it comes time to rebalance your portfolio after disastrous equity and/or bond returns, you've got in your cash component some excess weighting since it was unaffected by the disastrous performance. That excess cash is ready to be deployed to purchase equities and/or bonds at the lower current prices.  Rebalancing from cash can add a bonus to your returns and smooth volatility.  If you have no cash component and only equities and bonds, you have no money to deploy when both equities and bonds are depressed.  You didn't keep any powder dry.  And, BTW, I would personally keep a bit more than 3% of my powder dry. Consider a short-term cash deposit or good money-market fund for your \"\"equivalent to cash\"\" position.\""}
{"id": "392894", "text": "You can probably roll it over into the new company's 401k too, so just talk to your HR rep there.  I set up a separate Vangard IRA so when I changejobs or anything, I just dump my investments into that account and don't have to worry about keep track of them all over the place."}
{"id": "393009", "text": "Waiting for the next economic downturn probably isn't the best plan at this point. While it could happen tomorrow, you may end up waiting a long time. If you would prefer not to think much about your investment and just let them grow then mutual funds are a really good option. Make sure you research them before you buy into any and make sure to diversify, as in buy into a lot of different mutual funds that cover different parts of the market. If you want to be more active in investing then start researching the market and stick to industries you have  very good understanding of. It's tough to invest in a market you know nothing about. I'd suggest putting at least some of that into a retirement savings account for long term growth. Make sure you look at both your short term and long term goals. Letting an investment mature from age 20 through to retirement will net you plenty of compound interest but don't forget about your short term goals like possible cars, houses and families. Do as much research as you can and you will be fine!"}
{"id": "393031", "text": "You may want to start a company for a few reasons, the main one would be liability, you don't want your friend to drop a weight on a foot and sue you for millions taking your house away. You'd need to pay taxes on the income, that's after you pay all your expenses, bills, mortgage interest, insurance premiums (!), equipment depreciation. So it's going to be a lot less than you collect from your friends. Whether you incorporate or not you have to pay taxes on your income. If it's $200/year IRS may not notice that, if it's $20K a month it would be very hard to hide. If you pay your friends more than some amount (check the laws) you'd need to tell IRS about it (issue 1099-misc), then your friends must pay taxes on that income."}
{"id": "393090", "text": "would buying the stock of a REIT qualify as a 'Like-Kind' exchange? Short answer, no. Long answer, a 1031 (Starker) exchange only applies to real estate.  From the Wikipedia page on the topic: To qualify for Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, the properties exchanged must be held for productive use in a trade or business, or for investment. Stocks, bonds, and other properties are listed as expressly excluded by Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, although securitized properties are not excluded. A REIT, being stock in a real estate company, is excluded from Section 1031."}
{"id": "393101", "text": "\"There are a number of choices: I prefer Dilip's response \"\"Have you tried asking etrade?\"\" No offense, but questions about how a particular broker handles certain situations are best asked of the broker.  Last - one should never enter into any trade (especially options trades) without understanding the process in advance. I hope you are asking this before trading.\""}
{"id": "393464", "text": "\"&gt;\"\"Those measures all reflect a new way of measuring VaR though, one that switches the model from a four-year look to just one year, removing the rocky years of 2008 and 2009 from the current measure\"\"  VAR is a measure of how much money can be lost in a given time period within certain constraints. For most banks it is the maximum that can be lost within day in a 99% confidence interval. So in layman terms on average only 1 in 100 days will more money be lost than the VAR.   VAR is calculated using historical data. It uses the historical data to build up a profile of scenarios and probability of occurrence. Armed with the knowledge of how much is lost in each of these scenarios and the probability of it occurring a VAR can be estimated. MS have essentially stopped including the last 4 years since they are far more volatile and are only including the last year since it has been relatively calm. It is essentially cheating. It is choosing the data to fit your needs and is statistical heresy.\""}
{"id": "393483", "text": "Because the stock still has the same value as the money paid for it - you are just exchanging one asset for another (of course the stock value starts to change immediately, but for the accounting the fictional value is the buying price). For the accounting, it is similar to changing a 100$ bill in five 20$ bills - same value, still assets."}
{"id": "393580", "text": "&gt;But when share repurchases replace a company\u2019s research-and-development spending, that indicates its management is unable or unwilling to spend on innovation that could generate future earnings to shareholders.  I disagree. If we look at buybacks and r&amp;d purely as investments, a shorter term investment is lower in risk and return, while a longer term one is higher in risk. Of course, the same goes for respective returns. Knowing that research-to-market time for a drug is 5-12 years, and that buybacks are almost immediate returns, the 11% difference over ten years seems generous, not greedy.  I've read the same being said about marketing budgets being more than r&amp;d. Again, if the market doesn't have perfect flow of information, marketing become a need to survive. A smart CEO would never spend more on marketing than is necessary. It's the last cost a company bears on a product before booking a sale, and it's the last bite out of the profit."}
{"id": "393617", "text": "I did that.  What is allowed changes over time, though \u2014 leading up to the crisis, lenders would approve at the flimsiest evidence. In particular, my SO had only been in the country a couple years and was at a sweet spot where lack of history was no longer counting against her. Running the numbers, the mortgage was a fraction of a percent cheaper in her name than in mine.  Even though she used a \u201cstated income\u201d (self reported, not backed by job history) of the household, not just herself. The title was in her name, and would have cost money to have mine added later so we didn\u2019t.  This was in Texas, which is a \u201ccommunity property\u201d state so after marriage for sure everything is \u201cours\u201d."}
{"id": "393693", "text": "For the Roth the earnings: interest, dividends, capital gains distributions and capital gains are tax deferred. Which means that as long as the money stays inside of a Roth or is transferred/rolled over to another Roth there are no taxes due. In December many mutual funds distribute their gains. Let's say people invested in S&P500index fund receive a dividend of 1% of their account value. The investor in a non-retirement fund will be paying tax on that dividend in the Spring with their tax form. The Roth and IRA investors will not be paying tax on those dividends. The Roth investor never will, and the regular IRA investor will only pay taxes on it when they pull the money out."}
{"id": "393733", "text": "Wealthsimple lists their prices as follows: Those are the fees you pay over and above what you pay for the underlying ETFs' management fees. But why not just invest in the ETFs yourself? The Canadian Couch Potato website shows some sample portfolios. The ETF option has an average Management Expense Ratio very similar to that of the ETFs used by Wealthsimple, but without the additional management fee. Rebalance once or twice a year and you cut your fees from approximately 0.57% (if investing mid-six-figures) to 0.17%, for very little work. Is it worth it to you? Well, that depends on how much you have to invest, and how much effort you are willing to put in. Wealthsimple isn't particularly unreasonable with their fees, but the fees do look a bit high once you are in to the six figures of investing. On the other hand, I often recommend Tangerine's mutual funds to my friends who are looking at investing for retirement. Those mutual funds, last time I checked, cost 1.09%. That's about twice what Wealthsimple is charging. But they are easy to understand and easy to invest in; a good choice for my friends looking to invest $1,000 - $50,000 in my opinion. So, and understanding this is just my personal opinion, I think Wealthsimple fits in a niche where Tangerine mutual funds carry too high a cost for you, but you don't want to do all the management yourself, even if this is just an hour or so of work, a couple of times a year. I wish they were cheaper, but their pricing makes sense for a lot of people in my opinion. Do they make sense for you? If you are looking at investing less than $10,000, I'd stick with an option like Tangerine, only because that's an easier option. If investing more than $100,000 or $200,000, I think you are paying a bit much for what they offer. But, many people pay much, much, much more for their investments."}
{"id": "393842", "text": "I had a coworker whose stock picking skills were clearly in the 1% level. I had a few hundred shares of EMC, bought at $10. When my coworker bought at $80, I quietly sold as it spiked to $100. It then crashed, as did many high tech stocks, and my friend sold his shares close to the $4 bottom advising that the company would go under. So I backed up the truck at $5, which for me, at the time, meant 1000 shares. This was one of nearly 50 trades I made over a good 10 year period. He was loud enough to hear throughout the office, and his trades, whether buy or sell, were 100% wrong.  Individual stocks are very tough, as other posters have offered. That, combined with taking advice from those who probably had no business giving it.  For the record, I am semi-retired. Not from stock picks, but from budgeting 20% of income to savings, and being indexed (S&P) with 90% of the funds.  If there are options on your stock, you might sell calls for a few years, but that's a long term prospect. I'd sell and take my losses. Lesson learned. I hope."}
{"id": "393912", "text": "\"There is a difference between losing money in the market, and not knowing where the money is. Let's say he invested 2 billion into 1 stock, then that stock drops from $100 per share to $50 per share. Well that is documentable. Corzine claims he doesn't know what happened.   Haven't you ever seen \"\"It's A Wonderful Life\"\"?\""}
{"id": "393987", "text": "I use the following method. For each stock I hold long term, I have an individual table which records dates, purchases, sales, returns of cash, dividends, and way at the bottom, current value of the holding. Since I am not taking the income, and reinvesting across the portfolio, and XIRR won't take that into account, I build an additional column where I 'gross up' the future value up to today() of that dividend by the portfolio average yield at the date the dividend is received. The grossing up formula is divi*(1+portfolio average return%)^((today-dividend date-suitable delay to reinvest)/365.25) This is equivalent to a complex XMIRR computation but much simpler, and produces very accurate views of return.  The 'weighted combined' XIRR calculated across all holdings then agrees very nearly with the overall portfolio XIRR. I have done this for very along time.  TR1933 Yes, 1933 is my year of birth and still re investing divis!"}
{"id": "394093", "text": "\"I have seen the notation KTB written on documents in the place where you put an identifying number of some kind. It stands for Known to Branch and means the tellers recognize you. It's been written on documents of mine when I was depositing cheques large enough that someone else had to come and initial the transaction, and I presume that some people might have also had to show extra ID, but I didn't.  Just a month or so ago I was in line behind an old man at a branch where everyone has to put their card in and enter a pin to do transactions. I heard him tell the teller \"\"I don't have a card. Never did. Don't hold with that.\"\" Another teller came by and said something quietly to the teller (I presume it was \"\"that's old Mr Smith, we all know him\"\") and the transaction appears to have taken place without any ID being passed across the counter.  So yes, at least in Canada, if the tellers recognize you, the requirements for ID are less than you might think. It's a bit of a long con to spend 25 years going into a branch and conducting all your business under a particular name, just so you can do a transaction or two without ID, though :-)\""}
{"id": "394549", "text": "\"The company itself doesn't benefit. In most cases, it's an expense as the match that many offer is going to cost the company some percent of salary.  As Mike said, it's part of the benefit package. Vacation, medical, dental, cafeteria plans (i.e. both flexible spending and dependent care accounts, not food), stock options, employee stock purchase plans, defined contribution or defined benefit pension, and the 401(k) or 403(b) for teachers. Each and all of these are what one should look at when looking at \"\"total compensation\"\". You allude to the lack of choices in the 401(k) compared to other accounts. Noted. And that lack of choice should be part of your decision process as to how you choose to invest for retirement. If the fess/selection is bad enough, you need to be vocal about it and request a change. Bad choices + no match, and maybe the account should be avoided, else just deposit to the match.  Note - Keith thanks for catching and fixing one typo, I just caught another.\""}
{"id": "394702", "text": "Duration is the weighted average time until all the cash flows of a fixed income security are received. There are a few different measures of duration but generally, duration measures the sensitivity of the price of a fixed income asset to a change in the yield of that asset. If you're familiar with calculus, duration is the first derivative of price with respect to yield.  Convexity is the sensitivity of the duration of bond with respect to changes in yield, or the second derivative.   The first chart [here](http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/convexity.asp#axzz1x4F075zM) will help. Convexity measures the curvature of the blue or pink line, the steeper the curve the higher the convexity.   The more cash flows there are in a bond (higher or more frequent coupon) the lower the duration, because you are receiving more of your investment earlier as opposed to later (think time value of money). If a bond has one cash flow, meaning you get paid back only at maturity (zero coupon) then any changes in interest rates will have a greater impact on the price of the bond since you are discounting only one cash flow in the future. Think of buying a bond with no coupons and a 5% yield that matures in 5 years, or a bond with similar yield and maturity buy pays a coupon. If interest rates rise, the zero coupon bond's price will fall more than the bond with coupons. Why? Because if you own the zero coupon bond you have to wait 5 years to get your money back and reinvest it at the higher rate, while if you have the bond that pays coupons you can reinvest those incremental cash flows at the higher rate, even though at purchase they had the same yield and maturity.  These are both tough concepts that took me a fair amount of time to really understand. If you're investing in bonds or any fixed income asset, these topics are crucial to understanding interest rate risk."}
{"id": "394872", "text": "Yes, Lending Club is the biggest of the bunch, which to date have helped originate $1B of loans. LC just raised more money (bringing total to $100M) and Mary Meeker joined the board. There's a novelty aspect to it b/c it's new but it's just the beginning of parts of the banking industry/process/institutions being disintermediated.   Low vol is an easy sell, actually. If investors aren't being paid for risk, why assume it?"}
{"id": "394924", "text": "Interactive Brokers advertises the percent of profitable forex accounts for its own customers and for competitors. They say they have 46.9% profitable accounts which is higher than the other brokers listed. It's hard to say exactly how this data was compiled- but I think the main takeaway is that if a broker actually advertises that most accounts lose money, it is probably difficult to make money. It may be better for other securities because forex is considered a very tough market for retail traders to compete in.  https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/?f=%2Fen%2Ftrading%2Fpdfhighlights%2FPDF-Forex.php"}
{"id": "394961", "text": "\"at $8.50:  total profit = $120.00 *basis of stock, not paid in cash, so not included in \"\"total paid\"\" at $8.50: total profit = $75.00\""}
{"id": "395100", "text": "From the letter you link: Our performance, relatively, is likely to be better in a bear market than in a bull market so that   deductions made from the above results should be tempered by the fact that it was the type of year when we   should have done relatively well. In a year when the general market had a substantial advance I would be well   satisfied to match the advance of the Averages. Putting those two sentences together, the word relatively means that his funds perform better than the market in bear markets and perform about the same as the overall market in bull markets. It does not mean that absolute performance is better in bear markets than bull markets. Later on he states  This policy should lead to superior results in bear markets and average performance in bull markets."}
{"id": "395152", "text": "Sorry for your loss. Like others have said Debts cannot be inherited period (in the US). However, assets sometimes can be made to stand for debts. In most cases, credit card debt has no collateral and thus the credit card companies will often either sell the debt to a debt collector or collections agency, sue you for it, or write it off. Collecting often takes a lot of time and money, thus usually the credit card companies just sell the debt, to a debt collector who tries to get you to pay up before the statute of limitations runs out. That said, some credit card companies will sue the debtor to obtain a judgement, but many don't. In your case, I wouldn't tell them of your loss, let em do their homework, and waste time. Don't give them any info,and consult with a lawyer regarding your father's estate and whether his credit card will even matter. Often, unscrupulous debt collectors will say illegal things (per the FDCPA) to pressure anyone related to the debtor to pay. Don't cave in. Make sure you know your rights, and record all interactions/calls you have with them. You can sue them back for any FDCPA infractions, some attorneys might even take up such a case on contingency, i.e they get a portion of the FDCPA damages you collect. Don't pay even a penny. This often will extend or reset the statute of limitations time for the debt to be collectable. i.e Ex: If in your state, the statute of limitations for credit card debt is 3 years, and you pay them $0.01 on year 2, you just bought them 3 more years to be able to collect. TL;DR: IANAL, most credit card debt has no collateral so don't pay or give any info to the debt collectors. Anytime you pay it extends the statute of limitations. Consult an attorney for the estate matters, and if the debt collectors get too aggressive, and record their calls, and sue them back!"}
{"id": "395376", "text": "Withdrawing from your 401(k) may include a 10% withdrawal penalty. There are ways to avoid the withdrawal penalty for early disbursements. The idea is to reduce your interest expense by leveraging free loans (0% APR purchases). This will help you pay down your debt more.  If you have 0% APR on purchases, you can make purchases on things you already buy. Then use that money towards other debt, while making monthly payments on the 0% APR card. This way, you pay off the credit card before the 0% APR changes. You can then rinse and repeat on another 0% APR card offer. If your credit score is 800, you can do this multiple times. Citi Simplicity gives you 18 months 0% APR. Chase Slate and Chase Freedom gives you 15 months 0% APR. Others typically give you 12 months or less."}
{"id": "395379", "text": "I've kind of been there myself.  I stretched my finances for the deposit on a house, and lived off my credit card for a few months to build up what I was short on the deposit.  Add some unexpected car repairs, and I ended up with \u00a310k on the card.  The problem I had then was that interest on the card ran at around 20%, and although I could meet the interest payments I couldn't clear the \u00a310k. I simply went and talked to my bank.  In the UK there are some clear rules about banks giving customers a chance to restructure their debts.  That's the BANK doing it, not some shady loan-shark.  We went through my finances and established that in principle it was repayable.  So I got a 2-year unsecured loan at around 5%, cleared the card, and spent the next 2 years paying off a loan that I could afford.  My credit score is still aces. Forget the loan-sharks.  Talk to your bank.  If they're crap, talk to another bank.  If no bank is going to help you, consider bankrupcy as per advice above.  Debt restructuring companies are ALWAYS a con, no exceptions."}
{"id": "395483", "text": "\"Whether you do decide to go with a tax advisor or not, be sure to do some research on your own. When we moved to the US about 5 years ago, I did find the taxes here pretty complicated and confusing.  I went ahead and read up all different tax documents and did some calculations of my own before hiring a CPA (at that point, I just wanted a second opinion to make sure I got the calculations right). However, when the office of the CPA was finished with my taxes, I found they had made a mistake! When I went back to their office to point it out, the lady just shrugged, corrected her numbers on the form and said \"\"You seem to know a lot about this stuff already. Why are you here?\"\" I swore to never use them again - not this particular CPA at least. Now, I am not saying all CPAs are the same - some of them are pretty darn good at their job and know what they are doing. All I am saying is it helps to be prepared and know some basic stuff. Just don't go in all blind.  After all, they are also humans prone to mistakes and your taxes are your liability in the end.  My suggestion is to start with a good tool that supports tax filing for non-residents. Most of them provide a step-by-step QA based tool. As you go through the steps, Google each question you don't understand. It may take more time than hiring a tax advisor directly but in the end it will all be worth it.\""}
{"id": "395769", "text": "\"Auto loans are secured agains the car.  \"\"Signature\"\" loans, from a bank that knows and trusts you, are typically unsecured. Unsecured loans other than informal ones or these are fairly rare. Most lenders don't want to take the additional risk, or balance that risk with a high enough interest rate to make the unsecured loan unattractive.\""}
{"id": "395770", "text": "\"Unless you can make an agreement with your landlord, your credit is on the bubble in this situation and it may be difficult to get the landlord to void the terms of the original agreement in lieu of a new one. I was burned by a similar situation when I was in college. I rented an apartment with my then \"\"best friend\"\". I sent my half of the rent in on time and he consistently skipped out on his. My credit took a blow to the tune of the shared liability just the same. Seriously seek to work something out with the landlord because it sounds like if things continue as they are, whether you move out or not, your credit will take a hit.\""}
{"id": "395840", "text": "If you exceed the income limit for deducting a traditional IRA (which is very low if you are covered by a 401(k) ), then your IRA options are basically limited to a Roth IRA. The Cramer person probably meant to compare 401(k) and IRA from the same pre-/post-tax-ness, so i.e. Traditional 401(k) vs. Traditional IRA, or Roth 401(k) vs. Roth IRA. Comparing a Roth investment against a Traditional investment goes into a whole other topic that only confuses what is being discussed here. So if deducting a traditional IRA is ruled out, then I don't think Cramer's advice can be as simply applied regarding a Traditional 401(k). (However, by that logic, and since most people on 401(k) have Traditional 401(k), and if you are covered by a 401(k) then you cannot deduct a Traditional IRA unless you are super low income, that would mean Cramer's advice is not applicable in most situations. So I don't really know what to think here.)"}
{"id": "396066", "text": "Yes, if you can split your income up over multiple years it will be to your advantage over earning it all in one year.  The reasons are as you mentioned, you get to apply multiple deductions/credits/exemptions to the same income. Rather than just 1 standard deduction, you get to deduct 2 standard deductions, you can double the max saved in an IRA, you benefit more from any non-refundable credits etc. This is partly due to the fact that when you are filing your taxes in Year 1, you can't include anything from Year 2 since it hasn't happened yet. It doesn't make sense for the Government to take into account actions that may or may not happen when calculating your tax bill. There are factors where other year profit/loss can affect your tax liability, however as far as I know these are limited to businesses. Look into Loss Carry Forwarded/Back if you want to know more. Regarding the '30% simple rate', I think you are confusing something that is simple to say with something that is simple to implement.  Are we going to go change the rules on people who expected their mortgage deduction to continue? There are few ways I can think of that are more sure to cause home prices to plummet than to eliminate the Mortgage Interest Deduction. What about removing Student Loan Interest? Under a 30% 'simple' rate, what tools would the government use to encourage trade in specific areas? Will state income tax deduction also be removed? This is going to punish those in a state with a high income tax more than those in states without income tax. Those are all just 'common' deductions that affect a lot of people, you could easily say 'no' to all of them and just piss off a bunch of people, but what about selling stock though? I paid $100 for the stock and I sold it for $120, do I need to pay $36 tax on that because it is a 'simple' 30% tax rate or are we allowing the cost of goods sold deduction (it's called something else I believe when talking about stocks but it's the same idea?) What about if I travel for work to tutor individuals, can I deduct my mileage expenses? Do I need to pay 30% income tax on my earnings and principal from a Roth IRA? A lot of people have contributed to a Roth with the understanding that withdrawals will be tax free, changing those rules are punishing people for using vehicles intentionally created by the government. Are we going to go around and dismantle all non-profits that subsist entirely on tax-deductible donations? Do I need to pay taxes on the employer's cost of my health insurance? What about 401k's and IRA's? Being true to a 'simple' 30% tax will eliminate all 'benefits' from every job as you would need to pay taxes on the value of the benefits. I should mention that this isn't exactly too crazy, there was a relatively recent IRS publication about businesses needing to withhold taxes from their employees for the cost of company supplied food but I don't know if it was ultimately accepted. At the end of the day, the concept of simplifying the tax law isn't without merit, but realize that the complexities of tax law are there due to the complexities of life. The vast majority of tax laws were written for a reason other than to benefit special interests, and for that reason they cannot easily be ignored."}
{"id": "396107", "text": "Ok so Arbitrage?  I was looking specifically at the people who took this deal to the extreme taking the $5k and using the $10 giftcards to buy prepaid credit cards.  Would the better term would be positive-feedback loop, since the only constraint would be time and energy to the people exploit this deal.  Is there a financial term that fits this better?"}
{"id": "396180", "text": "\"I don't think its a taxable event since no income has been constructively received (talking about the RSU shareholders here). I believe you're right with the IRC 1033, and the basis of the RSU is the basis of the original stock option (probably zero). Edit: see below. However, once the stock becomes vested - then it is a taxable event (not when the cash is received, but when the chance of forfeiture diminishes, even if the employee doesn't sell the stock), and is an ordinary income, not capital. That is my understanding of the situation, do not consider it as a tax advice in any way. I gave it a bit more though and I don't think IRC 1033 is relevant. You're not doing any exchange or conversion here, because you didn't have anything to convert to begin with, and don't have anything after the \"\"conversion\"\". Your ISO's are forfeited and no longer available, basically - you treat them as you've never had them. What happened is that you've received RSU's, and you treat them as a regular RSU grant, based on its vesting schedule. The tax consequences are exactly as I described in my original response: you recognize ordinary income on the vested stocks, as they vest. Your basis is zero (i.e.: the whole FMV of the stock at the time of vesting is your ordinary income). It should also be reflected in your W2 accordingly.\""}
{"id": "396537", "text": "In general, the better advice I've heard is to spend only on things that matter to you and scrimp on the rest. It's an easy way to budget without having to stick to a strict set of rules. Otherwise keep 3-6 months of living expenses in liquid accounts (money market, savings) and invest the rest."}
{"id": "396617", "text": "\"&gt;Those \"\"resources\"\" are often employees  Yes labor is also a scarce resource. But just like other resources it needs to be used in a way that is most productive. If the govt spends $100k hiring two people to dig holes and then refill them, those two people are employed, but there is no production there. That $100k contributed to no productive growth and created no wealth for anyone. The two businessmen who did not get loans for their business would have to seek employment with another entrepreneur who could put their labor to more productive use.   &gt;No, only the base rate is set centrally.  Exactly, but the bank's rates are reliant on the federal funds rate\""}
{"id": "396768", "text": "I have ScottradeElite on my desktop. I have played around with it but no longer use it. The transactions that I make through Scottrade are more dependent on my goals for the securities than what the market is doing at the moment.  Keep in mind that there will always be others out there with better access to price changes than you. They also will have better hardware. We cannot beat them at their game."}
{"id": "396844", "text": "It depends on the sequence in which the order [bid and ask] were placed. Please read the below question to understand how the order are matched. How do exchanges match limit orders?"}
{"id": "396853", "text": "\"A \"\"true\"\" 0% loan is a losing proposition for the bank, that's true.  However when you look at actual \"\"0%\"\" loans they usually have some catches: There might also be late payment fees, prepayment penalties, and other clauses that make it a good deal on average to the bank.  Individual borrowers might be able to get away with \"\"free money\"\", but the bank does not look to make money on each loan, they look to make money on thousands of loans overall. For a retailer (including new car sellers). the actual financing costs will be baked into the sales price.  They will add, say, 10% to the sales price in exchange for an interest-free loan. They can also sell these loans to an investment bank or other entity, but they would be sold at a deep discount, so the difference will be made up in the sales price or other \"\"fees\"\". It's possible that they would just chalk it up to promotional discounts or customer acquisition costs, but it would not be a good practice on a large scale.\""}
{"id": "396933", "text": "I would say you are typical.  The way people are able to build their available credit, then subsequently build their average balances is buy building their credit score.  According to FICO your credit score is made up as follows: Given that you had no history, and only new credit you are pretty much lacking in all areas.  What the typical person does, is get a card, pay on it for 6 months and assuming good history will either get an automatic bump; or, they can request a credit limit increase. Credit score has nothing to do with wealth or income.  So even if you had 100K in the bank you would likely still be facing the same issue.  The bank that holds the money might make an exception. It is very easy to see how a college student can build to 2000 or more.  They start out with a $200 balance to a department store and in about 6 months they get a real CC with a 500 balance and one to a second department store.  Given at least a decent payment history, that limit could easily increase above 2500 and there could be more then one card open.   Along the lines of what littleadv says, the companies even welcome some late payments.  The fees are more lucrative and they can bump the interest rate.  All is good as long as the payments are made. Getting students and children involved with credit cards is a goal of the industry.  They can obtain an emotional attachment that goes beyond good business reasoning."}
{"id": "396974", "text": "The problem is very fundamental. Equity is traded on limit order books while fixed income is not. Meaning counterparty to counterparty, if you buy a bond off say barclays, chances are if you hit them for a price to sell it will be somewhat higher than the market as they do not want you to just take their money.  Putting fixed income on a limit order book could help however there may be fundamental liquidity problems on some smaller issues."}
{"id": "397081", "text": "Is the pay cycle every 2 weeks? So 30% each two week period is 1.3^26 = 917.33 or an APR of 91633%.  Loansharks charge less, I believe standard vig was 2%/week for good customers. Only 180% per year."}
{"id": "397313", "text": "As a dutch guy having lived in Canada for some time, and went down the the states a lot; I was extremely surprised how outdated your banking technology is.  A lot of mutations require me to physically visit a bank (often my specific branch), and I couldn't believe it when I saw that people still use cheques. Before I moved, I just remembered them from my very early childhood.  Get your shit together North America :)"}
{"id": "397340", "text": "So, my question is what is the limit below which I don't have to pay taxes while trading. I just invested $10. Do I have to pay taxes for this too? what are the slabs? Any income is subject to tax. That said, investing $10 will probably not generate much of income, even at the discount brokers most of it will be wasted on commissions... I am also having an assistantship. So is holding two sources of income legitimate? Thanks You can have as many sources of income as you want. Working is what is restricted when you're on a student visa. As long as you don't open a business as a day trader or start working for someone trading stocks - you're fine."}
{"id": "397445", "text": "\"That share class may not have a ticker symbol though \"\"Black Rock MSCI ACWI ex-US Index\"\" does have a ticker for \"\"Investor A\"\" shares that is BDOAX.  Some funds will have multiple share classes that is a way to have fees be applied in various ways.  Mutual fund classes would be the SEC document about this if you want a government source within the US around this. Something else to consider is that if you are investing in a \"\"Fund of funds\"\" is that there can be two layers of expense ratios to consider.  Vanguard is well-known for keeping its expenses low.\""}
{"id": "397449", "text": "You can keep your Mutual Funds. You have to communicate your new status to fund house.  The SIP can continue. Please note you have to convert the savings account to NRO account. Most banks would keep the account number same, else you have to revise SIP debit to new NRO account. From a tax point of view, it would be similar to resident status. Right now short term gains are taxed. There are quite a few other things you may need to do. Although dated, this is a good article. PS: Once you become resident alien in US for tax purposes, you are liable for taxes on global income."}
{"id": "397538", "text": "\"It can be difficult when all your disposable income is spoken for.  Your options depend on how good your credit is and how flexible your expenses are.  I don't have all the answers without more details (possibly not then).  However, couple of points of advice: Paying off that credit card debt (and not adding any more to it) is your #1 priority.  You should make minimum payments to every other debt until you have done that because the interest on it will kill you in the mean time.  It is always optimal to pay the maximum to your highest interest debt and minimum to all other debts. 11% doesn't sound very good on your house loan.  You may want to consider refinancing.  That is, if you can get a lower rate.  You may also want to get a longer term loan (if you have enough discipline to use the extra income to actually pay off your credit card and then the put it toward the house when the cards are paid off). Look at options to increase your income, at least temporarily.  Second jobs and such.  When your finances are more in order, you can back off. The debt \"\"trap\"\" is behavioral.  We humans tend to increase our spending until we can't any more.  But the reason we can't spend any more is that we have increased our debt until we have no flexible income.  Then we are stuck for a long time and have few options. The only way out (long term) is to change our habits so that we don't increase spending each time we pay down a debt or get an increase to our income.  Financial discipline is the only way to have financial security.  Almost always the first step is to pay off credit cards and stop maintaining a balance (always pay off every card at the end of each month).  Then start paying off other debts from highest interest rate to lowest. This is a hard challenge and one most of us face at some point in our lives.  Good luck!\""}
{"id": "398090", "text": "\"A few points Yes, as a rule, it is better to pay down high interest accounts first, as this will yield lower cost in the long run. Credit card balance transfers usually come at a cost (typically something like \"\"3% or $50, whichever is higher\"\").  So instead of transferring the debt, maybe try purchasing items with your card instead of cash, and using the cash to pay down the debt.  This has the added benefit of giving you points or cash back on the card (typically you won't get these for a balance transfer). Caveat: Only do this if you are very disciplined!  It is very easy to run up high CC balances and forget to save the cash. You should leave a bit of unused credit line on your credit cards in case of emergencies.  I'm doubting you can use your high interest loans in the same way.\""}
{"id": "398536", "text": "The short answer is no you can only deduct actual expenses. The long answer is that it would be impossible for the IRS to determine the value of your time and it would open the tax system to an enormous amount of fraud (think of being able to make up time spent or writing off time spent volunteering at a soup kitchen or any other charity). Now you can write off expenses you have involved in doing the work, equipment and supplies used to do the work along with any wages you paid an employee or contractor to do said work."}
{"id": "398805", "text": "\"Does her dad still have the records from those tax years? If so, I would suggest using those as a basis and if they're complete, just filing them directly. If we're talking about software recommendations, I would suggest GenuTax as it allows for completing returns all the way back to 2003 without buying separate versions. Alternatively, there are some no-cost options. See the Wikipedia entry Comparison of Canadian-tax preparation software for personal use. Look both at the \"\"Price\"\" column and at the \"\"Freebies\"\" column. You should start at 2006 and move forward so you can keep track of carry-forward amounts. I'm assuming your girlfriend had no balance owing from those years as she was a student so there's no penalty to worry about.\""}
{"id": "398856", "text": "\"Well, it's directly depositing money in your account, but Direct Deposit is something completely different: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_deposit Direct deposits are most commonly made by businesses in the payment of salaries and wages and for the payment of suppliers' accounts, but the facility can be used for payments for any purpose, such as payment of bills, taxes, and other government charges. Direct deposits are most commonly made by means of electronic funds transfers effected using online, mobile, and telephone banking systems but can also be effected by the physical deposit of money into the payee's bank account. Thus, since the purpose of DD is to eliminate checks, I'd say, \"\"no\"\", depositing cash directly into your account does not count as the requirement for one Direct Deposit within 90 days.\""}
{"id": "399083", "text": ""}
{"id": "399115", "text": "The $10,000 is not taxable to either of you, but the $500 is taxable income to you - and a deductible business expense for your friend."}
{"id": "399149", "text": "\"The article \"\"Best Stock Fund of the Decade: CGM Focus\"\" from the Wall Street Journal in 2009 describe the highest performing mutual fund in the USA between 2000 and 2009. The investor return in the fund (what the shareholders actually earned) was abysmal. Why? Because the fund was so volatile that investors panicked and bailed out, locking in losses instead of waiting them out. The reality is that almost any strategy will lead to success in investing, so long as it is actually followed. A strategy keeps you from making emotional or knee-jerk decisions. (BTW, beware of anyone selling you a strategy by telling you that everyone in the world is a failure except for the few special people who have the privilege of knowing their \"\"secrets.\"\") (Link removed, as it's gone dead)\""}
{"id": "399198", "text": "How and why is this considered fair (and/or legal)? Let's use an analogy.  The issue is not fairness, it is just the rules. The assets you own and the cash you receive are reported differently. If the rules don't make sense, I suggest you hire an adviser that can teach you and help you get the most out of your investments."}
{"id": "399199", "text": "I'm a CPA and former IRS agent and manager. Whether you are a cash or accrual basis taxpayer, you get to deduct the expense when your card is charged. Think of it this way: You are borrowing from the credit card company or bank that issued the credit card. You take that money to make a purchase of a product or service. You now have an expense and a liability to a third party. When you pay off the liability, you do not get to take a deduction. Your deduction is when you pay for the expense. Depending on what you purchased, you may have to capitalize it."}
{"id": "399406", "text": "\"I'm not sure if the rules in Canada and the US are the same. I'm as amazed as you are by the amounts of debts people have, but I can see how this credit can be extended. Generally, with good credit history and above average pay - it is not unheard of to get about $100K credit limit with a bunch of credit cards. What you do with that after that depends on your own ability to manage your finances and discipline. Good credit history is defined by paying your credit cards on time with at least minimum payment amount (which is way lower than the actual statement amount). Above average pay is $60K+. So you can easily have tons of debt, yet be considered \"\"low risk\"\" with good credit history. And that's the most lucrative market for the credit card issuers - people who do not default, but also have debt and pay interest.\""}
{"id": "399480", "text": "In fact, buybacks WERE often considered a vehicle for insider trading, especially prior to 1982.  For instance, Prior to the Reagan era, executives avoided buybacks due to fears that   they would be prosecuted for market manipulation. But under SEC Rule   10b-18, adopted in 1982, companies receive a \u201csafe harbor\u201d from market   manipulation liability on stock buybacks if they adhere to four   limitations: not engaging in buybacks at the beginning or end of the   trading day, using a single broker for the trades, purchasing shares   at the prevailing market price, and limiting the volume of buybacks to   25 percent of the average daily trading volume over the previous four   weeks."}
{"id": "399543", "text": "Does your employer provide a matching contribution to your 401k?  If so, contribute enough to the 401k that you can fully take advantage of the 401k match (e.g. if you employer matches 3% of your income, contribute 3% of your income).  It's free money, take advantage of it. Next up, max out your Roth IRA.  The limit is $5000 currently a year. After maxing your Roth, revisit your 401k.  You can contribute up to 16,500 per year. You savings account is a good place to keep a rainy day fund (do you have one?), but it lacks the tax advantages of a Roth IRA or 401k, so it is not really suitable for retirement savings (unless you have maxed out both your 401k and Roth IRA). Once you have take care of getting money into your 401k and Roth IRA accounts, the next step is investing it.  The specific investment options available to you will vary depending on who provides your retirement account(s), so these are general guidelines. Generally, you want to invest in higher-risk, higher-return investments when you are young.  This includes things like stocks and developing countries. As you get older (>30), you should look at moving some of your investments into things that less volatile.  Bond funds are the usual choice.  They tend to be safer than stocks (assuming you don't invest in Junk bonds), but your investment grows at a slower rate. Now this doesn't mean you immediately dump all of your stock and buy bonds.  Rather, it is a gradual transition over time.  As you get older and older, you gradually shift your investments to bond funds. A general rule of thumb I have seen: 100 - (YOUR AGE) = Percentage of your portfolio that should be in stocks Someone that is 30 would have 70% of their portfolio in stock, someone that is 40 would have 60% in stock, etc. As you get closer to retirement (50s-60s), you will want to start looking at investments that are more conservatie than bonds.  Start to look at fixed-income and money market funds."}
{"id": "399583", "text": "In a comment on this answer you asked  It's not clear to me why the ability to defer the gains would matter (since you never materially benefit until you actually sell) but the estate step up in basis is a great point! Could you describe a hypothetical exploitive scenario (utilizing a wash sale) in a little more detail?  This sounds like you still have the same question as originally, so I'll take a stab at answering with an example.   I sell some security for a $10,000 profit.  I then sell another security at a $10,000 loss and immediately rebuy.  So pay no taxes (without the rule).  Assuming a 15% rate, that's $1500 in savings which I realize immediately.  Next year, I sell that same security for a $20,000 profit over the $10,000 loss basis (so a $10,000 profit over my original purchase).  I sell and buy another security to pay no taxes.  In fact, I pay no taxes like this for fifty years as I live off my investments (and a pension or social security that uses up my tax deductions).  Then I die.  All my securities step up in basis to their current market value.  So I completely evade taxes on $500,000 in profits.  That's $75,000 in tax savings to make my heirs richer.  And they're already getting at least $500,000 worth of securities.   Especially consider the case where I sell a privately held security to a private buyer who then sells me back the same shares at the same price.   Don't think that $10,000 is enough?  Remember that you also get the original value.  But this also scales.  It could be $100,000 in gains as well, for $750,000 in tax savings over the fifty years.  That's at least $5 million of securities.   The effective result of this would be to make a 0% tax on capital gains for many rich people.   Worse, a poorer person can't do the same thing.  You need to have many investments to take advantage of this.  If a relatively poor person with two $500 investments tried this, that person would lose all the benefit in trading fees.  And of course such a person would run out of investments quickly.   Really poor people have $0 in investments, so this is totally impractical."}
{"id": "399762", "text": "VALIS Group Inc a new business on your own and defaulting on incorporating your business or being sued by a customer. Instead of being excited to start a new business, you will face difficulties as your personal assets could be taken away for fulfilling business expenses. However, if Incorporating your business, this nightmare can stay far away from you, as it alleviates personal liability as well as guards you as the corporate owner. also, has very friendly laws to incorporate a company and may require minimum documents and time period to complete company registration."}
{"id": "399838", "text": "OK, VERY glad you get that idea!  The problem with the ETF is: it's the monkeys-throwing-darts method. If the average (dollar-weighted) member stock in the ETF goes up, you win, but if half of them go under, and half succeed, over some time periods you will lose (and win over others).  I guess my POV is: if you can't do serious research into the expected success of an individual company, maybe it's too risky to even try betting on the whole group. YMMV. The problem with your investment plan is: you are depending on luck, and the assumption the group will increase in value over your investment period. I prefer research over hope."}
{"id": "399848", "text": "If this activity were to generate let's say 100K of profit, and the   other corporate activities also generate 100K of revenue, are there   any issues tax-wise I need to be concerned about? Yes. Having 25% or more of passive income in 3 consecutive years will invalidate your S-Corp status and you'll revert to C-Corp. Can I deduct normal business expenses from the straddles (which are   taxed as short term capital gains) profit? I don't believe you can. You can deduct investment expenses from the investment income. On your individual tax return it will balance out, but you cannot mix types of income/expense on the corporate return or K-1."}
{"id": "400009", "text": "Generally speaking, an interest-free loan will be tied to a specific purchase, and the lender will be paid something by the vendor. The only other likely scenario is an introductory offer to try to win longer-term more profitable business, such as an initial interest-free period on a credit card. Banks couldn't make money if all their loans were interest-free, unless they were getting paid by the vendors of whatever was being purchased with the money that was lent."}
{"id": "400016", "text": "While debt increases the likelihood and magnitude of a crash, speculation, excess supply and other market factors can result in crashes without requiring excessive debt. A popular counter example of crashes due to speculation is 16th century Dutch Tulip Mania.  The dot com bubble is a more recent example of a speculative crash. There were debt related issues for some companies and the run ups in stock prices were increased by leveraged traders, but the actual crash was the result of failures of start up companies to produce profits. While all tech stocks fell together, sound companies with products and profits survive today. As for recessions, they are simply periods of time with decreased economic activity. Recessions can be caused by financial crashes, decreased demand following a war, or supply shocks like the oil crisis in the 1970's. In summary, debt is simply a magnifier. It can increase profits just as easily as can increase losses. The real problems with crashes and recessions are often related to unfounded faith in increasing value and unexpected changes in demand."}
{"id": "400046", "text": "You forgot the biggest thing: Japan still controls its own currency and Greece does not.   If you don't control your currency, you have much more limited options when it comes to borrowing money. It is why US states can't borrow a lot of money, they all have to share the US dollar which no one state controls. So states are used to making cutbacks in hard times, but the Eurozone nations have not adopted this mindset.  Greece isn't in trouble because it borrowed too much, it's in trouble because it borrowed so much *and has to share the Euro*. Greece can't inflate its currency, so if they can't make a payment they default, no one wants to lend to a place that might default. If Greece had its own currency still there would be no currency crisis in Europe, just some inflation."}
{"id": "400119", "text": "Let me answer with an extreme example - I own the one single share of a company, and it's worth $1M. I issue 9 more shares, and find 9 people willing to pay $1M for each share. I know find my ownership dropped by 90%, and I am now a 10% owner of a business that was valued at $1M but with an additional $9M in the bank for expansion. (Total value now $10M) Obviously, this is a simplistic view, but no simpler than the suggestion that your company would dilute its shares 90% in one transaction."}
{"id": "400196", "text": "Almost all major no-load mutual fund families allow you to do the kind of thing you are talking about, however you may need an initial investment of between $1000 to $3000 depending on the fund.  Once you have it however, annual fee's are usually very little, and the fees to buy that companies funds are usually zero if it's a no-load company (Vanguard, TRowPrice, etc)  With the larger companies that means you have a pretty large selection of funds, but generally EACH fund has a minimum initial purchase, once that's met then you can buy additional amounts in small quantities without a problem. For someone on a smaller budget, many low cost brokers (ETrade as mentioned by Litteadv, Scottrade as mentioned by myself in another similar question today) allow you to start with smaller initial balances and have a small selection of funds or ETF's that you can trade from without commission.  In the case of Scottrade, they have like 15 ETF's that you can trade comission free.  Check with the various low cost brokerages such as ETrade, Scottrade, and TDAmeritrade, to see what their policies are, and what if any funds/ETF's they allow you to trade in without commissions. Keep in mind that for Mutual funds, there may still be a fund minimum initial investment that applies, be sure to check if that is the case or not.  The lack of any minimum investment makes ETF's a slightly more attractive option for someone who doesn't have the 'buy in' that many funds require."}
{"id": "400568", "text": "And it all depends what you are advertising. We target business owners and startups. I have yet to see a millennial as a client of ours.   Our CFO also pointed out some research found on LinkedIn pitying millenials unable to afford housing. Their age and choice living with parents is much larger by contrast, compared with previous generations. Many millenials wont pay rent, not because they can't, but they blow that money elsewhere for example on entertainment, electronic, or food they like as opposed to cooking, etc. so of course they can't. They learn their financial advice from each other. In some cases their word of mouth interaction with each other is depriving them more than the boomer paranoia spread has deprived baby boomers from taking certain risks."}
{"id": "400571", "text": "Fractional shares don't occur from Dividend Reinvestment Programs - residual credit is carried over until there is enough to purchase a whole share."}
{"id": "400620", "text": "\"Let's say you see a caf\u00e9. You're looking to buy a caf\u00e9 so you walk into one and ask the manager how much profit he makes in a year. He says $N and you walk out and think to yourself, \"\"I'd be willing to pay $500,000 for this caf\u00e9.\"\" You arrange to meet again to discuss purchasing the business (and he's looking for someone to purchase it).  You go into the store again the following day and the manager says, \"\"Sorry, I told you we make $N. I've checked the numbers and it's actually only $0.8N (20% lower than what you thought).\"\" Are you still willing to buy the caf\u00e9 for $500,000 as well? No, of course you're not.  I think that this is a sufficient analogy to public companies.\""}
{"id": "400631", "text": "\"Be mindful of your reporting requirements. Besides checking the box on Schedule B of your 1040 that you have a foreign bank account, you also need to file a TD F 90-22.1 FBAR report for any year that the total of all foreign bank accounts reaches a value of $10,000 at any time during the year. This is filed separately from your 1040 by June 30 of the following year. Penalties for violating this reporting requirement are draconian, in some cases exceeding the amount of money in the foreign bank account. This penalty has been levied on people who have been reporting and paying tax on the interest on their foreign bank accounts, and merely neglected this separate report filing. Article on the \"\"shoot the jaywalker\"\" punitive enforcement policy. http://www.rothcpa.com/archives/006866.php Mariette IRS Circular 230 Notice: Please note that any tax advice contained in this communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, by anyone to avoid penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law. EDITED TO ADD\""}
{"id": "400644", "text": "In the real world, there are only two times you'll see that 5% become worth anything - ie, something you can exchange for cash - 1) if another company buys them; (2) if they go public. If neither of these things happen, you cannot do anything with the stock or stock options that you own."}
{"id": "400669", "text": "Businesses you are already established with may do a soft pull to pre-qualify you for an offer.  They store the information and if you accept, may instantly setup and account.  You may also see language to the effect that they may do an inquiry (hard pull) - I guess if their data is old.  When you went outside of Amazon to Chase, they did a hard pull on their side which is what you saw."}
{"id": "400747", "text": "The changes to Equity given are: Since the total change is 42,500, the difference would be change in Retained Earnings (net income), so net income is"}
{"id": "400801", "text": "Construction loans have an entirely set of rules and factors than mortgages and that's hard to reconcile into one instrument.  Also, I'm guessing the bank would be a bit shy about giving a commitment to a home loan before they have any information about how the construction process is going.  There would have to be a ton of contingencies put into mortgage and they probably can't account for everything."}
{"id": "400838", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://asia.nikkei.com/Markets/Commodities/China-sees-new-world-order-with-oil-benchmark-backed-by-gold?page=1) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; The contract could become the most important Asia-based crude oil benchmark, given that China is the world&amp;#039;s biggest oil importer.  &gt; &amp;quot;It is a mechanism which is likely to appeal to oil producers that prefer to avoid using dollars, and are not ready to accept that being paid in yuan for oil sales to China is a good idea either,&amp;quot; Macleod said.  &gt; Yuan oil futures are expected to attract interest from investors and funds, while state-backed oil majors, such as PetroChina and China Petroleum &amp; Chemical will provide liquidity to ensure trade.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/70lu5h/china_announces_the_backing_of_the_yuan_by_gold/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~211390 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **oil**^#1 **China**^#2 **Saudi**^#3 **yuan**^#4 **gold**^#5\""}
{"id": "401447", "text": "SPX options are cash settled European style.  You cannot exercise European style options before the expiration date.  Assuming it is the day of expiration and you own 2,000 strike puts and the index settlement value is 1,950 - you would exercise and receive cash for the in the money amount times the contract multiplier.  If instead you owned put options on the S&amp;P 500 SPDR ETF (symbol SPY) those are American style, physically settled options.  You can exercise a long American style option anytime between when your purchase it and when it expires.    If you exercised SPY puts without owning shares of SPY you would end up short stock at the strike price."}
{"id": "401450", "text": "I would suggest you rollover your Roth 401k to a Roth IRA.  Then pay off your debt before investing anymore money. In the long run you will be better off to have all your debt paid off. But I would not withdraw from the Roth 401k to pay down your debt. The penality is too steep."}
{"id": "401551", "text": "If you want to be safe, only claim deductions for which you have a receipt. This explanation may help."}
{"id": "401724", "text": "\"There are two issues. The first is that you can manage all of your family's money. The second issue arises if you now \"\"own\"\" all of your family's money. As far as entities go, it is best to keep money or assets in as many different hands as possible. Right now, if someone sued you and won, they could take away not only your money, but your parents' and brother's money, under your name. Also, there are gift, estate and inheritance tax consequences to your parents and brother handing all their money to you. You should have three or four separate \"\"piles\"\" of money, one for yourself, one for your brother and one for each of your parents, or at least both of them as a couple. If someone sued one parent, the other parent, your brother and you are protected. You can have all these piles of money under your management. That is, your parents and brother should each maintain separate brokerage accounts from yours, and then give you the authorization to trade (but not withdraw from) their accounts. This could all be at the same brokerage house, to make the reporting and other logistics relatively easy.\""}
{"id": "401816", "text": "From an Indian perspective, this is what I would do. This typically would not only keep your credit score healthy but also give you additional benefits on spends."}
{"id": "401952", "text": "\"In general, yes. If interest rates go higher, then any existing fixed-rate bonds - and hence ETFs holding those bonds - become less valuable. The further each bond is from maturity, the larger the impact. As you suggest, once the bonds do mature, the fund can replace them at a market price, so the effect tails off. The bond market has a concept known as \"\"duration\"\" that helps reason about this effect. Roughly, it measures the average time from now to each payout of the bond, weighted by the payout. The longer the duration, the more the price will change for a given change in interest rates. The concept is just an approximation, and there are various slightly different ways of calculating it; but very roughly the price of a bond will reduce by a percentage equal to the duration times the increase in interest rates. So a bond with a duration of 5 years will lose 5% of its value for a 1% rise in interest rates (and of course vice-versa). For your second question, it really depends on what you're trying to achieve by diversifying - this might be best as a different question that gives more detail, as it's not very related to your first question. Short-term bonds are less risky. But both will lose value if the underlying company is in trouble. Gilts (government bonds) are less risky than corporate bonds.\""}
{"id": "401961", "text": "\"Property sold at profit is taxed at capital gains rate (if you held it for more than a year, which you have based on your previous question). Thus deferring salary won't change the taxable amount or the tax rate on the property. It may save you the 3% difference on the salary, but I don't know how significant can that be. The 25% depreciation recapture rate (or whatever the current percentage is) is preset by your depreciation and cannot be changed, so you'll have to pay that first. Whatever is left above it is capital gains and will be taxed at discounted rates (20% IIRC). You need to make sure that you deduct everything, and capitalize everything else (all the non-deductible expenses and losses with regards to the property). For example, if you remodeled - its added to your basis (reduces the gains). If you did significant improvements and changes - the same. If you installed new appliances and carpets - they're depreciated faster (you can appropriate part of the sale proceeds to these and thus reduce the actual property related gain). Also, you need to see what gain you have on the land - the land cannot be depreciated, so all the gain on it is capital gain. Your CPA will help you investigating these, and maybe other ways to reduce your tax bill. Do make sure to have proper documentation and proofs for all your claims, don't make things up and don't allow your CPA \"\"cut corners\"\". It may cost you dearly on audit.\""}
{"id": "402112", "text": "a smaller spread indicates a flat yield curve, which means banks and investors are uncertain about future economic conditions (like the current environment).   When the spread widens and the curve becomes upward sloping (considered a normal yield curve), investors expect future growth and minimal inflation. Longer term rates increase as investors demand a higher yield in return for lending their money for a longer period of time. Increase demand for credit (industries expanding) also drive up longer term rates.   A negative spread indicates an inverted yield curve and investors believe the economy is overheating and interest rates will fall. Investors pull money out of the stock market and into long term bonds (raising the price, lowering the yield) while companies stop borrowing, reducing the demand for credit and lower the cost, or interest rate, on a loan.   Keep in mind central banks determine short term rates, so inverted curves are rare in the sense the market perceives uncertainty and rushes to safety (bonds) before the central bank reacts and lowers short term rates."}
{"id": "402273", "text": "You can see some IRS info on distinguishing a business from a hobby here.  Nolo also has some info. The upshot is that you can only deduct losses if your activity is, in the judgement of the IRS, a for-profit endeavor.  You don't have to make a profit right away, or make a profit every year, for it to be a for-profit endeavor, but you have to be able to convince the IRS that you're doing it in order to (eventually) make a profit, not just for fun.  You can't just keep deducting the losses year after year if (as in the worst case you suggest) it never makes a profit and doesn't seem to have any chance of doing so."}
{"id": "402633", "text": "Securities (things you can buy on the stock market)  that pay dividends usually pay every quarter (every three months), but some pay every month. (For example: PGF pays dividends each month.) IF you reinvest your dividends back into the stock then you will be compounding your return.  I use the feature at Scottrade to automatically reinvest the dividend each month. Using this feature at Scottrade incurs no commission for the purchases of the stock from the dividend. (saving on commissions and fees is, likely, the most important aspect of investing).  US Treasuries (usually) pay interest twice a year. There is no commission when using Treasury Direct."}
{"id": "402739", "text": "\"The short answer is no, it's probably not ok. The longer answer is, it might be, if you are very disciplined.  You need to make sure that you have enough money to pay off the card after a year, and that you pay the card on time, every month, without exception.  There may also be balance transfer or other fees that only make it worth while if the interest rate or balance on the other loan is high. The problem is most of these offers will raise your rates to very high levels (think 20% or more) if you are even one day late with one payment.  Some of them also will back charge you interest starting from day one, although I have only seen this on store credit \"\"one year, same as cash\"\" type offers.   In the end you need to balance the possible payoff against how much it will cost you if you do it wrong.  Remember, the banks are not in the business of lending out free money.  They wouldn't do this unless enough people didn't pay it back in one year for them to make a profit.\""}
{"id": "402778", "text": "What Jaydles said. I think of each strategy in terms of Capital at Risk (CaR). It's a good thing to know when considering any position. And then conveniently, the return is always profit / CaR. With covered calls it's pretty easy. Pay $1000 for stock, receive $80 in premium, net CaR is $920.  If you own the stock and write calls many times (that expire worthless, or you that you buy back), there are two measurements to consider. First, treat every covered call as a buy-write. Even if you already own the stock, disregard the real cost basis, and calculate from the moment you write the call, using the stock price at that time. The second measure is more complicated, but involves using something like the XIRR function in a spreadsheet. This tracks the series as a whole, even accounting for times where there is no written call outstanding. For the written put, even though your broker may only require 30% collateral in a margin account, mentally treat them as cash-secured. Strike less premium is your true CaR. If the stock goes to zero by expiration, that's what you're on the hook for. You could just compute based on the 30% collateral required, but in my view that confuses cash/collateral needs with true risk. Note: a written put is exactly identical to a covered call at the same strike. If you tend to favor puts over CCs, ask yourself why. Just like a loaded gun, leverage isn't inherently bad, but you sure want to know when you're using it."}
{"id": "402814", "text": "The initial story sounds normal. Happens every day. Checksums cannot prevent this, since it is a typo by the sender. The sender typed in a wrong account number. That account number happened to exist (so the sender wouldn't get any immediate error message), your account. But, that innocent story can also be used as part of a money laundering plan. Namely, to give the money a legitimate source. Also can be used in a scheme to frame you for something. The question of how the person got your phone number raises suspicion. The bluffs to avoid the normal paperwork, and then disappearing, make it incriminating. No doubt. Take this to the police. The question arises: even if the plan (whatever it was) failed, why didn't he do the paperwork and get the money back? The answer is that that would leave a trail to possibly be picked up in a future investigation."}
{"id": "402852", "text": "Term life insurance for a healthy 30 year old is a heck of a lot cheaper than for a 40 year old who's starting to break down (and who needs the coverage since he's got a spouse and kids). So, get a long term policy now while it's cheap."}
{"id": "402984", "text": "I don't really see it as worth it at any level because of the risk. If you take $10,000,000 using the ratios you gave making 2% return. That is a profit of $200,000. Definitely not worth it, but lets go to 20% profit that is $2,000,000. To me the risk involved at beint 10 million in debt isn't worth it to make $2,000,000 quickly it would be pretty easy doing something wrong to wipe out everything."}
{"id": "403017", "text": "\"Most financial \"\"advisors\"\" are actually financial-product salesmen.  Their job is to sweet-talk you into parting with as much money as possible - either in management fees, or in commissions (kickbacks) on high-fee investment products** (which come from fees charged to you, inside the investment.)  This is a scrappy, cutthroat business for the salesmen themselves.  Realistically that is how they feed their family, and I empathize, but I can't afford to buy their product.  I wish they would sell something else. These people prey on people's financial lack of knowledge.  For instance, you put too much importance on \"\"returns\"\".  Why?  because the salesman told you that's important.  It's not.  The market goes up and down, that's normal.  The question is how much of your investment is being consumed by fees.  How do you tell that (and generally if you're invested well)?  You compare your money's performance to an index that's relevant to you.  You've heard of  the S&P 500, that's an index, relevant to US investors.  Take 2015. The S&P 500 was $2058.20 on January 2, 2015.  It was $2043.94 on December 31, 2015.  So it was flat;  it dropped 0.7%. If your US investments dropped 0.7%, you broke even.  If you made less, that was lost to the expenses within the investment, or the investment performing worse than the S&P 500 index.  I lost 0.8% in 2015, the extra 0.1% being expenses of the investment. Try 2013: S&P 500 was $1402.43 on December 28, 2012 and $1841.10 on Dec. 27, 2013. That's 31.2% growth.  That's amazing, but it also means 31.2% is holding even with the market.  If your salesman proudly announced that you made 18%... problem! All this to say: when you say the investments performed \"\"poorly\"\", don't go by absolute numbers. Find a suitable index and compare to the index.  A lot of markets were down in 2015-16, and that is not your investment's fault.  You want to know if were down compared to your index.   Because that reflects either a lousy funds manager, or high fees.   This may leave you wondering \"\"where can I invest that is safe and has sensible fees?  I don't know your market, but here we have \"\"discount brokers\"\" which allow self-selection of investments, charge no custodial fees, and simply charge by the trade (commonly $10).  Many mutual funds and ETFs are \"\"index funds\"\" with very low annual fees, 0.20% (1 in 500) or even less.    How do you pick investments? Look at any of numerous books, starting with John Bogle's classic \"\"Common Sense on Mutual Funds\"\" book which is the seminal work on the value of keeping fees low.  If you need the cool, confident professional to hand-hold you through the process, a fee-only advisor is a true financial advisor who actually acts in your best interest.  They honestly recommend what's best for you. But beware: many commission-driven salespeople pretend to be fee-only advisors.  The good advisor will be happy to advise investment types, and let you pick the brand (Fidelity vs Vanguard) and buy it in your own discount brokerage account with a password you don't share. Frankly, finance is not that hard.  But it's made hard by impossibly complex products that don't need to exist, and are designed to confuse people to conceal hidden fees.  Avoid those products.  You just don't need them.  Now, you really need to take a harder look at what this investment is. Like I say, they make these things unnecessarily complex specifically to make them confusing, and I am confused.  Although it doesn't seem like much of a question to me.  1.5% a quarter is 6% a year or 60% in 10 years (to ignore compounding). If the market grows 6% a year on average so growth just pays the fees, they will consume 60% of the $220,000, or $132,000.  As far as the $60,000, for that kind of money it's definitely worth talking to a good lawyer because it sounds like they misrepresented something to get your friend to sign up in the first place.  Put some legal pressure on them, that $60k penalty might get a lot smaller.   ** For instance they'll recommend JAMCX, which has a 5.25% buy-in fee (front-end load) and a 1.23% per year fee (expense ratio). Compare to VIMSX with zero load and a 0.20% fee.  That front-end load is kicked back to your broker as commission, so he literally can't recommend VIMSX - there's no commission! His company would, and should, fire him for doing so.\""}
{"id": "403033", "text": "We are one of the best advisory firm that provide mod gauges and refinancing at lowest possible rates. If you are certainly looking forward to get Mortgage Lenders or rental, loans to higher professional settlement in the world of Rate business as a professional agent, Highland can not only take care of your specific rates and loaning services. To know more information about services, please visit at http://www.highlandsmtg.com"}
{"id": "403314", "text": "I want to start investing money, as low risk as possible, but with a percentage growth of at least 4% over 10 - 15 years. ...I do have a mortgage, Then there's your answer.  You get a risk-free return of the interest rate on your mortgage (I'm assuming it's more than 4%).  Every bit you put toward your mortgage reduces the amount of interest you pay by the interest rate, helping you to pay it off faster.   Then, once your mortgage is paid off, you can look at other investments that fit your risk tolerance and return requirements. That said, make sure you have enough emergency savings to reduce cash flow interruptions, and make sure you don't have any other debts to pay. I'm not saying that everyone with a mortgage should pay it off before other investments.  You asked for a low-risk 4% investment, which paying your mortgage would accomplish.  If you want more return (and more risk) then other investments would be appropriate.  Other factors that might change your decision might be:"}
{"id": "403608", "text": "\"Long term capital gains are taxed at 15% this year, so the most you stand to save is $150. I wouldn't sell anything at a loss just to offset that, unless you planned on selling anyways.  A few reasons: The Long term capital gains rate will go up to 20% next year, so your losses will be \"\"worth more\"\" next year than this year. Short term capital gains rates will go up next year as well, so again, better off saving your losses for next year. You must use capital losses to offset capital gains if you have them, but if you don't have any capital gains, you can use capital losses to offset ordinary income (up to a limit - $3,000 a year IIRC).  So, if you just bite the bullet and pay the 15% on your gains this year, you could use your losses to offset your (likely higher rate) ordinary income next year. FYI, complete chart for capital gains tax rates is here. I also posted another answer about capital gains to this question a while back that might be useful.\""}
{"id": "403701", "text": "This is really an extended comment on the last paragraph of @BenMiller's answer. When (the manager of) a mutual fund sells securities that the fund holds for a profit, or receives dividends (stock dividends, bond interest, etc.), the fund has the option of paying taxes on that money (at corporate rates) and distributing the rest to shareholders in the fund, or passing on the entire amount (categorized as dividends, qualified dividends, net short-term capital gains, and net long-term capital gains) to the shareholders who then pay taxes on the money that they receive at their own respective tax rates. (If the net gains are negative, i.e. losses, they are not passed on to the shareholders. See the last paragraph below).  A shareholder doesn't have to reinvest the distribution amount into the mutual fund: the option of receiving the money as cash always exists, as does the option of investing the distribution into a different mutual fund in the same family, e.g. invest the distributions from Vanguard's S&P 500 Index Fund into Vanguard's Total Bond Index Fund (and/or vice versa). This last can be done without needing a brokerage account, but doing it across fund families will require the money to transit through a brokerage account or a personal account. Such cross-transfers can be helpful in reducing the amounts of money being transferred in re-balancing asset allocations as is recommended be done once or twice a year. Those investing in load funds instead of no-load funds should keep in mind that several load funds waive the load for re-investment of distributions but some funds don't: the sales charge for the reinvestment is pure profit for the fund if the fund was purchased directly or passed on to the brokerage if the fund was purchased through a brokerage account. As Ben points out, a shareholder in a mutual fund must pay taxes (in the appropriate categories) on the distributions  from the fund even though no actual cash has been received because the entire distribution has been reinvested. It is worth keeping in mind that when the mutual fund declares a distribution (say $1.22 a share), the Net Asset Value per share drops by the same amount (assuming no change in the prices of the securities that the fund holds) and the new shares issued are at this lower price. That is, there is no change in the value of the investment: if you had $10,000 in the fund the day before the distribution was declared, you still have $10,000 after the distribution is declared but you own more shares in the fund than you had previously. (In actuality, the new shares appear in your account a couple of days later, not immediately when the distribution is declared).  In short, a distribution  from a mutual fund that is re-invested leads to no change in your net assets, but does increase your tax liability. Ditto for a distribution that is taken as cash or re-invested elsewhere. As a final remark, net capital losses inside a mutual fund are not distributed to shareholders but are retained within the fund to be written off against future capital gains. See also this previous answer  or this one."}
{"id": "403755", "text": "\"1) When it says \"\"an investment or mutual fund\"\", is a mutual fund not   an investment? If no, what is the definition of an investment? A mutual fund is indeed an investment. The article probably mentions  mutual funds separately from other investments because it is not uncommon for mutual funds to give you the option to automatically reinvest dividends and capital gains.    2) When it says \"\"In terms of stocks\"\", why does it only mention   distribution of dividends but not distribution of capital gains? Since distributions are received as cash deposits they can be used to buy more of the stock. Capital gains, on the other hand, occur when an asset increases in value. These gains are realized when the asset is sold. In the case of stocks, reinvestment of capital gains doesn't make much sense since buying more stock after selling it to realize capital gains results in you owning as much stock as you had before you realized the gains. 3) When it says \"\"In terms of mutual funds\"\", it says about \"\"the   reinvestment of distributions and dividends\"\". Does \"\"distributions\"\" not   include distributions of \"\"dividends\"\"? why does it mention   \"\"distributions\"\" parallel to \"\"dividends\"\"? Used in this setting, dividend and distribution are synonymous, which is highlighted by the way they are used in parallel. 4) Does reinvestment only apply to interest or dividends, but not to   capital gain? Reinvestment only applies to dividends in the case of stocks. Mutual funds must distribute capital gains to shareholders, making these distributions essentially cash dividends, usually as a special end of year distribution. If you've requested automatic reinvestment, the fund will buy more shares with these capital gain distributions as well.\""}
{"id": "403870", "text": "Fund performance at NAV (%) for latest quarter, YTD, and average annual total returns for 1, 3, 5, 10 years. P/E ratio (1 yr. forecast), P/B ratio, Beta, Sharpe ratio, Wtd. avg. market cap, fund assets.  I guess I would want to calculate all these things based off of the data that I would be working with. I will assume I am working with daily fund values per share over 10+ years."}
{"id": "403872", "text": "Article is 1 paragraph long and does not answer the question in the headline. Just states the fact that Tesla bonds are higher yield.  I was hoping to be able to read speculation as to why bond investor's are valuing them this way."}
{"id": "403877", "text": "You should not open a company unless and until you want to continue operating your company for the longer term. If it is only for a year so so, refrain from opening a company. I am an IT contractor and operate through a limited company. Believe me it isn't that difficult to operate through a limited company. If you are afraid of doing your books, get an accountant and he will do it for you. Should not cost you more than a \u00a31000 - 1500 or so. Regarding what you can claim as an expense, it depends on how you can confirm that the expenses you incurred are for the company. Your accountant can help you out on that. If you claim false expenses and are caught, you have to forgo a lot to the HMRC.  Google is the best option, there are loads of sites which can help you on that."}
{"id": "403899", "text": "Far and away the most valuable skill in investing, in my opinion, is emotional fortitude.  You need to have the emotional stability and confidence to trust your decision making and research to hold on down days."}
{"id": "404275", "text": "Usually points have different value depending on what you use it for and how much of them you convert. For many providers, if you have enough (10000+ usually) points, it is possible to convert them 1:1 (which means 1 point converted to 1 cent) to either cash or something that is almost as good as cash ($100 gift card for some popular store or $100 Amazon.com certificate, etc.). Some cards have more exotic ways of getting best value - such as transferring money to pay student loans, retirement accounts, etc. So to get the best value, I'd recommend to make a list of what you can get from your program (most types of reward are uniform - i.e., many gift cards with the same price, so the work may be less than it seems) and calculate point values of each of those. If you want to be really precise take into account that if you buy something with points, you do not earn points on that, which reduces the value a little. In general, these days it is very rare to get a card that produces more than 1% back, though some have up to 5% for certain categories of purchases."}
{"id": "404304", "text": "I've been in the UK for 3.5 years, and I have the same problem: I can't get even a small loan from my bank; no one will give me a phone contract; it's a nightmare. I have 8 direct debits, I pay everything on time and I earn decent money, but still my credit is seen as no good. I have got a few ideas for you though: Good luck!"}
{"id": "404604", "text": "Yes apply for live and dynamic data (you may have to pay for this depending on your broker and your country) and look at the market depth."}
{"id": "404973", "text": "If your house was paid off, would you be comfortable borrowing from the equity to invest? This is essentially the same question.  Also, why not ask the opposite? How much more should you be borrowing (at a similar rate) for investments? Your answer to both questions will be clues to how you view the risk/reward of borrowing against your house in order to invest. My personal preference is not to invest with borrowed money. There may be a few percent of potential returns I am missing out on. That percent return has to be analyzed in the context of a full financial plan and future goals."}
{"id": "405105", "text": "\"In a word, no. If your income is high enough to have to file a return, you have to file a return. My accountant has a nice mindset for making it more palatable. I'll paraphrase: \"\"Our tax system is ludicrously complicated. As a result, it is your duty as an American to seek out and take advantage of every deduction and credit available to you. If our politicians and leaders put it into the tax code, use it to your advantage.\"\" A friend of mine got a free golf cart that way. It was a crazy combination of credits and loopholes for electric vehicles. That loophole has been closed, and some would say it's a great example of him exercising his patriotic duty.\""}
{"id": "405777", "text": "(do I need to get a W9 from our suppliers)? Will PayPal or Shopify send me a 1099k or something? Do not assume that you'll get paperwork from anyone.  Do assume that you have to generate your own paperwork.  Ideally you should print out some kind of record of each transaction.  Note that it can be hard to view older transactions in PayPal, so start now.  If you can't document something, write up a piece of paper showing the state of the world to the best of your knowledge.   Do assume that you need separate receipts for each expenditure.  The PayPal receipt might be enough (but print it in case the IRS wants to see it).  A receipt from the vendor would be better (again, print it if it is online now).   A CPA is not strictly necessary.  A CPA is certified (the C in CPA) to formally audit the books of a corporation.  In your case, any accountant would be legally sufficient.  You still may want to use a CPA, as the certification, while technically unnecessary, still demonstrates knowledge.  You may otherwise not be in a position to evaluate an accountant.  A compromise option is to go to a firm that includes a CPA and then let them assign you to someone else to process the actual taxes.   You are going to have to fill out some business tax forms.  In particular, I would expect a schedule C.  That's where you would show revenues and expenses.  You may well have to file other forms as well."}
{"id": "405848", "text": "I do know that a blank check has all the information they need for the electronic transfer. They probably add it as a customer service to streamline future payments. Though I don't think automatically adding it makes good business sense. It is possible that the form used to submit the check included a line to added the account to the list of authorized accounts.  He might have been lucky he didn't set up a recurring payment.  I would check the website to see if there is a tool to remove the account info from the list of payment options. There has to be a way to edit the list so that if you change banks you can update the information, yet not keep the old accounts on the list. Talk to customer service if the website doesn't have a way of removing the account. Tell them that you have to edit the account information. And give them your info. If they balk at the change tell them that they could be committing fraud if the money is pulled from an unauthorized account."}
{"id": "405986", "text": "Article is typical monetarist bs. Like Trump.  IMO,  money and wealth are not equal, and all debt is not bad. Find out how Hamilton took the Revolutionary War debt,  and used it as  an asset to  issue credit from the  Bank of the US. The real question today is, where is the growth of the real  economy?"}
{"id": "406109", "text": "\"Anyone can walk into a bank, say \"\"Hi, I'm a messenger, I have an endorsed check and a filled out deposit slip for Joe Blow who has an account here, please deposit this check for him, as he is incapacitated. Straight deposit.\"\"  They'll fiddle on their computer, to see if they can identify the deposit account definitively, and if they can, and the check looks legit, \"\"thanks for taking care of our customer sir.\"\"  Of course, getting a balance or cashback is out of the question since you are not authenticated as the customer. I have done the same with balance transfer paperwork, in that case the bank knew the customer and the balance transfer was his usual. If the friend does not have an account there, then s/he should maybe open an account at an \"\"online bank\"\" that allows deposit by snapping photos on a phone, or phone up a branch, describe her/his situation and see if they have any options.  Alternately, s/he could get a PayPal account.  Or get one of those \"\"credit card swipe on your phone\"\" deals like Square or PayPal Here, which have fees very close to nil, normally cards are swiped but you can hand-enter the numbers.   Those are fairly easy to get even if you have troubles with creditworthiness.  S/he would need to return the check to the payer and ask the payer to pay her/him one of those ways.  The payer may not be able to, e.g. if they are a large corporation. A last possibility is if the check is from a large corporation with whom s/he continues to do business with.  For instance, the electric company cashiers out your account after you terminate service at your old location. But then you provision service at a new location and get a new bill, you can send their check right back to them and say \"\"Please apply this to my new account\"\". If s/he is unable to get any of those because of more serious problems like being in the country illegally, then, lawful behavior has its privileges, sorry. There are lots of unbanked people, and they pay through the nose for banking services at those ghastly check-cashing places, at least in America.  I don't have a good answer for how to get a check cashed in that situation.\""}
{"id": "406243", "text": "\"I've found that once people \"\"fall in love\"\" with a home or the idea of a home, there's little chance they will chance course.    I'd implore you to do some reading about individuals and families trapped in an underwater mortgage and having lost a job -- now they can't move for work, and they can't refinance or sell.  In short, they are trapped and will be foreclosed upon (or, at best, will short-sell).  If you want to play knife-catcher (e.g., trying to buy an asset while its value is falling) then at least don't go in blind or kid yourself about the risks.  Of course, many folks believe the housing market has bottomed - if that's true then there's no harm in waiting 6 or 12 months and verifying that premise.  At most, you'll lose a couple of points in equity.    On the other hand, you may well discover that all is not well, and suddenly you can \"\"afford\"\" even \"\"more\"\" house.  It is not hyperbole to say that the housing market in the USA has financially destroyed millions of people -- be careful out there especially as Europe comes unglued.\""}
{"id": "406286", "text": "The rule that I know is six months of income, stored in readily accessible savings (e.g. a savings or money market account).   Others have argued that it should be six months of expenses, which is of course easier to achieve.  I would recommend against that, partially because it is easier to achieve.  The other issue is that people are more prone to underestimate their expenses than their income.  Finally, if you base it on your current expenses, then budget for savings and have money left over, you often increase your expenses.  Sometimes obviously (e.g. a new car) and sometimes not (e.g. more restaurants or clubs).  Income increases are rarer and easier to see.   Either way, you can make that six months shorter or longer.  Six months is both feasible and capable of handling difficult emergencies.  Six years wouldn't be feasible.  One month wouldn't get you through a major emergency.   Examples of emergencies:   Your savings can be in any of multiple forms.  For example, someone was talking about buying real estate and renting it.  That's a form of savings, but it can be difficult to do withdrawals.  Stocks and bonds are better, but what if your emergency happens when the market is down?  Part of how emergency funds operate is that they are readily accessible.   Another issue is that a main goal of savings is to cover retirement.  So people put them in tax privileged retirement accounts.  The downside of that is that the money is not then available for emergencies without paying penalties.  You get benefits from retirement accounts but that's in exchange for limitations.   It's much easier to spend money than to save it.  There are many options and the world makes it easy to do.  Emergency funds make people really think about that portion of savings.  And thinking about saving before spending helps avoid situations where you shortchange savings.   Let's pretend that retirement accounts don't exist (perhaps they don't in your country).  Your savings is some mix of stocks and bonds.  You have a mortgaged house.  You've budgeted enough into stocks and bonds to cover retirement.  Now you have a major emergency.   As I understand your proposal, you would then take that money out of the stocks and bonds for retirement.  But then you no longer have enough for retirement.  Going forward, you will have to scrimp to get back on track.   An emergency fund says that you should do that scrimping early.  Because if you're used to spending any level of money, cutting that is painful.  But if you've only ever spent a certain level, not increasing it is much easier.  The longer you delay optional expenses, the less important they seem.   Scrimping beforehand also helps avoid the situation where the emergency happens at the end of your career.  It's one thing to scrimp for fifteen years at fifty.  What's your plan if you would have an emergency at sixty-five?  Or later?  Then you're reducing your living standard at retirement.   Now, maybe you save more than necessary.  It's not unknown.  But it's not typical either.  It is far more common to encounter someone who isn't saving enough than too much."}
{"id": "406324", "text": "Based on your comment that you do not itemize your deductions, I think that's probably the next step for you to consider. Many of the suggestions that we would give require that you itemize. If you are not familiar with the potential deductions it would probably be worth your while to visit with a local tax professional and discuss your expenses including what changes you could make to minimize your tax bill.  Ultimately becoming eligible for the 401(k) if possible will allow you access to the biggest avenue for reducing tax liability. It sounds like you are already prioritizing and saving for retirement through your IRA, but most earners in the 25% bracket can't put the recommended 15% into savings (with tax advantages) through an IRA."}
{"id": "406542", "text": "On a company level ROCE over WACC would be more meaningful in my view but the end result should be be pretty much the same. This concept is closely related to value creation. Value can only be created when a company's ROCE is exceeding its cost of funding - WACC. This is also tightly related with the NPV concept. Value is only created when the NPV on a project is &gt;0.  And to directly answer OP. Study in detail WACC. (weighted average cost of capital). Focus on the Modigliani\u2013Miller theorem with taxes and financial distress costs. Good luck."}
{"id": "406656", "text": "\"My late answer is: Be aware of the difference of being a contractor and being an employee.  I am not sure of the laws in Canada, but in the United States lots of small companies like to hire people as \"\"contractors\"\" but make them work under rules that fall into employee.   The business is trying to avoid paying payroll taxes, which is fine, but make sure you know your rights and responsibilities as a contractor vs employee. You can check with your state's Bureau of Labor and Industry in the US, but I am sure wherever you are from there is a government agency to do the same thing.\""}
{"id": "406789", "text": "\"Littleadv is incorrect because receiving a 1099 means she will be taxed self-employment tax on top of federal income taxes. Your employer will automatically withhold 7.65% of payroll taxes as they pay you each paycheck and then they'll automatically pay the other half of your payroll tax (an additional 7.65%) to bring it to a total of 15.3%. In other words, because your wife is technically self employed, she will owe both sides of payroll tax which is 15.3% of $38k = $5,800 on TOP of your federal income tax (which is the only thing the W-4 is instructing them about what amount to withhold). The huge advantage to a 1099, however, is that she's essentially self-employed which means ALL of the things she needs to run her business are deductible expenses. This includes her car, computer, home office, supplies, sometimes phone, gas, maintenance, travel expenses, sometimes entertainment, etc - which can easily bring her \"\"income\"\" down from $38k to lets say $23k, reducing both her federal income tax AND self-employment tax to apply to $15k less (saving lets say 50% of $15k = $7.5k with federal and self employment because your income is so high). She is actually supposed to pay quarterly taxes to make up for all of this. The easy way to do this is each quarter plug YOUR total salary + bonus and the tax YOU have paid so far (check your paystubs) into TurboTax along with her income so far and all of her expenses. This will give you how much tax you can expect to have left to owe so far--this would be your first quarter. When you calculate your other quarters, do it the exact same way and just subtract what you've already paid so far that year from your total tax liability.\""}
{"id": "406876", "text": "I can't agree more. If you have unique IP and know-how you can very well be a single successful proprietorship. That said you can even be more successful, if you can grow beyond that. The reality is that you have to be an exceptional salesperson, if you want to grow a pure commoditized services business. Otherwise you just keep on adding overhead and there is very little left over for you. Unless of course you make your money off the back of your employees."}
{"id": "406920", "text": "Exchange-traded funds are bought and sold like stocks so you'd be able to place stop orders on them just like you could for individual stocks. For example, SPY would be the ticker for an S & P 500 ETF known as a SPDR. Open-end mutual funds don't have stop orders because of how the buying and selling is done which is on unknown prices and often in fractional shares. For example, the Vanguard 500 Index Investor shares(VFINX) would be an example of an S & P 500 tracker here."}
{"id": "407017", "text": "Getting the line of credit would likely be a bit easier than the loan but realistically the best option is getting a mortgage through an Indian bank.  With a long term mortgage your monthly payments would be a small portion of your income (maybe as low as $500) so currency fluctuations are likely to be minor blips that you can avoid by sending a few thousand to hold as a cushion for when exchange is unfavorable. Edit:  Please be advised that mortgages work differently throughout the world.  While 10% down may be standard in the US, in India 40-50% down seems to be the norm."}
{"id": "407316", "text": "\"As long as you paid 100% of your last year's tax liability (overall tax liability, the total tax to pay on your 1040) or 90% of the total tax liability this year, or your underpayment is no more than $1000, you won't be penalized as long as you pay the difference by April 15th. That's per the IRS. I don't know where the \"\"10% of my income\"\" came from, I'm not aware of any such rule.\""}
{"id": "407378", "text": "I am not a lawyer or a tax accountant, but from the description provided it sounds to me like you have created two partnerships: one in which you share 50% of Bob's revenue, and another in which you share 50% of the revenue from the first partnership. If this is the case, then each partnership would need to file form K-1 and issue a copy to the partners of that partnership. I think, but I'm not sure, that each partnership would need an Employer Identification Number (EIN; you can apply for and receive these online with the IRS). You would only pay tax on the portion of profits that are assigned to you on the K-1. (If you've accidentally created a partnership without thinking through all the ramifications, you probably want to straighten this out. You can be held liable for the actions of your partners.) On the other hand, if your contract with Bob explicitly makes you a contractor and not a partner, then Bob should probably be issuing a 1099 to you. Similarly for you and Joe -- if your contract with Joe makes him a subcontractor, then you may need to get an EIN and issue him a 1099 at the end of the year. The money you pay to Joe is a business expense, and would be deducted from the profits you show on your Schedule C. In my opinion, it would be worth the $200 fee paid to a good CPA to make sure you get this right."}
{"id": "407401", "text": "First step, pull a copy of your credit report, and score. You should monitor that score and do what you can to bring it up. Your chances are far better if (a) you first save a sizable downpayment, and (b) go with a local bank that doesn't just write the mortgage and sell it. Better still, go to that local bank and inquire about REO (real estate owned by the bank) property. These are properties they foreclosed on and depending how they are carrying them, you might find decent opportunities. As a matter of logic, a local bank that owns these specific properties (as compared to debt pools where big banks have piles of paper owned fractionally) are more willing to get a new owner in and paying a new loan.  Congrats on the new, higher, income. I'd suggest you first build the emergency fund before the downpayment fund. Let us know how it goes."}
{"id": "407654", "text": "Sure you can. Obviously it means your company will make less profit, saving you 20% corporation tax, while your personal income will be higher, meaning you will likely spend more than 20% in income tax and National Insurance contributions."}
{"id": "407663", "text": "Returns: Variable, as with all investments. Legitimate: Contact the usual major investment-fund houses."}
{"id": "407759", "text": "You have just answered your question in the last sentence of your question:  More volume just means more people are interested in the stock...i.e supply and demand are matched well. If the stock is illiquid there is more chance of the spread and slippage being larger. Even if the spread is small to start with, once a trade has been transacted, if no new buyers and sellers enter the market near the last transacted price, then you could get a large spread occurring between the bid and ask prices. Here is an example, MDG has a 50 day moving average volume of only 1200 share traded per day (obviously it does not trade every day).  As you can see there is already an 86% spread from the bid price. If a new bid price is entered to match and take out the offer price at $0.039, then this spread would instantly increase to 614% from the bid price."}
{"id": "407832", "text": "&gt; If the investor is a partner in the company then they're just as responsible for the debts of their business as any other partner.  Umm, one of the benefits of creating a corporation is to keep personal money separate from the business.  http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/corporation-basics-29867.html  There are exceptions to that of course.  &gt; The registered owners of the company can also be held liable for it's debts if it's a corporation.  This is false. Baring in mind that you can prove separation of assets and aren't doing anything illegal.  &gt; Or you can always just have them sign as guarantor for your back pay.  This is of course one of the exceptions."}
{"id": "407844", "text": "I would prefer to see you register in your home state, and then focus on making money, rather than spending time looking to game the system to save a few bucks.  People worry way too much about these trivial fees when they should be focused on making their business successful.  Get registered, get insurance, and then pour it on and start making money. Make $650 your target for a week's income - you can do it!  Next year's goal should be spending $50 a month on a payroll service because you're SO BUSY you can't take the extra time to pay your own social security taxes."}
{"id": "407941", "text": "\"There is no opposite of a hedge, except not having a hedge at all. A \"\"hedge\"\" isn't directional. If you are short, you hedge by having something that minimizes your losses if you are wrong. If you are long, you hedge by having something that minimizes your losses if it decreases in value. If you own a house, you hedge by having insurance. There are \"\"hedged bets\"\" and \"\"unhedged bets\"\"\""}
{"id": "408112", "text": "\"Thinking about the business overall, your \"\"profit\"\" would be: Since this is a sole proprietorship, the taxes are going to depend on your marginal tax rate. If you file jointly, your income will determine what your marginal tax rate is.  If you file separately, there likely wouldn't be any tax on that income since it's less than the standard deduction, but you lose benefits of filing jointly (combined exemptions, etc.) So think about how much she would charge, what expenses are involved (before taxes), what the taxes would be on that profit, and what the \"\"opportunity costs\"\" are - is it worth time away from the kids/hobbies/etc. for that hobby? How much should a hobby business make to make it worth the effort of charging for such services? That would fall in the \"\"expense\"\" section.  Are you talking about the actual costs (tax prep, etc.) or just the hassle of collecting, accounting, etc.  Certainly those are a consideration but it's harder to quantify that.  If you can come up with some sort of cost then certainly it would fit in the overall value equation. I'm not sure using additional Social Security benefits as a gauge is helpful, since you wouldn't see those benefits until you're of retirement age (according to SS) and a lot can happen between now and then.\""}
{"id": "408124", "text": "When you start at a new job here in the U.S., the default means of payment is usually a paper check. Most folks will quickly set up direct deposit so that their employer deposits their paycheck directly into their personal bank account - the incentive to do so is that you receive your funds faster than if you deposit a paper check.  Even if you set up direct deposit on your first day on the job, you may still receive your first paycheck as a paper check simply because the wheels of payroll processing turn slowly at some (large) companies. A counter example is a self-employed contractor - perhaps a carpenter or house painter.  These folks are paid by their customers, homeowners and such.  Many larger, well established contracters now accept credit card payments from customers, but smaller independents may be reluctant to set up a credit card merchant account to accept payment by card because of all the fees that are associated with accepting credit card payments.  3% transaction fees and monthly service fees can be scary to any businessman who already has very thin profit margins.  In such cases, these contractors prefer to be paid by check or in cash for the simple reason that there are no fees deducted from cash payments. There are a few folks here who don't trust direct deposit, or more specifically, don't trust their employer to perform the deposit correctly and on time.  Some feel uncomfortable giving their bank info to their employer, fearing someone at the company could steal money from their account. In my experience, the folks who prefer a paper paycheck are often the same folks who rush to the bank on payday to redeem their paychecks for cash.  They may have a bank account (helps with check cashing) but they prefer to carry cash. I operate in a manner similar to you - I use a debit card or credit card (I only have one of each) for nearly all transactions in daily life, I use electronic payments through my bank to pay my regular bills and mortgage, and I receive my paycheck by direct deposit.  There have been periods where I haven't written or received paper checks for so long that I have to hunt for where I put my checkbook! Even though I use a debit card for most store purchases, the bank account behind that debit card is actually a checking account according to the bank.  Again, the system defaults to paper checks and you have the option of going electronic as well. Before we judge anyone who doesn't use direct deposit or who prefers to be paid in cold hard cash, consider that direct deposit is a luxury of stability. Steady job, home, etc.  Direct deposit doesn't make sense for a contractor or day laborer who expect to work for a different person each day or week. I don't think this is all that unique to the US.  There are people in every city and country who don't have long-term employment with a single employer and therefore prefer cash or paper check over electronic payments.   I'd be willing to bet that this applies to the majority of people on the planet, actually."}
{"id": "408233", "text": "Those aren't distributions, they're contributions.  Distribution is when the money comes out of the retirement accounts. Here is the best source (the IRS) for information about tax advantaged retirement plans."}
{"id": "408288", "text": "&gt;You have to sell 3-5x more LT than you're buying ST in order to be delta neutral, because the ST is much more volatile.  I assume that you talking about positions by their DV01 and not by the notional exposure?"}
{"id": "408307", "text": "In personal finance circles this is called an Emergency Fund. There are many opinions about how big it needs to be but most seem to come in around 3-6 months worth of your average expenses. Any more than that and you're going to loose money to inflation, less and you will start having problems if you get laid off or have a medical issue."}
{"id": "408434", "text": "You can have multiple W2 forms on the same tax return. If you are using software, it will have the ability for you to enter additional W2 forms. If you are doing it by paper, just follow the instructions and combine the numbers at the correct place and attach both.  Similarly you can also have a 1099 with and without a W2. Just remember that with a 1099 you will have to pay the self employment tax ( FICA taxes, both employee and employer) and that no taxes will be withheld. You will want to either adjust the withholding on your main job or file quartely estimated taxes. Travel reimbursement should be the same tax exempt wise. The difference is that with a 1098, you will need to list your business expenses for deduction on the corresponding tax schedule. The value on the 1099 will include travel reimbursement. But then you can deduct your self employment expenses. I believe schedule C is where this occurs."}
{"id": "408435", "text": "Proof of funds for funding firms are used to determine if you have any money before they lend to you. (determine risk of lending to you if you defaulted) If you came in with 10 million dollars, the firms will turn a blind eye to any money laundering regulations and just lend to you."}
{"id": "408582", "text": "If there were no contribution limits, you could shelter practically all of your income from income tax. The government would not have sufficient tax revenue. Hence, there are limits which ensure some personal income remains taxable today. Similarly, when you retire, there are rules for minimum required distributions (withdrawals) which ensure the government gets to tax some of your income each year in your retirement, depending on the account type. One other advantage of limits is to encourage people to approach saving for retirement using regular, ongoing contributions made in the context of each year's limit. The limit, in a sense, can be a form of guidance. Some aim to contribute to the limit, and some even save beyond it using plain taxable investments."}
{"id": "408742", "text": "No, the 120 days rule only applies in cases of delay or cancellation. If the purchase went through and you got additional money elsewhere - you cannot re-deposit the distribution back. See IRC Sec. 72(t)(8)(E): If any distribution from any individual retirement plan fails to meet   the requirements of subparagraph (A) solely by reason of a delay or   cancellation of the purchase or construction of the residence, the   amount of the distribution may be contributed to an individual   retirement plan as provided in section 408 (d)(3)(A)(i) (determined by   substituting \u201c120th day\u201d for \u201c60th day\u201d in such section)"}
{"id": "408918", "text": "\"Largely, because stock markets are efficient markets, at least mostly if not entirely; while the efficient market hypothesis is not necessarily 100% correct, for the majority of traders it's unlikely that you could (on the long term) find significant market inefficiencies with the tools available to an individual of normal wealth (say, < $500k). That's what frequent trading intends to do: find market inefficiencies.  If the market is efficient, then a stock is priced exactly at what it should be worth, based on risk and future returns.  If it is inefficient, then you can make more money trading on that inefficiency versus simply holding it long.  But in stating that a stock is inefficient, you are stating that you know something the rest of the market doesn't - or some condition is different for you than the other million or so people in the market.  That's including a lot of folks who do this for a living, and have very expensive modelling software (and hardware to run it on).  I like to think that I'm smarter than the far majority of people, but I'm probably not the smartest guy in the room, and I certainly don't have that kind of equipment - especially with high frequency trading nowadays. As such, it's certainly possible to make a bit of money as a trader versus as a long-term investor, but on the whole it's similar to playing poker for a living.  If you're smarter than most of the people in the room, you might be able to make a bit of money, but the overhead - in the case of poker, the money the house charges for the game, in the case of stocks, the exchange fees and broker commissions - means that it's a losing game for the group as a whole, and not very many people can actually make money.  Add to that the computer-based trading - so imagine a poker game where four of the eight players are computer models that are really good (and actively maintained by very smart traders) and you can see where it gets to be very difficult to trade at a profit (versus long term investments, which take advantage of the growth in value in the company). Finally, the risk because of leverage and option trading (which is necessary to really take advantage of inefficiencies) makes it not only hard to make a profit, but easy to lose everything.  Again to the poker analogy, the guys I've known playing poker for a living do it by playing 10-20 games at once - because one game isn't efficient enough, you wouldn't make enough money.  In poker, you can do that fairly safely, especially in limit games; but in the market, if you're leveraging your money you risk losing a lot.  Every action you take to make it \"\"safer\"\" removes some of your profit.\""}
{"id": "409184", "text": "Generally speaking the bank accounts and credit card accounts remain open.  Banks and the credit card companies don't monitor public records on a daily basis.  Instead, whoever is handling your estate will need to obtain copies of your death certificate and they will then search your paper records to identify all accounts (reason to get your act together - there are books on the subject).  The executor will work with the banks and card companies to make sure all your charges and payments clear (common to have them open for months or even a year) and to make close or transfer autopays.  They will make sure to notify the credit agencies to flag your accounts so no new accounts can be created.  MANY copies of the death certicates are needed."}
{"id": "409350", "text": "Shorting is the term used when someone borrows a stock and sells it at the current price to then buy it back later at hopefully a lower price. There are rules about this as noted in the link that begins this answer as there are risks to selling a stock you don't own of course. If you look up various large companies you may find that there are millions of shares sold short throughout the market as someone does have the shares and they will need to be put back eventually."}
{"id": "409603", "text": "\"Typically mutual funds will report an annualized return. It's probably an average of 8% per year from the date of inception of the fund. That at least gives some basis of comparison if you're looking at funds of different ages (they will also often report annualized 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10- year returns, which are probably better basis of comparison since they will have experience the same market booms and busts...).  So yes, generally that 8% gets compounded yearly, on average. At that rate, you'd get your investment doubled in roughly 9 years... on average... Of course, \"\"past performance can't guarantee future results\"\" and all that, and variation is often significant with returns that high. Might be 15% one year, -2% the next, etc., hence my emphasis on specifying \"\"on average\"\". EDIT: Based on the Fund given in the comments: So in your fund, the times less than a year (1 Mo, 3 Mo, 6 Mo, 1 Yr) is the actual relative change that of fund in that time period. Anything greater is averaged using CAGR approach. For example. The most recent 3 year period (probably ending end of last month) had a 6.19% averaged return. 2014, 2015, and 2016 had individual returns of 8.05%, 2.47%, and 9.27%. Thus that total return over that three year period was 1.0805*1.0247*1.0927=1.21 = 21% return over three years. This is the same total growth that would be achieved if each year saw consistent 6.5% growth (1.065^3 = 1.21).  Not exactly the 6.19%, but remember we're looking at a slightly different time window. But it's pretty close and hopefully helps clarify how the calculation is done.\""}
{"id": "409818", "text": "\"When you exercise your options, you come up with cash to buy the shares. This makes you an owner of the company for shares at the share price your options let you have. Ideally, your share price is at a significant discount to what the company is worth. Being a shareholder, you gain from any share price appreciation in a sale. The only thing the \"\"60-day window\"\" applies to is whether you come up with the cash to buy fast enough, or your shares get permanently deleted from the company finances, where everyone else potentially makes more, you make nothing. The sale of the company is based on whenever the sell finalizes, which is between your company and the acquiring company.\""}
{"id": "410035", "text": "\"Why bother with the ETF? Just trade the options -- at least you have the ability to know what you actually are doing. The \"\"exotic\"\" ETFs the let you \"\"double long\"\" or short indexes aren't options contracts -- they are just collections of unregulated swaps with no transparency. Most of the short/double long ETFs also only attempt to track the security over the course of one day -- you are supposed to trade them daily. Also, you have no guarantee that the ETFs will perform as desired -- even during the course of a single day. IMO, the simplicity of the ETF approach is deceiving.\""}
{"id": "410061", "text": "You do not hold leveraged ETF for longer than a few days.  You have UGAZ and DGAZ, both 3x leveraged, one longs one shorts.  What happens if you buy both? You don't get 0% return. In fact, you get -10% return if you hold both for 3 months.   No matter what happens, they both go down in long term.  Call it Leverage Decay, Beta Slippage, Contango, Rollover, etc.  If you want to gamble that NG goes up within 3 days, go ahead. Just be prepared for the worst cases like losing 15% in 3 days.  If you want to speculate the NG will recover in a year, buy Natural Gas industry ETF http://www.ftportfolios.com/retail/etf/etfsummary.aspx?Ticker=FCG"}
{"id": "410117", "text": "\"Unfortunately for investors, returns for equity-based investments are not linear - you'll see (semi-random) rises and dips as you look at the charted per-share price.  Without knowing what the investments are in the target date retirement fund that you've invested in, you could see a wide range of returns (including losses!) for any given period of time. However, over the long term (usually 10+ years), you'll see the \"\"average\"\" return for your fund as your gains and losses accumulate/compound over that period.\""}
{"id": "410166", "text": "\"For one thing fund managers, even fund management companies, own less money than their clients put together. On the whole they simply cannot underwrite 50% of the potential losses of the funds they manage, and an offer to do so would be completely unsecured. Warren Buffet owns about 1/3 of Berkshire Hathaway, so I suppose maybe he could do it if he wanted to, and I won't guess why he prefers his own business model (investing in the fund he manages, or used to manage) over the one you propose for him (keeping his money in something so secure he could use it to cover arbitrary losses on B-H). Buffett and his investors have always felt that he has sufficient incentive to see B-H do well, and it's not clear that your scheme would provide him any useful further incentive. You say that the details are immaterial. Supposing instead of 50% it was 0.0001%, one part in a million. Then it would be completely plausible for a fund manager to offer this: \"\"invest 50 million, lose it all, and I'll buy dinner to apologise\"\". But would you be as attracted to it as you would be to 50%? Then the details are material. Actually a fund manager could do it by taking your money, putting 50% into the fund and 50% into a cash account. If you make money on the fund, you only make half as much as if you'd been fully invested, so half your profit has been \"\"taken\"\" when you get back the fund value + cash. If you lose money on the fund, pay you back 50% of your losses using the cash. Worst case scenario[*], the fund is completely wiped out but you still get back 50% of your initial investment. The combined fund+cash investment vehicle has covered exactly half your losses and it subtracts exactly half your profit. The manager has offered the terms you asked for (-50% leverage) but still doesn't have skin the game. Your proposed terms do not provide the incentive you expect. Why don't fund managers offer this? Because with a few exceptions 50% is an absurd amount for an investment fund to keep in cash, and nobody would buy it. If you want to use cash for that level of inverse leverage you call the bank, open an account, and keep the interest for yourself. You don't expect your managed fund to do it. Furthermore, supposing the manager did invest 100% of your subscription in the fund and cover the risk with their own capital, that means the only place they actually make any profit is the return on a risk that they take with their capital on the fund's wins/losses. You've given them no incentive to invest your money as well as their own: they might as well just put their capital in the fund and let you keep your money. They're better off without you since there's less paperwork, and they can invest whatever they like instead of carefully matching whatever money you send them. If you think they can make better picks than you, and you want them to do so on your behalf, then you need to pay them for the privilege. Riding their coattails for free is not a service they have any reason to offer you. It turns out that you cannot force someone to expose themselves to a particular risk other than by agreeing that they will expose themselves to that risk and then closely monitoring their investment portfolio. Otherwise they can find ways to insure/hedge the risk they're required to take on. If it's on their books but cancelled by something else then they aren't really exposed. So to provide incentive what we normally want is what Buffett does, which is for the fund manager to be invested in the fund to keep them keen, and to draw a salary in return for letting you in[**]. Their investment cannot precisely match yours because the fund manager's capital doesn't precisely match your capital. It doesn't cover your losses because it's in the same fund, so if your money vanishes the fund manager loses too and has nothing to cover you with. But it does provide the incentive. [*] All right, I admit it, worst case scenario there's a total banking collapse, end of civilization as we know it, and the cash account defaults. But then even in your proposed scheme it's possible that whatever assets the fund manager was using as security could fail to materialise. [**] So why, you might ask, do individual fund managers get bonuses in return for meeting fixed targets instead of only being part-paid in shares in their own fund whose value they can then maximise? I honestly don't know, but I suspect \"\"lots of reasons\"\". Probably the psychology of rewarding them for performance in a way that compares with other executive posts or professions they might take up instead of fund management. Probably the benefit to the fund itself, which wants to attract more clients, of beating certain benchmarks. Probably other things including, frankly, human error in setting their compensation packages.\""}
{"id": "410335", "text": "That's not a valid counterpoint.    It doesn't rub you the right way because it would require you to take responsibility for your own future and do the work yourself.  It doesn't rub you the right way because it would mean that you couldn't blame anyone else if you weren't able to retire when you wanted to."}
{"id": "410421", "text": "You can deduct retirement contributions (above the line even), but not as a business expense. So you can't avoid the SE taxes, sorry."}
{"id": "410675", "text": "Why would you want to withdraw only the company match, and presumably leave your personal contributions sitting in your ex-company's 401k plan? Generally, 401k plans have larger annual expenses and provide for poorer investment choices than are available to you if you roll over your 401k investments into an IRA. So, unless you have specific reasons for wanting to continue to leave your money in the 401k plan (e.g. you have access to investments that are not available to nonparticipants and you think those investments are where you want your money to be), roll over part (or all) of your 401k assets into an IRA, and withdraw the rest for personal expenses.  If your personal contributions are in a Roth 401k, roll them over to a Roth IRA, but, as I remember it, company contributions are not part of the Roth 401k and must be rolled over into a Traditional IRA. Perhaps this is why you want to take those in cash to pay for your personal purchase? Also, what is this 30% hit you are talking about? You will owe income tax on the money withdrawn from the 401k (and custodians traditionally withhold 20% and send it to the IRS on your behalf) plus penalty for early withdrawal (which the custodian may also withhold if you ask them), but the tax that you will pay on the money withdrawn will depend on your tax bracket, which may be lower if you are laid off and do not immediately take on a new job. That is, the 30% hit may be on the cash flow, but you may get some of it back as a refund when you file your income tax return."}
{"id": "410822", "text": "I think you are mixing up the likelihood of making a profit with the amount of profit. The likelyhood of profit will be the same, because if you buy $100 worth of shares and the price moves up you will make a profit. If you instead bought $1000 worth of the same shares at the same price and the price moved up you would once again make a profit. In fact if you don't include commissions and other fees, and you buy and sell at the same prices, you percentage profit would be the same.  For example, if you bought at $10 and sold at $12, you percentage gain of 20% would be the same no matter how many shares you bought (not including commissions). So if you bought $100 worth your gain would have been 20% or $20 and if you bought $1000 worth your gain would have been 20% or $200. However, if you include commissions, say $10 in and $10 out, your net profit on $100 would have been $0 (0%) and your net profit on $1000 would have been $180 (18%)."}
{"id": "411462", "text": "It's so wonderful.  Through the magic of fractional reserve banking, a bank the vast majority of the time is loaning out money they created from thin air.  And if you don't pay the obligation, they get a yacht, personal jet, or racehorse in return!  Now, of course having to repossess something might be undesirable in an accounting context, but it still beggars belief that basically the entire economy and money supply of the developed world is based on obligations backed by nothing, by private parties, created out of thin air."}
{"id": "411572", "text": "\"You owe $20,000 to a loanshark, 1% per week interest.  I'm happy to get 1% per month, and trust you to pay it back, so I lend you the $20,000.  The first lender got his money, and now you are paying less interest as you pay the loan back. This is how a refi works, only the first bank won't try to break the legs of the second bank for moving into their business.  This line \"\"reinvested the money into the mortgage to lower his monthly payments\"\" implies he also paid it down a bit, maybr the new mortgage is less principal than the one before.\""}
{"id": "411655", "text": "There are many basic services that the business should be offering but are not. This can easily increase sales by 100k per year. Due to old age of the owner, he refrains from doing so. I just want to make sure the business is in good standing on the books."}
{"id": "411799", "text": "Selftrade does list them. Not sure if you'll be able to sign up from the US though, particularly given the FATCA issues."}
{"id": "412109", "text": "It all depends on how much risk you take. The problem is you have no idea what the risks are, and so you will lose all your money. I would say zero. But if you want to have a go, try reading reminiscences of a stock operator, then try reading my own attempt to make sense of the same stuff Hey, as you're a student you could even try making sense of my FX and MM training on the same website. Good luck"}
{"id": "412197", "text": "12b1 refers to a specific marketing fee on funds in my world. are you referring to the expense ratio?  yes - that is what fund wholesalers will do. another practice that won't affect your cost though.  basically what i want to express is that you shouldn't need a flowchart to understand your fees. it is simply the layers of management that will raise your cost, in addition to any transactional fees."}
{"id": "412368", "text": "\"There are places that call themselves quant funds that are like what you describe, but most are not. \"\"Quant fund\"\" can just about mean anything from \"\"we use computer screens when we read 10-Ks\"\" to \"\"our PhDs write signal processing programs without even knowing what the input data represents, and we run those programs with no manual intervention.\"\"\""}
{"id": "412881", "text": "The question is valid, you just need to work backwards. After how much money-time will the lower expense offset the one time fee?  Lower expenses will win given the right sum of money and right duration for the investment."}
{"id": "413043", "text": "&gt; ES_F June today the most recent 5 min bar has 809 volume. while the september has 10616 volume on the same bar.  on my rolled over contract, the ratio based adjustment has happened last week (9 bus days prior to expiration)  &gt; 1. Commision p/l should be subtracted as actual actual.  absolutely BUT, initially, it is interesting to see if there's a good positive bias in the strategy. then we check whether comm/slippage eats it all. if so we try to play it in an index/etf whatever that charges less c&amp;s/.  agree ?"}
{"id": "413090", "text": "\"Just remember that the numbers can be quite remote from the realities . Look at the corporations that are crashing and ask yourself - \"\"would any of the numbers have told me what was going wrong with the corporations and what needed to be done to fix them ?\"\" . Look at , for example , Sony , HMV , Best Buy etc. .\""}
{"id": "413174", "text": "Since you reference SS, I surmise you are in the US.  Stock you inherit gets a stepped up basis when it's inherited. (so long as it was not contained within a tax deffered retirement account.) When you sell, the new basis is taken from that day you inherited it. It should be minimal compared to your desire to diversify."}
{"id": "413231", "text": "&gt;I take advantage of this distortion to offer to buy your gold for half its free market value.  This is where I disagree. The price you get *actually is* the market value. If not, you clearly don't have the skills to be trading in gold, and should immediately get out of that business.   But let's continue with your example, where starvation is the *only* alternative. The only thing preventing your death by starvation, is the *ability and willingness* of David Siegel to accept your offer. In your example, he has saved your life.   Ah, but how did he come to be in a position to do so? It took him many years of his life, and he chose to forego many of life's pleasures along the way, to ultimately attain the ability to save *your* life. Suppose he had never done so. Perhaps you would have never ended up with gold, as it would be worthless to you. Or you still would have acquired the gold, and then just died.   As far as the timeshare thing goes, if people are willing to accept a vacation in exchange for allowing someone to attempt to sell them something, I see nothing wrong with them doing so."}
{"id": "413348", "text": "On re-reading the question, I see that you're self-employed, decent income, but only have an IRA. Since the crux of the question appears to be related to your wanting to put aside more money, I suggest you open a Solo 401(k) account. The current year limit is $17,000, and you can still have an IRA if you wish."}
{"id": "413441", "text": "\"Im currently working on the line for a major multinational. They regularly take feedback from us for improvements, and in India, one of those suggestions increased direct sales by (reportedly) over 50%. That suggestion? Put a label on card readers that said \"\"(company name) Authorized Card Reader\"\". It cost the company less than $10, and now brings in millions per year.\""}
{"id": "413642", "text": "\"From the article: \"\"Because of complicated legal and financial constraints I (Abigail) am unable to withdraw my investment at this time...\"\"  BECAUSE:  \"\"*I still gonna make money off this cause it's HARD to separate this asset from my overloaded portfolio...stocks go up in value and then Yaaaa! Bonanza down the road WITH THE HIGHER STOCK VALUE... but hey, I still love those little snot-nosed children and the scrappy puppies they chase around in my park - yeah, my park as their deadbeat parents don't pay any taxes - of course I don't either, but my accountants can explain all my write-offs every year that gives me a \"\"No tax due\"\" notice and usually a refund!\"\"*\""}
{"id": "413966", "text": "I took two of their online classes, attended an on campus case discussion, and attended a discussion between two professors on the future of capitalism.  What's being taught and talked about at HBS in the past year that I've been a student has been focused on using business and the economy to serve humanity. At the end of the disscusion one professor suggested getting rid of income taxes and replacing it with a financial transaction tax. A sales tax on financial instruments not targeted at long term investments but at high frequency trading."}
{"id": "414172", "text": "(12 * 100) * 1.01 = 1212 Assuming the $12 ask can absorb your whole 100 share order."}
{"id": "414219", "text": ""}
{"id": "414284", "text": "\"In general, following the W-4 instructions should result in withholdings that are fairly close to the amount of taxes that you will owe for the year, particularly if your situation is relatively uncomplicated. Claiming less withholdings than the form suggests can help ensure that you end up saving money in your \"\"interest-free IRS savings account\"\" and get a refund at the end of the year, which some people prefer so they don't need to budget separately for a tax payment. I'm guessing that the HR employee either prefers doing so himself or has on occasion received complaints from other employees that they \"\"didn't take enough out\"\". Personally, I'd prefer to claim as many withholdings as I can, and be sure to have some money aside in case it turns out that I have to owe a little bit, since it means I get more take-home pay throughout the year. It's good to keep in mind that a W-4 isn't written in stone. If it turns out that too much or too little is being taken out, you can always change it. You can also try playing around with the IRS withholding calculator to try some scenarios.\""}
{"id": "414454", "text": "\"If it's fully expensed, it has zero basis. Any sale is taxable, 100%. To the ordinary income / cap gain issue raised in comment - It's a cap gain, but I believe, as with real estate, special rates apply. This is where I am out of my area of expertise, and as they say - \"\"Consult a professional.\"\"\""}
{"id": "414692", "text": "I\u2019m not an expert on the VISA/US tax or insurance, but you're making enough mistakes in terms of all the associated costs involved in owning and renting houses/apartments that this already looks potentially unwise at this stage of your investment career. Renting cheap properties/to students involves the property constantly being trashed, often being empty and requiring extremely close management (which you either have to pay someone a lot to do, or do yourself and lose other potential earning time. If doing yourself you will also make lots of mistakes in the vetting/managing/marketing process etc at first as this is a complex art in itself).  Costs on this type of rental can often get as high as 25% a year depending exactly how lucky you get even if you do it all yourself, and will typically be in the 5-15% range every year once everything you have to constantly maintain, replace and redecorate is totalled up. That's all pre what you could be earning in a job etc, so if you could earn a decent clip elsewhere in the same time also have to deduct that lost potential. Send it all to third parties (so all upkeep by hired contractors, all renting by an agency) you will be lucky to even break even off ~15k a year per property rents to students. You\u2019re not seeming to price in any transaction costs, which usually run at ~5% a time for both entrance and exit. Thats between half and one years rent gone from the ten per property on these numbers. Sell before ten is up its even more. On point three, rounding projections in house price rises to one decimal place is total gibberish \u2013 no one who actually has experience investing their own money well ever makes or relies on claims like this. No idea on Pittsburgh market but sound projections of likely asset changes is always a ranged and imprecise figure that cannot (and shouldn\u2019t) be counted on for much. Even if it was, it\u2019s also completely unattainable in property because you have to spend so much money on upkeep: post costs and changes in size/standard, house values generally roughly track inflation. Have a look at this chart and play around with some reasonable yearly upkeep numbers and you will see what I mean. Renting property is an absolute graveyard for inexperienced investors and if you don't know the stuff above already (and it's less than 10% of what you need to know to do this profitably vs other uses of your time), you will nearly always be better off investing the money in more passive investments like diversified bonds, REITs and Stock."}
{"id": "414693", "text": "\"They borrowed it from the people, and typically to finance wars and military spending. For example, Wikipedia suggests that the Bank of England \"\"was set up to supply money to the King. \u00a31.2m was raised in 12 days; half of this was used to rebuild the Navy.\"\" It's a game that everyone has to play once started; if Napoleon buys an army on credit, you'll have to raise an equal amount or face quite a problem. As for why they've grown so large, it's because governments are quite skilled at owing large sums of money. Only a small portion of the debt comes due in full at a given moment, and they constantly reissue new debt via auction to keep it rolling. So as long as they can make coupon (interest) and the lump sum at maturity, it's not difficult to keep up. Imagine how much credit card debt you could rack up if you only ever had to pay interest. This game will continue for as long as people lend. And there are plenty of lenders. There's pensions, mutual funds and endowments, which find public debt typically safer than stocks. And money market funds, which target 1 dollar NAV and only invest in the \"\"safest\"\" AAA-rated bonds to protect it. There's central banks, which can buy and sell public debt to manipulate inflation and exchange rates.  Absent some kind of UN resolution to ban lending, or perhaps a EU mandated balanced budget, these debts will likely continue to grow. You think they \"\"collectively owe more money than can exist\"\", but there's a lot of wealth in the world. Most nations owe less than a year's GDP. For example, the US's total wealth is in the neighborhood of 50 trillion.\""}
{"id": "414892", "text": "\"Do you want to split expenses of the new apartment, or split your income/assets equally too (as for instance with a marriage where no sort of \"\"yours, mine, and ours\"\" are split out)? I'm going to assume you have beliefs similar to me in my answer, in that you desire to split expenses of the new place but don't suddenly want to split all of your assets and income 50/50 too. So here's how I'd approach this. I am somewhat unsure of what you mean by \"\"living expenses\"\" for your flat. Does this mean the cost of ownership per month - what it takes to not get rid of the place - and no portion of this is interest/mortgage? To make the calculations a little simpler, I'll assume that all the money you pay out as expenses is just gone - none of it remains as equity or is dis-proportionally accumulating value in some other such way. So, you move in with your girlfriend. The cost for her place - the place itself, taxes, utilities, whatever - is 7892 per month. So since you are both getting equal use of the place, you would split this into 3946 per month for each of you. That's it. Well, I don't see how that really matters at all, anymore than if you owned a company or stocks and bonds. If you rent it out for less per month than it costs you, I don't see why your girlfriend should take any part of the loss. Conversely if you make more money per month than it costs you, that is your investment profit - the payment you get for owning the apartment and dealing with renting it out. Now if your girlfriend is going to partner with you in handling renting out the apartment you own and you want to look at this as an investment partnership, then you should pay all expenses out of the income first and then you can split the profit if you really want. One question to ask would be, what if you just sold your apartment completely? Would you give your girlfriend have the money from the sale? If not then I don't see why you would split the investment profit from holding on to the place. While this is what I recommend and would feel comfortable with personally and if the situation was reversed (and it was my girlfriend that owned a place and was moving in with me), ultimately this is about your personal values, beliefs, and relationship. You are very wise to seek something that both of you will find fair, and so you should discuss a proposed arrangement with your girlfriend and see if you are on the same page. If you are both fine with the agreement and feel OK with it, then great - none of us have to like or agree with it, because we aren't a part of your relationship. Psychologically and financially this situation seems the most reasonable to me, but YMMV. After some more thought and from comments, I realize that it's probably best to explore a few possibilities numerically. So I'll run a few sets of numbers which may help pick which one is right for your relationship. This is approximately the same as paying her \"\"rent\"\" for getting to live with her. You pay her for sharing her place, splitting the expense: 3946 paid to you. She pays the other 3946 for her place. Financially it's like being room-mates. You can do whatever you want with your place - rent or sell, hold on to it for security, etc. This deal makes your girlfriend financially better off by 3946. The financial advantage to you is wholly dependent on what you do with your place.  This option would give you each the most financial independence, which is why I like it - but you might be keen on being more interdependent.  Which leads us to the next option. Here you behave as before in splitting her expenses, but you include renting out your place as part of the deal. Let's say you get 10k a month for it. You pay the expenses on that place from the rent, then you have 2108 left as 'profit'. You split the profits monthly 1054 to each of you.  There's a bit of problem here, though - what happens when the place is vacant? Do you share the full expense of the rent, so she'd actually be paying you each month while it sits open? What about repairs, taxes (costs and credits), etc?  I would recommend instead what you do, if you go this way, to account for the apartment as an investment and don't pay out ANY of the profits right away. All rents stay in their own account, and you pay expenses from that same account. For you both it's like it doesn't exist, accept it is a nice earning asset. When you decide it has accumulated more than enough to pay for itself and has enough money to cover vacancy, repairs, etc, then when you pull out money for the duration you are together you just pay it out to both of you equally. You might also pull this \"\"equity\"\" out and spend it on something for both of you, like a nice vacation, etc - something you both enjoy, so you are still sharing the profits. I don't object to this, and it could be a nice arrangement. I would only note that this makes you have a personal relationship, you live together as roommates, and now you are co-landlords/business partners. That's a lot of types of relationships, and I can tell you from personal experience each type has it's own stresses - and this sort of stress can stack (or if you don't handle it well, multiply). So just make sure you are both clear what sort of responsibility you are really both signing up for up front, and what you'd do if you part.  Combine your apartment expenses, which would equal 14753, so that's 7376 cost to each of you a month. If you rent your place then whatever money you get you split, and whatever costs come up (repairs, cleaning, etc) you would also split. So if you get an average of 10000 a month for the apartment you each are paying living expenses of 2376 total.  But notice that this isn't exactly equal, either. You will pay 5516 less per month than you are now, and she will pay 4485 less than she was before.  There's nothing morally wrong with this or anything - it's a 100% partnership across the board. Yet advantage is still not equal - you actually will see a larger benefit to your budget than she will. But if you seek equal benefit, you will have to pay 515 a month more than she does.  This sort of thing is basically the model marriage uses, a pure 50/50 partnership, or \"\"communal property\"\". And note that one of you will either be paying more than the other, will be benefiting more than the other - no matter what you do! It's impossible to balance both costs and benefits, because your income and expenses are not the same going in. If you go this way you'll need to choose what is most important - splitting the expenses/income equally, or benefiting financially equally. So I say again, ultimately you have to choose based upon your individual and shared values, and also on just what sort of relationship and layers of commitment you want to have together. You could start slow with option 1, then progress to sharing more - that's what I'd recommend, because I like the idea of developing things one layer at a time rather than jumping in head-first (like I have personally done in the past, haha!). Once bitten twice shy, I might just be more risk-averse or careful than you desire to be, but that's a personal choice.  I personally believe the relationship can be far more valuable than any investment, but at the same time I'll take $1 over a relationship that has turned sour any day of the week. This is why I suggest the more gradual, careful approach - to let your love bloom and grow deeper one layer at a time, without the complexities of fully shared finances or investment partnership. Relationships are hard enough, so this is why I favor trying to protect them aggressively from unnecessary complexity. Some favor the \"\"sink or swim\"\" model of seeking out trials and challenges, while I favor the \"\"relationship as tender, growing sapling\"\" model. I hope seeing these options laid out more is helpful to you, and good luck to you, your relationship, and - lastly - to your investments!\""}
{"id": "415408", "text": "This is called a fraudulent conveyance because its purpose is to prevent a creditor from getting repaid. It is subject to claw back under US law, which is a fancy way of saying that your friend will have to pay the bank back. Most jurisdictions have similar laws. It is probably a crime as well, but that varies by jurisdiction."}
{"id": "415432", "text": "On average, you should be saving at least 10-15% of your income in order to be financially secure when you retire.  Different people will tell you different things, but really this can be split between short term savings (cash), long term savings (401ks, IRAs, stocks & bonds), and paying down debt. That $5k is a good start on an emergency fund, but you probably want a little more.  As justkt said, 6 months' worth is what you want to aim for.  Put this in a Money Market account, where you'll earn a little more interest but won't be penalized from withdrawing it when its needed (you may have to live off it, after all). Beyond that, I would split things up; if possible, have payroll deductions going to a broker (sharebuilder is a good one to start with if you can't spare much change), as well as an IRA at a bank. Set up a separate checking account just for rent and utilities, put a month's worth of cash in there, and have another payroll deduction that covers your living expenses + maybe 5% put in there automatically.  Then, set up automatic bill payments, so you don't even have to think about it.  Check it once a month to make sure there aren't any surprises. Pay off your credit cards every month.  These are, by far, the most expensive forms of credit that most people have.  You shouldn't be financing large purchases with them (you'll get better rates by taking a personal loan from a bank). Set specific goals for savings, and set up automatic payroll deductions to work towards them.  Especially for buying a house; most responsible lenders will ask for 20% down.  In today's market, that means you need to write a check for $40k or $50k.  While it's tempting to finance up to 100% of the property value, it's also risky considering how volatile markets can be.  You don't want to end up owing more on the property than it's worth two years down the road. If you find yourself at the end of the month with an extra $50 or so, consider your savings goals or your current debt instead of blowing it on a toy.  Especially if you have long term debt (high balance credit cards, vehicle or property loans), applying that money directly to principal can save you months (or years) paying it back, and hundreds or thousands of dollars of interest (all depending on the details of the loan, of course). Above all, have fun with it :)  Think of your personal net worth as you do your Gamer score on the XBox, and look for ways to maximize it with a minimum of effort or investment on your part!  Investing in yourself and your future can be incredibly rewarding emotionally :)"}
{"id": "415887", "text": "There is no reason to roll an option if the current market value is lower than the strike sold. Out-of-the-money strikes (as is the $12 strike) are all time value which is decaying constantly and that is to our advantage. If share price remains below the strike, the option will expire worthless, you will still have your shares and free to sell another option the Monday after expiration Friday. If share price is > $12 on expiration Friday and you want to keep those shares, you can roll out or out-and-up depending on your outlook for the stock. Good luck, Alan"}
{"id": "415946", "text": "In the equity markets, the P/E is usually somewhere around 15.  The P/E can be viewed as the inverse of the rate of a perpetuity. Since the average is 15, and the E/P of that would be 6.7%, r should be 6.7% on average. If your business is growing, the growth rate can be incorporated like so: As you can see, a high g would make the price negative, in essence the seller should actually pay someone to take the business, but in reality, r is determined from the p and an estimated g. For a business of any growth rate, it's best to compare the multiple to the market, so for the average business in the market with your business's growth rate and industry, that P/E would be best applied to your company's income."}
{"id": "415976", "text": "The price inflation isn't a percentage, it's a fixed amount. If the dealer adds $R to the price of both the trade-in and the purchased car, then everyone ends up with the right amount of money in their pockets. So your formula should be: D + T + R = 0.1 * (P + R)"}
{"id": "416188", "text": "\"True, absolutely safe are only death and taxes.  Apparently [US treasuries](https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=yield) yield far less than 3,5-4%, but I guess that's as \"\"100% safe\"\" as it gets.  However, best I could find while talking to various banks was a reverse convertible bond that yields 3,5% per year, tax excluded. Worst case scenario: 1) I got all my money back and gained 3,5% for one year. 2) after a few years, I find myself with pretty valuable shares and still cashed in the yearly 3,5%.  I was wondering if I got lucky with that, or if there are better things out there and if yes, where I should look. Honestly, in the age of negative interests, I'm more than happy to get enough interest to counter inflation.\""}
{"id": "416371", "text": "\"I have never seen anything that suggest it's illegal to charge \"\"fair\"\" interests on loans, personally or commercially.  Even CRA has long allowed the use of properly written \"\"promissory notes\"\" as the proof for personal loans between individuals, as long as the rates are consistent with their current \"\"subscribed rate\"\" (think bank's prime rate, if you don't want to having to look it up on CRA site). Loan Shark is someone or some entity that charges significantly higher interests than the rates posted by FI's.  We are talking about 30+% versus the bank's 10%.   Yes, we can argue the FI's are acting like Loan Shark when it comes to credit card interest rates, but that's another discussion.\""}
{"id": "416476", "text": "If your dad would have won money on the slot machines(And the amount was high), the casino would have given him a W2G to fill out right there and taxes would have been deducted. However, table games including Poker does not have any such rule. You will have to account for your winnings(And losses) at the end of the year. So, it is ok if you sign that paper, as you do not owe the IRS any money yet.  You will still need to file your taxes as a non resident alien at the end of the year and attach the form W2G with it and pay your dues."}
{"id": "416513", "text": "Yield is the term used to describe how much income the bond will generate if the bond was purchased at a particular moment in time. If I pay $100 for a one year, $100 par value bond that pays 5% interest then the bond yields 5% since I will receive $5 from a $100 investment if I held the bond to maturity. If I pay $90 for the same one year bond then the bond yields 17% since I will receive $15 from a $90 investment if I held the bond to maturity. There are many factors that affect what yield creditors will accept: It is the last bullet that ultimately determines yield.  The other factors feed into the creditor\u2019s desire to hold money today versus receiving money in the future.  I desire money in my hand more than a promise to receive money in the future.  In order to entice me to lend my money someone must offer me an incentive.  Thus, they must offer me more money in the future in order for me to part with money I have. A yield curve is a snapshot of the yields for different loan durations.  The x-axis is the amount of time left on the bond while the y-axis is the yield.  The most cited yield curve is the US treasury curve which displays the yields for loans to the US government.  The yield curve changes while bonds are being traded thus it is always a snapshot of a particular moment in time. Short term loans typically have less yield than longer term loans since there is less uncertainty about the near future. Yield curves will flatten or slightly invert when creditors desire to keep their money instead of loaning it out.  This can occur because of a sudden disruption in the market that causes uncertainty about the future which leads to an increase in the demand for cash on hand. The US government yield curve should be looked at with some reservation however since there is a very large creditor to the US government that has the ability to loan the government an unlimited amount of funds."}
{"id": "416569", "text": "The biggest benefit to having a larger portfolio is relatively reduced transaction costs. If you buy a $830 share of Google at a broker with a $10 commission, the commission is 1.2% of your buy price.  If you then sell it for $860, that's another 1.1% gone to commission.  Another way to look at it is, of your $30 ($860 - $830) gain you've given up $20 to transaction costs, or 66.67% of the proceeds of your trade went to transaction costs. Now assume you traded 10 shares of Google. Your buy was $8,300 and you sold for $8,600.  Your gain is $300 and you spent the same $20 to transact the buy and sell.  Now you've only given up 6% of your proceeds ($20 divided by your $300 gain). You could also scale this up to 100 shares or even 1,000 shares. Generally, dividend reinvestment are done with no transaction cost.  So you periodically get to bolster your position without losing more to transaction costs.  For retail investors transaction costs can be meaningful.  When you're wielding a $5,000,000 pot of money you can make your trades on a larger scale giving up relatively less to transaction costs."}
{"id": "416787", "text": "What you are looking for is a 1031 exchange. https://www.irs.gov/uac/like-kind-exchanges-under-irc-code-section-1031 Whenever you sell business or investment property and you have a gain, you generally have to pay tax on the gain at the time of sale. IRC Section 1031 provides an exception and allows you to postpone paying tax on the gain if you reinvest the proceeds in similar property as part of a qualifying like-kind exchange. Gain deferred in a like-kind exchange under IRC Section 1031 is tax-deferred, but it is not tax-free. You may also sell your house for bitcoin and record the sales price on the deed with an equal or lesser amount that you bought it for."}
{"id": "417130", "text": "Building your credit takes time.  The basic idea is pay bills on time, and keep the available credit high.    So you spend between 10-30% on the card and pay off in full each month.  If you have student loans, once you start paying on those, that will help too, after you get some payment history, but again, it will take time."}
{"id": "417295", "text": "If the $882 is reported on W2 as your income then it is added to your taxable income on W2 and is taxed as salary. Your basis then becomes $5882. If it is not reported on your W2 - you need to add it yourself. Its salary income. If its not properly reported on W2 it may have some issues with FICA, so I suggest talking to your salary department to verify it is. In any case, this is not short term capital gain. Your broker may or may not be aware of the reporting on W2, and if they report the basis as $5000 on your 1099, when you fill your tax form you can add a statement that it is ESPP reported on W2 and change the basis to correct one. H&R Block and TurboTax both support that (you need to chose the correct type of investment there)."}
{"id": "417981", "text": "\"While the question is very localized, I'll answer about the general principle. My main question is with how far away it is (over 1000 miles), how do   I quantify the travel expenses? Generally, \"\"necessary and ordinary\"\" expenses are deductible. This is true for business and also true for rentals. But what is necessary and what is ordinary? Is it ordinary that a landlord will manage the property 1000 miles away by himself on a daily basis? Is it ordinary for people to drive 1000 miles every week? I'd say \"\"no\"\" to both. I'd say it would be cheaper for you to hire a local property manager, thus the travel expense would not be necessary. I would say it would be cheaper to fly (although I don't know if its true to the specific situation of the OP, but as I said - its too localized to deal with) rather than drive from Texas to Colorado. If the OP thinks that driving a thousand miles is indeed ordinary and necessary he'll have to justify it to the IRS examiner, as I'm sure it will be examined. 2 trips to the property a year will be a nearly 100% write-off (2000   miles, hotels, etc). From what I understood (and that is what I've been told by my CPA), IRS generally allows 1 (one) trip per year per property. If there's an exceptional situation - be prepared to justify it. Also, keep all the receipts (like gas, hotel, etc.... If you claim mileage but in reality you took a flight - you'll get hit hard by the IRS when audited). Also while I'm up there am I allowed to mix business with pleasure? You cannot deduct personal (\"\"pleasure\"\") expenses, at all. If the trip is mainly business, but you go out at the evening instead of staying at the hotel - that's fine. But if the trip is \"\"business\"\" trip where you spend a couple of hours at your property and then go around having fun for two days - the whole trip may be disallowed. If there's a reasonable portion dedicated to your business/rental, and the rest is pleasure - you'll have to split some of the costs and only deduct the portion attributed to the business activities. You'll have to analyze your specific situation, and see where it falls. Don't stretch the limits too much, it will cost you more on the long run after all the audits and penalties. Can I also write off all travel involved in the purchase of the   property? Although, again, the \"\"necessary and ordinary\"\" justification of such a trip is arguable, lets assume it is necessary and ordinary and generally justified. It is reasonable to expect you to go and see the property with your own eyes before the closing (IMHO, of course, I'm not an authority). Such an expense can be either business or investment expense. If its a business expense - its deductible on schedule C. If its an investment expense (if you do buy the property), its added to the cost of the property (capitalized). I'm not a tax adviser or a tax professional, and this is not a tax advice. This answer was not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding any tax related penalties that may be imposed on you or any other person under the Internal Revenue Code. You should seek a professional consultation with a CPA/Attorney(tax) licensed in your State(s) or a Federally licensed Enrolled Agent (EA).\""}
{"id": "418108", "text": "The value of debt is that it allows you to profit from the return of equity beyond the amount of actual net equity you own.  Of course, this only works if the cost of borrowing is less than your return on equity.  Market timing matters a great deal but isn't accounted for in this view.  For my answer I would like to hand-wave away market timing considerations.  One plausible justification is that you could default on your current home and then immediately go buy one of equal value.  If you buy a new home of a lesser value (due to lack of funds) and then prices appreciate, then you missed some opportunity cost but probably not $100k worth of it. Moving on, here are some helpful assumptions I'll make. I'll ignore performance of your portfolio after retirement and only seek to optimize F, which will be your net worth upon retirement.  In either case, your current net worth is earning the R2 rate.  We can convert this for both your current net worth and future savings using conversion formulas. Present to future value F = P (1+R2)^x Annual to future value F = S ( (1+R2)^x - 1 ) / R2 Adding these together is sufficient to obtain F in the case that you have no borrowing power.  The case where you do not default and maintain your credit score is different due to an initial $100k penalty and the amortized value of borrowing power.  In a completely theoretical sense, you get an effective (R2-R1) yield on all borrowed money.  The future value will be the following: F = A1 (1+R2-R1)^x One step is missing, however, which is to convert this value (the value of having a good credit score) into present value to compare to value of your defaulting. P of borrowing power = F / (1+R2)^x = A1 { (1+R2-R1)/(1+R2) }^x Now, let's put some specific values in.  Say that you can borrow $300k with your good credit history and this applies for the next 25 years, after which you retire.  The borrowing rate is 7% and the time-value of money to you is 10%.  I would then calculate: P of borrowing power = $58 k < $100 k This indicates that it would be more economical to default.  Of course, some people might point out that it will be removed from your record after 7 years.  If you plug 7 years instead of 25 years into the equation, almost no assumptions about rates will lead to the option of keeping your house being preferable. So in a nutshell, the value of your credit is probably less than $100k in a purely mathematical sense.  But there are other factors too.  If you don't have that borrowing ability maybe you wouldn't be able to borrow money to start the business of your dreams.  If you are a rock star entrepreneur, then time-value of money to you could be 1,000% yield, sure, then maybe you could make the above numbers work (to favor keeping the house).  I've also neglected ethics.  As other people point out, it would be like stealing from the bank."}
{"id": "418135", "text": "r/personalfinance  r/investing   Make a budget, set goals, and make a plan on how to achieve them.   99% of people will say index funds and dollar cost average. Make sure to set up a retirement account and see if your company has a matching program   Edit- hire an accounting/tax specialist."}
{"id": "418150", "text": "If a stock that makes up a big part of the Dow Jones Industrial   Average decided to issue a huge number of additional shares, that will   make the index go up. At least this is what should happen, since an   index is basically a sum of the market cap of the contributing   companies. No, indices can have various weightings. The DJIA is a price-weighted index not market-cap weighted. An alternative weighting besides market-cap and price is equal weighting. From Dow Jones: Dow Jones Industrial Average\u2122. Introduced in May 1896, the index, also   referred to as The Dow\u00ae, is a price-weighted measure of 30 U.S.   blue-chip companies. Thus, I can wonder what in the new shares makes the index go up? If a stock is split, the Dow divisor is adjusted as one could easily see how the current Dow value isn't equal to the sum or the share prices of the members of the index. In other cases, there may be a dilution of earnings but that doesn't necessarily affect the stock price directly as there may be options exercised or secondary offerings made. SO if the index, goes up, will the ETF DIA also go up automatically   although no additional buying has happened in the ETF itself? If the index rises and the ETF doesn't proportionally, then there is an arbitrage opportunity for someone to buy the DIA shares that can be redeemed for the underlying stocks that are worth more in this case. Look at the Creation and Redemption Unit process that exists for ETFs."}
{"id": "418551", "text": "\"Aggressiveness in a retirement portfolio is usually a function of your age and your risk tolerance. Your portfolio is usually a mix of the following asset classes: You can break down these asset classes further, but each one is a topic unto itself. If you are young, you want to invest in things that have a higher return, but are more volatile, because market fluctuations (like the current financial meltdown) will be long gone before you reach retirement age.  This means that at a younger age, you should be investing more in stocks and foreign/developing countries. If you are older, you need to be into more conservative investments (bonds, money market, etc).  If you were in your 50s-60s and still heavily invested in stock, something like the current financial crisis could have ruined your retirement plans.  (A lot of baby boomers learned this the hard way.) For most of your life, you will probably be somewhere in between these two.  Start aggressive, and gradually get more conservative as you get older.  You will probably need to re-check your asset allocation once every 5 years or so. As for how much of each investment class, there are no hard and fast rules.  The idea is to maximize return while accepting a certain amount of risk.  There are two big unknowns in there: (1) how much return do you expect from the various investments, and (2) how much risk are you willing to accept.  #1 is a big guess, and #2 is personal opinion. A general portfolio guideline is \"\"100 minus your age\"\".  This means if you are 20, you should have 80% of your retirement portfolio in stocks.  If you are 60, your retirement portfolio should be 40% stock.  Over the years, the \"\"100\"\" number has varied.  Some financial advisor types have suggested \"\"150\"\" or \"\"200\"\".  Unfortunately, that's why a lot of baby boomers can't retire now. Above all, re-balance your portfolio regularly.  At least once a year, perhaps quarterly if the market is going wild.  Make sure you are still in-line with your desired asset allocation.  If the stock market tanks and you are under-invested in stocks, buy more stock, selling off other funds if necessary.  (I've read interviews with fund managers who say failure to rebalance in a down stock market is one of the big mistakes people make when managing a retirement portfolio.) As for specific mutual fund suggestions, I'm not going to do that, because it depends on what your 401k or IRA has available as investment options.  I do suggest that your focus on selecting a \"\"passive\"\" index fund, not an actively managed fund with a high expense ratio. Personally, I like \"\"total market\"\" funds to give you the broadest allocation of small and big companies.  (This makes your question about large/small cap stocks moot.)  The next best choice would be an S&P 500 index fund. You should also be able to find a low-cost Bond Index Fund that will give you a healthy mix of different bond types. However, you need to look at expense ratios to make an informed decision.  A better-performing fund is pointless if you lose it all to fees! Also, watch out for overlap between your fund choices.  Investing in both a Total Market fund, and an S&P 500 fund undermines the idea of a diversified portfolio. An aggressive portfolio usually includes some Foreign/Developing Nation investments.  There aren't many index fund options here, so you may have to go with an actively-managed fund (with a much higher expense ratio).  However, this kind of investment can be worth it to take advantage of the economic growth in places like China. http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2009/04/27/how-to-create-your-own-target-date-mutual-fund/\""}
{"id": "418626", "text": "You're missing the cost-of-carry aspect: The cost of carry or carrying charge is the cost of storing a physical commodity, such as grain or metals, over a period of time. The carrying charge includes insurance, storage and interest on the invested funds as well as other incidental costs. In interest rate futures markets, it refers to the differential between the yield on a cash instrument and the cost of the funds necessary to buy the instrument. So in a nutshell, you'd have to store the gold (safely), invest your money now, i.e. you're missing out on interests the money could have earned until the futures delivery date.  Well and on top of that you need to get the gold shipped to London or wherever the agreed delivery place is. Edit: Forgot to mention that of course there are arbitrageurs that make sure the futures and spot market prices don't diverge. So the idea isn't that bad as I might have made it sound but being in the arbitrage business myself I should disclaim that profits are small and arbitraging is highly automated, so before you spot a $1 profit somewhere between any two contracts, you can be quite sure it's been taken by an arbitrageur already."}
{"id": "418630", "text": "\"Most states that have income tax base their taxes on the income reported on your federal return, with some state-specific adjustments.  So answering your last question first:  Yes, if it matters for federal, it will matter for state (in most cases). For estimating the tax liability, I would not use the effective rate but rather use the rate for your highest tax bracket and apply that to your estimated hobby income, assuming that you primary job income won't be wildly higher or lower than last year. As @keshlam noted in a comment, this income is coming on top of whatever else you earn, so it will be taxed at your top rate. Finally, I'd check again whether this is really \"\"hobby\"\" income or if it is \"\"self-employment\"\" income.  Self-employment income will be subject to self-employment tax, which comes on top of the regular income tax.\""}
{"id": "418647", "text": "Do you need to incorporate? This depends on whether the company prefers you to be incorporated.  If you are going through a recruiting company, some of them are willing to deal with non-incorporated people (Sole Proprietor) and withhold taxes from your cheques for you. If you do want to incorporate, you can do it yourself, go through a paralegal, or you can even do it online.  I did mine in Ontario for about $300 (no name search - i just have a numbered corporation like 123456 Ontario Inc.) through www.oncorp.com - there are other sites that do it as well. Things to consider - if you're contracting through a corporation you most likely need to: Talk to an accountant about these for clarification - most of them will give you an initial consultation for free. Generally speaking, accountant fees for corporate filing taxes averages about $1000-2000 a year."}
{"id": "418772", "text": "\"No shit. That crazy, ruthless republican notion that your credit rating shouldn't take a hit because you defaulted on the restructured home loan that you got when you defaulted on the *last* deal. Few people shed a tear for the borrowers who defaulted on jumbo ARM loans, but when a government does it we're all supposed to sit here and say \"\"that's ok. Take a mulligan\"\".\""}
{"id": "418999", "text": "Not sure about the UK, but if it were in the US you need to realize the expenses can be claimed as much as the income. After having a mild heart attack when I did my business taxes the first time many years ago, a Small Business Administration adviser pointed it out. You are running the site from a computer?  Deductible on an amortization schedule.  Do you work from home?  Electricity can be deducted.  Do you drive at all?  Did you pay yourself a wage?  Any paperwork, fax communications, bank fees that you had to endure as work expenses? I am not an accountant, but chances are you legally lost quite a bit more than you made in a new web venture.  Discuss it with an accountant for the details and more importantly the laws in your country.  I could be off my rocker."}
{"id": "419138", "text": "Leverage is when you borrow in order to invest. Mind you, most people aren't going to just give you money to gamble on the stock market completely unsecured; rather, you deposit (say) $10,000 and buy a stock... and then you have $10k in assets which you can borrow against, so you can buy another $10,000 of that stock. Now if the stock goes up you'll make twice the gain (2x leverage). However, if it goes down, you'll lose twice as much as well. If the value of your stock falls, your line of credit will be reduced as well; in this case, since you used all your credit and are now over your limit, your broker will issue a margin call (they will demand a deposit of additional funds, or they will sell some of your stock at their discretion). This protects you from owing more than you invested, but it's still sometimes possible (for instance, if a company spontaneously goes bankrupt and becomes worthless, and your stock becomes worthless). There are also things like leveraged index funds and commodity funds which aim to return some multiple of the market's earnings. These are designed for intraday trading, though, and usually end up underperforming significantly over the long term. [edit] Mose people who accept borrowed funds should generally accept real cash as well. However, if you're trying to short sell, i.e. borrow shares and sell them (in the hopes you can get them back cheaper later after the stock falls) you will need a margin line of credit to do so as well. [edit 2] clarified margin calls"}
{"id": "419578", "text": "Thanks. I'm going to have them take 40% on Monday when I go to the lottery office.  I have a car payment that's been killing me, so that's the first move.  Student loans have a fairly low APR, Sotho king about keeping those to build credit."}
{"id": "419747", "text": "This is not hypothetical, this is an accurate story. I am a long-term investor. I have a bunch of money that I'd like to invest and I plan on spreading it out over five or six mutual funds and ETFs, roughly according to the Canadian Couch Potato model portfolio (that is, passive mutual funds and ETFs rather than specific stocks). I am concerned that if I invest the full amount and the stock market crashes 30% next month, I will have paid more than I had to. As I am investing for the long term, I expect to more than regain my investment, but I still wouldn't be thrilled with paying 30% more than I had to. Instead, I am investing my money in three stages. I invested the first third earlier this month. I'll invest the next third in a few months, and the final third a few months after that. If the stock market climbs, as I expect is more likely the case, I will have lost out on some potential upside. However, if the stock market crashes next month, I will end up paying a lower average cost as two of my three purchases will occur after the crash. On average, as a long-term investor, I expect the stock market to go up. In the short term, I expect much more fluctuation. Statistically speaking, I'd do better to invest all the money at once as most of the time, the trend is upward. However, I am willing to trade some potential upside for a somewhat reduced risk of downside over the course of the next few months. If we were talking a price difference of 1% as mentioned in the question, I wouldn't care. I expect to see average annual returns far above this. But stock market crashes can cause the loss of 20 to 30% or more, and those are numbers I care about. I'd much rather buy in at 30% less than the current price, after all."}
{"id": "419809", "text": "\"Ya, when my buddy who is by no means a financial wizard, and paid to have his TV installed (not even wall mounted...), told me he was looking to invest in a condo, cause apparently it was \"\"easy\"\".  I think the quote from the friend who told him got broken down to, \"\"The market only goes up, so as long as your rent handles the interest on your mortgage you just make up the difference and gain when your value doubles!\"\"  That is one reason I am worried for the eventual decline if all of those types of people rush for the door at the same time.  I really hope it is a case of broken telephone.\""}
{"id": "420273", "text": "Indeed, a well respected study found that American children are still not dumb enough that they don't understand that they are paying off 20 Trillion of debt borrowed from a bank that prints its own money, but expects to be repaid in real money.  It also recommended that lead be added to the diet and where children seemed resilient and stubborn and asked to many questions, it be administered with a .38  Shalom bitches it concluded"}
{"id": "420379", "text": "\"As an owner of a share of a business you also \"\"own\"\" profits made by the business. But you delegate company management to reinvest those profits, on your behalf, to make even more profits. So your share of the business is a little money-making machine that should grow, without you having to pay taxes on the dividends and without you having to decide where to reinvest your share of the profit.\""}
{"id": "420440", "text": "Banks make money by charging fees on products and charging interest on loans. If you keep close to a $0 average balance in your account, and they aren't charging you any fees, then yes, your account is not profitable for them. That's ok. It's not costing them much to keep you as a customer, and some day you may start keeping a balance with them or apply for a loan. The bank is taking a chance that you will continue to be a loyal customer and will one day become profitable for them. Just be on the lookout for a change in their fee structure. Sometimes banks drop customers or start charging fees in cases like yours."}
{"id": "420484", "text": "I've wondered the same thing.  And, after reading the above replies, I think there is a simpler explanation. It goes like this. When the bank goes to make a loan they need capital to do it. So, they can get it from the federal reserve, another bank, or us. Well, if the federal reserve will loan it to them for lets say 0.05%, what do you think they are going to be willing to pay us?  Id say maybe 0.04%. Anyway, I could be wrong, but this makes sense to me."}
{"id": "420529", "text": "I assume US as mhoran_psprep edited, although I'm not sure IRS necessarily means US. (It definitely used to also include Britain's Inland Revenue, but they changed.)  (US) Stockbrokers do not normally withhold on either dividends/interest/distributions or realized capital gains, especially since gains might be reduced or eliminated by later losses. (They can be required to apply backup withholding to dividends and interest; don't ask how I know :-) You are normally required to pay most of your tax during the year, defined as within 10% or $1000 whichever is more, by withholding and/or estimated payments. Thus if the tax on your income including your recent gain will exceed your withholding by 10% and $1000, you should either adjust your withholding or make an estimated payment or some combination, although even if you have a job the last week of December is too late for you to adjust withholding significantly, or even to make a timely estimated payment if 'earlier in the year' means in an earlier quarter as defined for tax (Jan-Mar, Apr-May, June-Aug, Sept-Dec). See https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/estimated-taxes and for details its link to Publication 505. But a 'safe harbor' may apply since you say this is your first time to have capital gains. If you did not owe any income tax for last year (and were a citizen or resident), or (except very high earners) if you did owe tax and your withholding plus estimated payments this year is enough to pay last year's tax, you are exempt from the Form 2210 penalty and you have until the filing deadline (normally April 15 but this year April 18 due to weekend and holiday) to pay. The latter is likely if your job and therefore payroll income and withholding this year was the same or nearly the same as last year and there was no other big change other than the new capital gain. Also note that gains on investments held more than one year are classified as long-term and taxed at lower rates, which reduces the tax you will owe (all else equal) and thus the payments you need to make. But your wording 'bought and sold ... earlier this year' suggests your holding was not long-term, and short-term gains are taxed as 'ordinary' income. Added: if the state you live in has a state income tax similar considerations apply but to smaller amounts. TTBOMK all states tax capital gains (and other investment income, other than interest on exempt bonds), and don't necessarily give the lower rates for long-term gains. And all states I have lived in have 'must have withholding or estimated payments' rules generally similar to the Federal ones, though not identical."}
{"id": "420846", "text": "\"Your wages are an expense to your employer and are therefore 100% tax deductible in the business income.  The company should not be paying tax on that, so your double-tax scenario, as described, isn't really correct. [The phrase \"\"double taxation\"\" with respect to US corporations usually comes into play with dividends.  In that case, however, it's the shareholders (owners) that pay double.  The answer to \"\"why?\"\" in that case can only be \"\"because it's the law.\"\"]\""}
{"id": "420851", "text": "Yes, you are. When someone is bankrupt their assets are being sold to satisfy the creditors. Your note is an asset, and will be sold. You'll be making payments to the entity that buys it."}
{"id": "420915", "text": "\"I would suggest you forget everything you learned in economics. The only applicable knowledge is Accounting 101.  Step 1: An accrual basis financial statement. There is no step 2 if you don't do this. Most small business do everything cash basis. Simpler, cheaper but useless for analysis. You would get better answers from the local fortune teller than a cash basis statement.   Make one change from the general rules. If you have debt or are paying interest for inventory include that in your cost of sales. This is actually proper but the rule is little known and often ignored. Interest on debt up to the amount of inventory is a cost of inventory.  Step 2: Gross profit. If you seem to be working hard and still losing money it may be because you are selling products for less than they cost you. In this case the more you sell the more you lose. So suggestions like advertising or doing anything to increase sales are actually destructive.  Step 3 Price products at the level necessary to turn a profit at current sales and overhead. 'When we have enough sales we will make a profit\"\" is the philosophy of a start up business. It is toxic for a going concern.  Step 4 If sales are unsustainable at the price that produces a profit have the courage to sell or close the business. I have seen people waste their lives on futile endeavors just because they can't make that tough decision.  Finally Step 0: Ignore all other suggestions but this. They are well meaning but ill informed. To reiterate, growing sales while losing money on every transaction is a huge mistake. Trends, books, charts and graphs, analytics and market research are the tools of con-men and fortune tellers. Business is arithmetic and nothing more or less.  FYI if I don't get at least one upvote, this is the last time I am giving my valuable professional advice away for free on reddit. Folks will have to rely on the suggestions of their fellow college kids.\""}
{"id": "420974", "text": "\"Though it seems unintuitive, you should rationally ignore the past performance of this stock (including the fact that it's at its 52-week high) and focus exclusively on factors that you believe should affect it moving forward.  If you think it's going to go up even further,  more than the return on your other options for where to put the money, keep the stock.  If you think it's peaked and will be going down, now's a good time to sell. To put it another way: if you didn't already have this stock, would you buy it today? Your choice is just about the same: you can choose between a sum of cash equal to the present market value of the shares, OR the shares.   Which do you think is worth more? You also mentioned that you only have 10 stocks in the portfolio.  Some are probably a larger percentage than others, and this distribution may be different than what you want in your portfolio.  It may be time to do some rebalancing, which could involve selling some shares where your position is too large (as a % of your portfolio) and using the proceeds toward one or more categories you're not as invested in as you would like to be.  This might be a good opportunity to increase the diversity in your portfolio. If part of your reward and motivation for trading is emotional, not purely financial, you could sell now, mark it as a \"\"win,\"\" and move on to another opportunity.  Trading based on emotions is not likely to optimize your future balance, but not everybody is into trading or money for money's sake.  What's going to help you sleep better at night and help boost your quality of life?  If holding the stock will make you stress and regret a missed opportunity if it goes down, and selling it will make you feel happy and confident even if it still goes up more (e.g. you interpret that as further confirming that you made a good pick in the first place), you might decide that the risk of suboptimal financial returns (from emotion-based trading) is acceptable.  As CQM points out, you could also set a trailing sell order to activate only when the stock is a certain percentage or dollar amount below whatever it peaks at between the time you set the order and the time it fires/expires; the activation price will rise with the stock and hold as it falls.\""}
{"id": "420993", "text": "You're correct. The VIX price is calculated based on the price of all of SPX options which are expiring (IIRC 2) weeks after the expiration of that VIX contract. It's an index measuring implied vol not realized vol.  VIX futures/options are calculated slightly differently than the VIX index."}
{"id": "421172", "text": "\"&gt;Title leads one to believe that one complaint call cost a company four million bucks.  Actually the title is ambiguous; it merely implies that the complain call was *worth* $4 million.  You chose to *infer* that the end result was a \"\"cost\"\" rather than a \"\"gain\"\".\""}
{"id": "421575", "text": "Are financial institutions less likely to lend me money because of my age Yes.  But they are especially unlikely to loan you money because you have little income.   or because they know I avoid interest by paying things off aggressively? This won't affect them.  But you might ask yourself how much credit history you have.  Credit history can include all of loans, credit cards, rent, utilities, etc.  You mention three loans.  But you don't mention rent or utilities.  You may simply not have much credit history, even if what you do have is good.   But again, the biggest thing that they will look at is your income history.  If you have a small income, then it doesn't matter what your payment history is.  They don't want to loan money to people who need money.  They want to loan money to people who don't need to borrow but are instead bringing a future purchase into the present.   The ideal recipient is someone who has a high income and spends it all every month.  Such a person is likely to borrow heavily but be able to keep up the payments.   Obsessing about your ability to borrow is probably the wrong approach.  Instead focus on how you can meet your goals without borrowing.  Eventually your ability to pay will catch up.  Then they'll offer you money.  Of course, you might not need it then.   Note that when I say little income, I'm talking about their perspective.  You may be fully on track and making decent money or even very good money for your age.  But they're looking for people who are mature in their careers and regularly bringing home large sums but who spend it faster than they can get it."}
{"id": "421639", "text": "That would have been a good idea.  They don't charge interest on a $0 balance, but if you payoff your account after the cycle date, there is a hidden balance and that balance will accrue interest. It is only a few cents a day.  I just don't think it is legal for them to refuse to provide you a payoff quote mid cycle. I'm almost certain. When I worked for Discover it was a key point in training to not give the wrong amount and to make sure to use the calculator in the system to quote a daily balance, how much it goes up per day, and how much they should send if they were mailing the payment, giving consideration for the time it takes to receive/process the payment."}
{"id": "421978", "text": "\"Story printed literally as the only thing that can hold on value to the currency..   OK so I'm printing unlimited money to pay off my debt,  so hey debtor I can either give you this useless currency or I can't pay..   Japan is heading for default,  their currency is only holding value because people have \"\"Hope\"\", the only reason for hope is because this article \"\"says\"\" people don't know..  They know  ..\""}
{"id": "422084", "text": "sheegaon's reply looks fine to me, a HELOC can usually be set up for a minimal ($50?) fee, and is currently a pretty low rate, mine is 2.5%.  If this doesn't appeal to you, my other suggestion is a 401(k) loan. While this is usually a last resort and 'not' recommended, a short term use may make sense. The rate is low, and you can pay in back in full after moving into the new house."}
{"id": "422225", "text": "\"Actually in Finland on some bank + debit/credit card + online retailer combinations you type in your card details as you normally do, but after clicking \"\"Buy\"\" you get directed to your own bank's website which asks you to authenticate yourself with online banking credentials. It also displays the amount of money and to which account it is being paid to. After authentication you get directed back to the retailer's website. Cannot say why banks in US haven't implemented this.\""}
{"id": "422295", "text": "\"In some sense, the share repurchasing program is better if the company does not foresee the same profit levels down the road.  Paying a dividend for several years and then suddenly not paying or reducing a dividend is viewed as a \"\"slap in the face\"\" by investors.  Executing a share repurchase program one year and then not the next is not viewed as negatively. From an investor's standpoint, I would say a dividend is preferred over a share repurchase program for a similar reason.  Typically companies that pay a dividend have been doing so for quite some time and even increasing it over time as the company increases profits.  So, it can be assumed that if a company starts paying a dividend, it will do so for the long-run.\""}
{"id": "422436", "text": "\"You're right about your suspicions. I'm not a professional (I suggest you talk to a real one, a one with CPA, EA or Attorney credentials and license in your State), but I would be very cautious in this case. The IRS will look at all the facts and circumstances to make a claim, but my guess would be that the initial claim would be for this to be taxable income for your husband. He'd have to prove it to be otherwise. It does seem to be related to his performance, and I doubt that had they not known him through his employment, they'd give him such a gift. I may be wrong. So may be an IRS Revenue Officer. But I'd bet he'd think the same. Did they give \"\"gifts\"\" like that to anyone else? If they did - was it to other employees or they gave similar gifts to all their friends and family? Did those who gave your husband a gift file a gift tax return? Had they paid the gift tax? Were they principles in the partnership or they were limited partners (i.e.: not the ones with authority to make any decision)? Was your husband instrumental in making their extraordinary profit, or his job was not related to the profits these people made? These questions are inquiring about the facts and circumstances of the transaction. Based on what he can find out, and other potential information, your husband will have to decide whether he can reasonably claim that it was a gift. Beware: unreasonable claims lead to equally unreasonable penalties and charges. IRS and your State will definitely want to know more about this transaction, its not an amount to slide under the radar. This is not a matter where you can rely on a free opinions written by amateurs who don't know the whole story. You (or, rather, your husband) are highly encouraged to hire a paid professional - a CPA, EA (enrolled agent) or tax attorney with enough experience in fighting gift vs income characterization issues against the IRS (and the State, don't forget your State). An experienced professional may be able to identify something in the facts and the circumstances of the situation that would lead to reducing the tax bill or shifting it to the partners, but it is not something you do on your own.\""}
{"id": "422684", "text": "\"You're calculating it exactly right. I wrote about this one on my blog a while ago. Lesson learned is that nothing comes for free, and you can take the saying \"\"there are no free meals\"\" quite literally in this case. edit To address the comments about tips... I don't believe tips should be compulsory. Its my reward to the server for outstanding service. Not part of the cost of the meal. If its part of the server's salary - then I prefer not to dine in such a place (and at least in some places its illegal to consider tips as part of the salary). The coupon in question explicitly requests tipping the server. Thus, the tips with or without the coupon are still expected, and that's why I'm not taking them into the consideration. According to the laws of the State of California (where I live), mandatory charges, such as the 18% gratuity charge required by the coupon, are not tips, and don't have to be passed on to the employees. Thus, employees will still expect my tips on the bill, so I'm basically required to tip twice, when using the coupon.\""}
{"id": "422941", "text": "\"The \"\"pure play\"\" would be using interest rate options.  http://www.cboe.com/Products/InterestRateOptionsSpecs.aspx\""}
{"id": "422974", "text": "\"While I know some people prefer handling things more \"\"manually\"\", I really like automating everything possible. To the greatest extent possible, my deposits automatically go into my Checking account and my bills automatically withdraw from it. That way, I never have to worry about accidentally paying a bill late, and my financial life just runs mostly on its own. There are a couple things to be wary of when automating one's financial life:\""}
{"id": "422979", "text": "The fact that you are planning to move abroad does not affect the decision to contribute to a 401(k). The reason for this is that after you leave your employer, you can roll all the money over from your 401(k) into a self-directed traditional IRA. That money can stay invested until retirement, and it doesn't matter where you are living before or after retirement age.  So, when deciding whether or not to use a 401(k), you need to look at the details of your employer's plan: Does your employer offer a match? If so, you should definitely take advantage of it.  Are there good investments available inside the 401(k)? Some plans offer very limited options. If you can't find anything good to invest in, you don't want to contribute anything beyond the match; instead, contribute to an IRA, where you can invest in a fund that you like.  The other reason to use a 401(k) is that the contribution limits can be higher. If you want to invest more than you are allowed to in an IRA, the 401(k) might allow that.  In your case, since there is no match, it is up to you whether you want to participate or not. An IRA will allow more flexibility in investing options. If you need to invest more than your IRA limit, the 401(k) might allow that. When you leave your employer, you should probably roll any 401(k) money into an IRA."}
{"id": "423171", "text": "I'm assuming your talking USA. There are two ways to look. If you know you should pay on the cap gains, the best way to handle that separately from your salary is to file a quarterly tax payment.  That, I understand, is what the self-employed have to do. I'm in the situation where at some point, probably this year, the company that employs me will be bought out, and I will owe capital gains taxes on my shares gobbled up in the buy-out.  It's a cash-for-stock transaction.  So, in my case, I've just adjusted my W-4 to take advantage of the safe-harbor provision related to taxes I payed in 2016 and my salary.  The details vary depending on your situation, but in my case, I've calculated what it will take in W-4 allowances to make sure I pay 110% of my 2016 tax payment (after refund).  I'm not worrying about what the actual taxes on those shares of company stock will be, because I've met the rules for safe-harbor. Safe harbor just means that they can't penalize you for under-withholding or underpayment.  It doesn't mean I won't have to write a check on april 15."}
{"id": "423217", "text": "You would be extremely delusional if you think the average joe could go to Princeton, and then get a senior executive position at age 29. I also would know because Im also privileged like David and so are most of my friends. I don't I have a single friend that is paying for their own tuition out of pocket.  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/fashion/weddings/david-knopf-edwin-marrero-weddings.html"}
{"id": "423438", "text": "Your post seems to read as if you want to invest only in real estate rental properties as a start because they will be a reliable investment guaranteed to generate profits that you will be plowing back into buying even more rental properties, but you are willing to consider (possibly in later years) other forms of investment (in real estate) that will not require active  participation in the management of the rental properties. While many participants here do own rental real estate and even manage it entirely, for most people, that is only a small part of their investment portfolio, and I suspect that hardly any will recommend real estate as the only investment the way you seem to want to do. Also, you might want to look more closely at the realities of rental real estate  operations before jumping in. Things are not necessarily as rosy as they appear to you now.  Not all your units will be rented all the time, and the rental income might not always be enough to cover the mortgage payments and the property taxes and the insurance payments and the repairs and maintenance and ... Depreciation of the property is another matter that you might not have thought about. That being said, you can invest in real estate through real estate investment trusts (REITs) or through limited partnerships where you have only a passive role.  There are even mutual funds that invest in REITs or in REIT indexes."}
{"id": "423754", "text": "\"I don't think you have your head in the right space - you seem to be thinking of these lifecycle funds like they're an annuity or a pension, but they're not. They're an investment. Specifically, they're a mutual fund that will invest in a collection of other mutual funds, which in turn invest in stock and bonds. Stocks go up, and stocks go down. Bonds go up, and bonds go down. How much you'll have in this fund next year is unknowable, much less 32 years from now. What you can know, is that saving regularly over the next 32 years and investing it in a reasonable, and diversified way in a tax sheltered account like that Roth will mean you have a nice chunk of change sitting there when you retire. The lifecycle funds exist to help you with that \"\"reasonable\"\" and \"\"diversified\"\" bit.They're meant to be one stop shopping for a retirement portfolio. They put your money into a diversified portfolio, then \"\"age\"\" the portfolio allocations over time to make it go from a high risk, (potentially) high reward allocation now to a lower risk, lower reward portfolio as you approach retirement. The idea is is that you want to shoot for making lots of money now, but when you're older, you want to focus more on keeping the money you have. Incidentally, kudos for getting into seriously saving for retirement when you're young. One of the biggest positive effects you can have on how much you retire with is simply time. The more time your money can sit there, the better. At 26, if you're putting away 10 percent into a Roth, you're doing just fine. If that 5k is more than 10 percent, you'll do better than fine. (That's a rule of thumb, but it's based on a lot of things I've read where people have gamed out various scenarios, as well as my own, cruder calculations I've done in the past)\""}
{"id": "424079", "text": "\"The short answer is the annualised volatility over twenty years should be pretty much the same as the annualised volatility over five years. For independent, identically distributed returns the volatility scales proportionally. So for any number of monthly returns T, setting the annualization factor m = 12 annualises the volatility.  It should be the same for all time scales.  However, note the discussion here: https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/7496/7178 Scaling volatility [like this] only is mathematically correct when the   underlying price model is driven by Geometric Brownian motion which   implies that prices are log normally distributed and returns are   normally distributed. Particularly the comment: \"\"its a well known fact that volatility is overestimated when scaled over long periods of time without a change of model to estimate such \"\"long-term\"\" volatility.\"\" Now, a demonstration.  I have modelled 12,000 monthly returns with mean = 3% and standard deviation = 2, so the annualised volatility should be Sqrt(12) * 2 = 6.9282.   Calculating annualised volatility for return sequences of various lengths (3, 6, 12, 60 months etc.) reveals an inaccuracy for shorter sequences.  The five-year sequence average got closest to the theoretically expected figure (6.9282), and, as the commenter noted \"\"volatility is [slightly] overestimated when scaled over long periods of time\"\". Annualised volatility for varying return sequence lengths  Edit re. comment Reinvesting returns does not affect the volatility much.  For instance, comparing some data I have handy, the Dow Jones Industrial Average Capital Returns (CR) versus Net Returns (NR).  The return differences are somewhat smoothed, 0.1% each month, 0.25% every third month.  More erratic dividend reinvestment would increase the volatility.\""}
{"id": "424717", "text": "\"Specifically, what does my broker mean when they say an asset or investment strategy is high risk?  In this context, it is a statement based on past events and probability. It is based on how confident s/he is that the investment will perform to certain benchmarks. This is a math question, primarily (with some opinion mixed in, granted). This is where the Sharpe ratio and others fit well. How am I supposed to answer a question like \"\"rate your risk tolerance from low to high\"\"? This is the hard question, as you have seen. In this context, risk tolerance is derived from your current position and future plans (goals). This is a planning, goal setting, and strategy question, primarily (with some math mixed in, granted). How vulnerable is your current position and future plans to an under-performing investment? If you answer \"\"very\"\", then you choose investments that have a lower probability of under-performing.  The Sharpe ratio has little to do with answering this question. It is a tool to find investments that better match your answer to this question.\""}
{"id": "424824", "text": "\"US-Australian tax treaty limits the tax the US can levy on interest payments to Australian residents at 10%. However, that is the \"\"worst\"\" situation. There are several exempted situations which your specific example may fall into where you wouldn't need to deal with the US taxes at all. I suggest contacting a tax accountant proficient in that treaty and the Australian tax law. You will still be obviously paying taxes in Australia.\""}
{"id": "425288", "text": "Why can't the Fed simply bid more than the bond's maturity value to lower interest rates below zero? The FED could do this but then it would have to buy all the bonds in the market since all other market participants would not be willing to lend money to the government only to receive less money back in the future.  Not everyone has the ability to print unlimited amounts of dollars :)"}
{"id": "425352", "text": "Using your credit card: Applying for a store credit card: In general it is far better to not buy bigger items like a computer until you can pay cash, or pay for it on credit card (to get reward points) and then pay off the card the next month so you don't pay interest."}
{"id": "425452", "text": "\"In theory, the idea is that diversified assets will perform differently in different circumstances, spreading your risk around. Whether that still functions in practice is a decent question, as the \"\"truth\"\" of most probability based arguments for diversification rely on the different assets being at least somewhat uncorrelated. This article suggests that might not be true. Specifically: The correlations we note among industry sectors are profoundly and dysfunctionally high. and  Gold and silver traders have gotten too used to the negative correlation trade with stocks. This is, in fact, an unusual relationship for precious metals tostocks. The correlation should actually be zero.\""}
{"id": "425527", "text": "\"Related to this question: I came across a post at The Financial Planning Exchange* titled \"\"The Top 10 Ways To Tell If You're Working With A Really Good Financial Planner.\"\" Here are a few tips I particularly liked: (* site is no longer available) 4. Make sure the planner is going to   work with you on a Fiduciary basis.   This means that they are going to   recommend only what is in your best   interest. A planner who tries to sell   you a product is generally a red flag   that they aren't looking out for your   best interests.   [...] 8. Interview the prospective planner   that you are about to hire. Understand   how they think, what their speciality   is, and most importantly how they are   going to get paid for their services.   Be very very careful with a planner   who is going to provide you with a   free financial plan as that person   more often than not has a motivation   to sell you something.   [..] 10. Last but not least, go to a person   who works hand in hand with financial   planners like an accountant or estate   planning attorney for a referral.   Accountants and estate planning/tax   attorneys know the difference between   a good and bad planner. Chances are   they are a client of the person   they'll refer you to.\""}
{"id": "425558", "text": "Traditional IRA contributions can be made if you  have compensation and the amount of the contribution is limited to the smaller of your compensation and $5500 ($6000 if age 50 or more). Note that compensation (which generally means earnings form working) is not just what appears on a W-2 form as salary or wages; it can be  earnings from self-employment too, as well as commissions, alimony etc (but not earnings from property, pensions and annuities, certain types of partnership income) You must also not have attained age 70.5 in the year for which the contribution is made.  Even if you don't have any compensation of your own, you can nonetheless make a Traditional IRA contribution if your spouse has compensation as long as you are filing a joint tax return with your spouse. For spouses filing a joint return, the  limits are still the same $5500/$6000 for each spouse, and the sum total of Traditional IRA contributions for both spouses also must not exceed the sum total of earned income of both spouses. The age limits etc are all still applicable. Note that none of this says anything about whether the contributions are deductible.  Everyone meeting the above requirements is eligible to make contributions to a Traditional IRA; whether the contributions can be deducted from current income depends on the income:  those with high enough incomes cannot deduct the contribution. This is different from Roth IRAs to which people with high incomes are not permitted to make a contribution at all. Finally, the source of the cash you contribute to the IRA can be the proceeds of the stock sale if you like; you are not required to prove that the cash received from compensation is what you sent to the IRA custodian. Read Publication 590 (available on the IRS website www.irs.gov) if you need an authoritative reference."}
{"id": "425561", "text": "Agree with some of the posts above - Barchart is a good source for finding unusual options activity and also open interest -https://www.barchart.com/options/open-interest-change"}
{"id": "425680", "text": "\"A brief review of the financial collapses in the last 30 years will show that the following events take place in a fairly typical cycle: Overuse of that innovation (resulting in inadequate supply to meet demand, in most cases) Inadequate capacity in regulatory oversight for the new volume of demand, resulting in significant unregulated activity, and non-observance of regulations to a greater extent than normal Confusion regarding shifting standards and regulations, leading to inadequate regulatory reviews and/or lenient sanctions for infractions, in turn resulting in a more aggressive industry \"\"Gaming\"\" of investment vehicles, markets and/or buyers to generate additional demand once the market is saturated \"\"Chickens coming home to roost\"\" - A breakdown in financial stability, operational accuracy, or legality of the actions of one or more significant players in the market, leading to one or more investigations A reduction in demand due to the tarnished reputation of the instrument and/or market players, leading to an anticipation of a glut of excess product in the market \"\"Cold feet\"\" - Existing customers seeking to dump assets, and refusing to buy additional product in the pipeline, resulting in a glut of excess product \"\"Wasteland\"\" - Illiquid markets of product at collapsed prices, cratering of associated portfolio values, retirees living below subsistence incomes Such investment bubbles are not limited to the last 30 years, of course; there was a bubble in silver prices (a 700% increase through one year, 1979) when the Hunt brothers attempted to corner the market, followed by a collapse on Silver Thursday in 1980.   The \"\"poster child\"\" of investment bubbles is the Tulip Mania that gripped the Netherlands in the early 1600's, in which a single tulip bulb was reported to command a price 16 times the annual salary of a skilled worker. The same cycle of events took place in each of these bubbles as well. Templeton's caution is intended to alert new (especially younger) players in the market that these patterns are doomed to repeat, and that market cycles cannot be prevented or eradicated; they are an intrinsic effect of the cycles of supply and demand that are not in synch, and in which one or both are being influenced by intermediaries. Such influences have beneficial effects on short-term profits for the players, but adverse effects on the long-term viability of the market's profitability for investors who are ill-equipped to shed the investments before the trouble starts.\""}
{"id": "425817", "text": "\"Well a definitive answer would require a lot of information.  Instead of posting that kind of info online, you should take a look at the instructions for Form 2210 and in particular \"\"Schedule AI -- Annualized Income Installment Method,\"\" which corrects the penalty for highly variable income.   Using this form you will likely be able to avoid the penalty, but it is hard to know for sure.\""}
{"id": "426215", "text": "\"Understand your own risk tolerance and discipline. From Moneychimp we can see different market results -  This is a 15 year span, containing what was arguably one of the most awful decades going. A full 10 year period with a negative return. Yet, the 15 year return was a 6.65% CAGR. You'd net 5.65% after long term cap gains. Your mortgage is likely costing ~4% or 3% after tax (This is not applicable to my Canadian friends, I understand you don't deduct interest). In my not so humble opinion, I'd pay off the highest rate debts first (unlike The David followers who are happy to pay off tens of thousands of dollars in 0% interest debt before the large 18% debt) and invest at the highest rate I'd get long term. The problem is knowing when to flip from one to the other.  Here's food for thought - The David insists on his use of the 12% long term market return. The last 100 years have had an average 11.96% return, but you can't spend average, the CAGR, the real compound rate was 10.06%. Why would he recommend paying off a sub 3% loan while using 12% for his long term planning (All my David remarks are not applicable to Canadian members, you all probably know better than to listen to US entertainers)?  I am retired, and put my money where my mouth is. The $200K I still owe on my mortgage is offset by over $400K in my 401(k). The money went in at 25%/28% pretax, has grown over these past 20 years, and comes out at 15% to pay my mortgage each month. No regrets. Anyone starting out now, and taking a 30 year mortgage, but putting the delta to a 15 year mortgage payment into their 401(k) is nearly certain to have far more in the retirement account 15 years hence than their remaining balance on the loan, even after taxes are considered. Even more if this money helps them to get the full matching, which too many miss.  All that said, keep in mind, the market is likely to see a correction or two in the next 15 years, one of which may be painful. If that would keep you up at night, don't listen to me. If a fixed return of 4% seems more appealing than a 10% return with a 15% standard deviation, pay the mortgage first.  Last - if you have a paid off house but no job, the town still wants its property tax, and the utilities still need to be paid. If you lose your job with $400K in your 401(k)/IRA but have a $200K mortgage, you have a lot of time to find a new job or sell the house with little pressure from the debt collectors.  (To answer the question in advance - \"\"Joe, at what mortgage rate do you pay it off first?\"\" Good question. I'd deposit to my 401(k) to grab matching deposits first, and then if the mortgage was anywhere north of 6%, prioritize that. This would keep my chances at near 100% of coming out ahead.)\""}
{"id": "426343", "text": "Another way to look at this is if we separate the owner's account from the business's account.  At the start of the year, the owner puts $9 into the business account to get the business started. At the end of the first day, the business account has $10, and at the end of the second day, the business account has $11.  The owner doesn't need to add any more of his own money into the business account. At the end of the 365th day, the business will have $374, which is $365 profit + $9 investment.  Assuming the business has no other expenses, the business will calculate profit for the year like this: The author is making a strange point. The two numbers he is talking about are two different quantities. The business owner's return on investment is $365 / $9 = 4056%.  But the business's profit margin is $365 / $3650 = 10%.  Both are useful numbers when running the business. I disagree with the author's insinuation that a business is doing something tricky when calculating profit margin. Remember that, in addition to the business owner's monetary investment, he worked every day for a year to earn that $365."}
{"id": "426960", "text": "\"Since you did not treat the house as a QBU, you have to use USD as your functional currency.  To calculate capital gains, you need to calculate the USD value at the time of purchase using the exchange rate at the time of purchase and the USD value at the time of sale using the exchange rate at the time of sale.  The capital gain / loss is then the difference between the two.  This link describes it in more detail and provides some references: http://www.maximadvisors.com/2013/06/foreign-residence/ That link also discusses additional potential complications if you have a mortgage on the house. This link gives more detail on the court case referenced in the above link: http://www.uniset.ca/other/cs5/93F3d26.html The court cases references Rev. Rul 54-105.  This link from the IRS has some details from that (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/0303021.pdf): Rev. Rul. 54-105, 1954-1 C.B. 12, states that for purposes of determining   gain, the basis and selling price of property acquired by a U.S. citizen living in a foreign country should be expressed in United States dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing as of the dates of purchase and sale of the property,   respectively. The text of this implies it is for U.S. citizen is living in a foreign country, but the court case makes it clear that it also applies in your scenario (house purchased while living abroad but now residing in the US): Appellants agree that the 453,374 pounds received for their residence should be translated into U.S. dollars at the $1.82 exchange rate prevailing at the date of sale. They argue, however, that the 343,147 pound adjusted cost basis of the residence, consisting of the 297,500 pound purchase price and the 45,647 pounds paid for capital improvements, likewise should be expressed in U.S. dollar terms as of the date of the sale. Appellants correctly state that, viewed \u201cin the foreign currency in which it was transacted,\u201d the purchase generated a 110,227 pound gain as of the date of the sale, which translates to approximately $200,000 at the $1.82 per pound exchange rate. ... However fair and reasonable their argument may be, it amounts to an untenable attempt to convert their \u201cfunctional currency\u201d from the U.S. dollar to the pound sterling. ... Under I.R.C. \u00a7 985(b)(1), use of a functional currency other than the U.S. dollar is restricted to qualified business units (\"\"QBU\"\"s). ... appellants correctly assert that their residence was purchased \u201cfor a pound-denominated value\u201d while they were \u201cliving and working in a pound-denominated economy,\u201d ... And since appellants concede that the purchase and sale of their residence was not carried out by a QBU, the district court properly rejected their plea to treat the pound as their functional currency.\""}
{"id": "427017", "text": "\"You can report it as \"\"hobby\"\" income, and then you won't be paying self-employment taxes. You can also deduct the blog-related expenses from that income (subject to the 2% limit though). See this IRS pub on the \"\"hobby\"\" income.\""}
{"id": "427202", "text": "If i am not wrong, any business activities such should be declared on Year End Tax filing. If your friend is going to own that website either it is commercial or nonprofit, he has to declare in the year end taxation."}
{"id": "427535", "text": "Buy one and use it but never spend more than you can pay off at the end of the month.  Also, remember that the length of credit affects your rating too, so don't go canceling cards and/or getting new ones every time a new gimmick comes along."}
{"id": "428031", "text": "I'm sorry, but who pressured the appraiser to overstate the value of the house by threatening him with a loss of future business? I'm pretty sure I hired him but the lender threatened him. After I only had one house for him to do. You're missing the bigger picture"}
{"id": "428079", "text": "Their motivation should be the same as yours, just moderated for the fact that they don't have ownership.  The fairest thing is likely a percentage of revenue (.5 moving up to 1 or higher depending on competency, off of gross, not net) plus getting some of the expense account for lunches and whatnot when something big gets done.    This will also make them less likely to leave when other offers or opportunities come around.  Retaining the best staff you can possibly get will almost certainly pay for itself ten times over with happy clients who don't have to deal with bureaucratic bullshit, and when they do, they know the person who is responsible for it is likable and competent, and don't complain as much."}
{"id": "428141", "text": "You don't really have a lot of money, and that isn't a criticism as much as that you are limited to diversification.  For example, I would estimate you can only have one or two stocks for a buy-write scheme.  Secondly you may be only to buy one fund with a high minimum investment, and a second fund with a smaller minimum investment.  Thirdly there is not a whole lot of money to make a large difference. One options might be to look at iShares since your are with Fidelity.  Trading those are commission free and the minimum investment is one share.  They offer many sector funds. Since you were in a CD ladder you might be looking for stability of principle.  If so you can look at USMV and PFF.  If you can tolerate a little more volatility DGRO. Having said that you seem interested in doing some buy-writes.  Why not mix and match?  Pick a stock, like INTC (for example not a recommendation), and buy-write with half the money and some combination of iShares for the rest."}
{"id": "428277", "text": "Right! He actually plans on selling it and getting a car to save on fuel and cut down the payment a few hundred a month. The problem is, he bought it last June and we still like nearly a year before we are allowed to trade it in. But we are more than ready for that day to come! Lol"}
{"id": "428318", "text": "Interesting.  How would they account for it? Monthly? And if so do they modify the cost basis for each lot for the month and then restate?   It's hard to imagine they do that.   I have a million questions regarding this topic do you know where in the regs it is covered?"}
{"id": "428348", "text": "\"As I understand your scenario, you paid the contractor twice for cabinets - Once by paying the $20k in cash on the original contract and once \"\"in-kind\"\" by providing the cabinets yourself.  The $20k that you got from the contractor is not income to you, it's just a refund of your overpayment. I don't think you need to report that at all.  Just make sure that you can document that the check that you got back from the contractor matches what you paid for the cabinets and keep that record.\""}
{"id": "428533", "text": "\"If you have income - it should appear on your tax return. If you are a non-resident, that would be 1040NR, with the eBay income appearing on line 21. Since this is unrelated to your studies, this income will not be covered by the tax treaties for most countries, and you'll pay full taxes on it. Keep in mind that the IRS may decide that you're actually having a business, in which case you'll be required to attach Schedule C to your tax return and maybe pay additional taxes (mainly self-employment). Also, the USCIS may decide that you're actually having a business, regardless of how the IRS sees it, in which case you may have issues with your green card. For low income from occasional sales, you shouldn't have any issues. But if it is something systematic that you spend significant time on and earn significant amounts of money - you may get into trouble. What's \"\"systematic\"\" and how much is \"\"significant\"\" is up to a lawyer to tell you.\""}
{"id": "428552", "text": "\"Investing in a business can be daunting and risky, so it is not for everyone. The most common pitfalls are mentioned here:  Beyond that:  It all sounds a bit like \"\"Don't trust anyone\"\" and sadly, this is true when there's a lot of money involved. So be prepared and do your homework, this sometimes will save you more money than you gain with your investments :) Good luck!\""}
{"id": "428627", "text": "\"If you are hard-working Japanese or German, it takes less than 10 years. This is with little investment from outside.  Actually, think about it this way: before the devastation, Japan and Germany were thriving economies to begin with.  In comparison, no matter how much money you throw at Afghanistan, Iraq, or \"\"Palestinians\"\", they will not have proper infrastructure and economy, before and after the devastation, DESPITE no need for outside investment because they have plenty of oil and minerals to sell.\""}
{"id": "428657", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2017/06/12/Public-Investment-Scaling-up-and-Debt-Sustainability-The-Case-of-Energy-Sector-Investments-44943) reduced by 50%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; The views expressed in IMF Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management.  &gt; This paper proposes a bottom-up approach to assess large public investments that are potentially self-financing and reflect their impact in macro-fiscal projections that underpin the IMF&amp;#039;s Debt Sustainability Analysis Framework.  &gt; Using the case of energy sector investments in Caribbean countries, the paper shows how to avoid biases against good projects that pay off over long horizons and ensure that transformative investments are not sacrificed to myopic assessments of debt sustainability risks.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6gydz6/imfpublic_investment_scalingup_and_debt/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~142844 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **IMF**^#1 **investment**^#2 **paper**^#3 **debt**^#4 **sustainability**^#5\""}
{"id": "428847", "text": "&gt;The banks needed as many loans as possible because they thought they could sell them all.  You mean they could not sell them fast enough.  There was more demand than the supply for this trash paper.  When the demand was still there and the supply of even half-way legitimate loan salad CDOs ran out, the banks started to push into ever riskies and riskier loans just to fill the limitless demand.  This insane demand is part of the problem.  It means the wealth is too concentrated and there are a shitton of billionaires with nothing to invest their idiotic billions into, no reasonable account to park their money at, etc...  If there was no demand for this trash paper, the whole thing would have gone nowhere."}
{"id": "428941", "text": "\"&gt; 1). How is a loan an asset? I'm the bank and I have 100$. I loan Jimmy 20$. With interest I expect him to pay back 25$. My books sure as shit shouldn't say I'm worth 105$ or even 100$!  If you *extend* a loan to someone, the loan is an asset to you and a liability to them. It's a liability to them because they *owe* you the loan + interest back. It's an *asset* to you because you expect to retrieve the full loan principal AND interest back. There is no difference, cash flow wise, between spending $100 on a machine that makes fidget spinners and earns you $110 back ($10 profit) and extending a loan to Billy at 10% interest (you'll get $110 back, $10 profit).   &gt; My books sure as shit shouldn't say I'm worth 105$ or even 100$!  Why not? I have $100 cash. I loan it out to Billy at 10% interest. Billy is creditworthy and reliable, and certain collateral is in place. I'm worth, essentially, a discounted cash flow of $110 (which as long as my required return is less than 10%, means I'm worth *more* than $100).   &gt; I gave away 20$. I'm worth 80$ right?  No. That assumes you spent $20 and won't get *any* of it back. It's the same as ordering a $20 pizza and eating it all.   Now, the *cash* you have on your *balance sheet* would be $80, but you'd have a loan outstanding as an asset at $20, which is a net 0 movement in equity on the other side.   &gt; Sure I can put it on my books that Jimmy owes me 20$ but I cannot be acting like I HAVE that 20$ can I?  Well, yes and no. On one hand, you are certainly *worth* more than $80 in your scenario. However, banks have some stringent regulations preventing banks from being overly risky.   &gt;  Isn't that how the 08' crash happened?  No. '08 happened from a culmination of many different events, including risky and predatory loan origination, conflicts of interest in credit rating agencies, and low Fed rates, among other issues, including several \"\"domino effect\"\" secondary issues.   &gt; Is the risk of default accounted for?   Theoretically, the risk of default is accounted for in two areas:  1. The interest rate extended to the debtor.  2. A provision for loan losses.   &gt; \"\" because default risk is not transferred with the asset.\"\"  In what context was this seen? No one would willingly sell an asset but hold on to the risk (or they'd charge a high price, at least, for that).    Student loans are a special case. In the U.S., they are generally *non-cancellable.* They survive everything, including bankruptcy. They don't have collateral. Basically, they're going to follow the person around, regardless of situation, INCLUDING simply not paying. This makes default risk (or rather loss risk) lower.  A large portion of loans come from the federal government, which means to a pretty high degree, they are guaranteed by the government. This also makes loss risk lower. The government can garnish wages and all sorts of unpleasant things to get the money back. Even if losses are realized, taxes can (and will) make up the difference.   Private loans have a bit less leeway in these regards, but they still are immune to bankruptcy currently. As such, while they don't have all the tools of the government, they're still essentially invincible.\""}
{"id": "428953", "text": "My first credit card was a JC Penney card, 30-ish years ago.  I had a steady job paying maybe $11/hr at the time, and putting that on the application (with no other long-term debts) was all it took.  They gave me a card and a $4100 limit!!!!  I bought some clothes and stuff there every month or so, and paid the bill in full every month by the due date.    After a few months of that, I was able to apply and get approved for a Visa card (having the JCP card already helped).  After that, just keep on buying and paying in full every month.    Eventually you'll buy a car, and the credit history from the cards will help you get approved for that.  Continue making your payments on time every month.  Same with a house/condo (just bigger).  Basically, don't spend more that you can afford, make your payments regularly and on time.  Pay in full--do NOT just make the minimum payments...that's a recipe for disaster!!!  Don't miss payments, and try not to be late on them.  A late payment once in a great while isn't the end of the world, as long as you pay the late fees and interest charges."}
{"id": "429037", "text": "What about changing the income tax to a national sales tax and putting different products and services on a tiered system.  Basic necessities would be taxed at a lower rate (if at all), then you work up the tiers towards purely luxury items that are taxed at a much higher rate?  That would give us the benefits of a sales tax while, at the same time, not placing an extra burden on the lower class (who would, presumably, need to spend a higher portion of their income on basic necessities)."}
{"id": "429123", "text": "\"New SEC rules also now allow brokers to collect fees on non-dividend bearing accounts as an \"\"ADR Pass-Through Fee\"\". Since BP (and BP ADR) is not currently paying dividends, this is probably going to be the case here. According to the Schwab brokerage firm, the fee is usually 1-3 cents per share. I did an EDGAR search for BP's documents and came up with too many to read through (due to the oil spill and all of it's related SEC filings) but you can start here: http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/nn/m/q207/adr.html\""}
{"id": "429133", "text": "Dazed, an RESP is a type of account.  Within the RESP, you can have cash, investments or even savings vehicles like GICs etc.  So depending on where you put the money within the RESP, yes, there is a chance of losing money. If you think your children will attend post secondary education, I don't think that there is a better way to save.  The government will match 20% of your contribution, up to a maximum grant of $500 per year. To take advantage of the grant, we contribute $2500 per year to obtain the maximum $500 grant. Hope this helps!"}
{"id": "429627", "text": "Michael Pryor's answer is accurate to the actual question asked. The current accepted answer from Dheer is not entirely true but roughly provides an overview of the different entities involved in a typical transaction, with some wrong terminologies, corrected and improved below.  The issuing bank, the one that issues the credit card to the customer. When it comes to the service fee split, the issuer bank takes on the majority of the cut in the service fee paid by the merchant to the different entities. For example, on a 2.5% overall fee paid by merchant, roughly 1.5% goes to the issuer, 0.3% goes to the card network (visa, master card, etc) and the remaining 0.7% goes to the acquiring bank. Reward programs have a partnership with participating merchants, where merchants are charged a higher service fee, for the likelihood of driving a higher volume of transactions to the merchant. A portion of the rewards also comes from the issuer, who shares a percentage of their fee back to the customer, in exchange for the same likelihood of making more profit through increased volume in total transactions. For example, a reward program may charge merchants 4.5% fee, with 3.5% of it going to the issuer. Upto 3% of this can be given back to the customer for their loyalty in using the card service. The banks can afford to take as little as 0.5% instead of their regular 1.5% due to the increased volume of transactions and the fixed fee they collect as membership fee. Note that costco has a similar business plan, but they make money entirely of membership fee. So with enough clients, banks can theoretically afford to run their program entirely on membership fees, costing no additional service fee to merchants. The service fee depicted above is arbitrary, and it can be lowered if the merchant is also a client of the issuing bank, that is, both the issuing bank and acquiring bank are the same. So it is kind of a win-win-win situation. And as usual, the banks can afford to make a larger income, if the customer ends up paying interest for their credit - although the rewards program is not designed accounting on this."}
{"id": "429704", "text": "\"First it is worth noting the two sided nature of the contracts (long one currency/short a second) make leverage in currencies over a diverse set of clients generally less of a problem.  In equities, since most margin investors are long \"\"equities\"\" making it more likely that large margin calls will all be made at the same time. Also, it's worth noting that high-frequency traders often highly levered make up a large portion of all volume in all liquid markets ~70% in equity markets for instance.  Would you call that grossly artificial?  What is that volume number really telling us anyway in that case? The major players holding long-term positions in the FX markets are large banks (non-investment arm), central banks and corporations and unlike equity markets which can nearly slow to a trickle currency markets need to keep trading just for many of those corporations/banks to do business.  This kind of depth allows these brokers to even consider offering 400-to-1 leverage.  I'm not suggesting that it is a good idea for these brokers, but the liquidity in currency markets is much deeper than their costumers.\""}
{"id": "429927", "text": "Where can publicly traded profits go but to shareholders via dividends? They can be retained by the company."}
{"id": "429978", "text": "\"Keep in mind that the only advantage that using a tax favored account gives you is tax-free growth of the cash value of the policy. This \"\"Infinite Banking\"\" spin isn't some sort of new revolution in money management, its just a repackaging of techniques that people have been using for years to manage tax liability with some breathless marketing spiel. Before you jump in, compute the following: Now comes the hard part: Life insurance is sold, never bought. The guy pushing this does seminars at hotels sponsored by life insurance agents. The purpose of the program is to generate sales of insurance. Be wary. If you actually have the significant amounts of money required to capitalize this, there are much better ways to get an income stream from that money -- you need a good financial advisor. And if you have a huge tax liability and a scheme like this somehow makes sense, find someone who does it for a living in your state who isn't a crook.\""}
{"id": "430014", "text": "\"My basic rule I tell everyone who will listen is to always live like you're a college student - if you could make it on $20k a year, when you get your first \"\"real\"\" job at $40k (eg), put all the rest into savings to start (401(k), IRA, etc). Gradually increase your lifestyle expenses after you hit major savings goals (3+ month emergency fund, house down payment, etc). Any time you get a raise, start by socking it all into your employer's 401(k) or similar. And repeat the above advice.\""}
{"id": "430189", "text": "As per Indian tax laws; income, expense, gain and loss constitute the basic pillars of every individual\u2019s economic life. There are very few cases under which this new 'income' is non taxable. Based on the circumstances, you might have to pay capital gains tax."}
{"id": "430240", "text": "Yes. Here's the answer to this question from oregon.gov: 3. I am moving into Oregon. What income will be taxed by Oregon? As an Oregon resident, you are taxed on ALL income regardless of the   source of the income. This includes, but is not limited to: You may need to pay estimated taxes if you don't have Oregon   withholding on your income."}
{"id": "430398", "text": "Exactly. Regardless of just the volatility, to weight an asset or two with a majority of your portfolio is poor investment strategy. Ron is a smart guy and obviously understands the benefits of diversification. As others have suggested, I think he is doing it more to make a statement.  When he retires, I hope it doesn't come back to bite him."}
{"id": "430407", "text": "I am by no means an expert in this, but I did a little research and came across this page on the SSA site -- Can You Be Entitled To Benefits Retroactively?   You may be entitled to monthly benefits retroactively for months before the month you filed an application for benefits. For example, full retirement age claims and survivor claims may be paid for up to six months retroactively. In certain cases, benefits involving disability up to 12 months may be paid retroactively. (This is not true of the special age 72 payments (see \u00a7\u00a7346-348), black lung benefits (see Chapter 22), medical insurance (see Chapter 24), or SSI (see Chapter 21).) SSA Handbook (emphasis mine) Based on this, it sounds like he may be mistaken. I recommend speaking to a SSA rep to get a solid answer on this though. Not everything on the internet is true."}
{"id": "430417", "text": "You're right, but it can be broken down enough to where its more easily absorbable- at least that's the premise. Is definitely a concern we've had and I guess we'll see what's possible through some more user feedback and iteration."}
{"id": "430441", "text": "The Homebuyers Tax Credit was unrelated to whether or not a mortgage was part of the purchase. You will have no issue with this credit if you refinance."}
{"id": "430689", "text": "Sure, you'd make an $8.33 during that first month with little extra risk. Sounds like free money, right? (Assuming no hidden fees in the fine print.) I don't know that the extra money is worth the time you will spend monitoring the account, especially after inflation claims its share of your pie.  If you're going to use leverage to invest, you should probably pick an investment that will return at a much higher rate. If you can get an unsecured line of credit at 1%, there aren't a lot of downsides. Hopefully interest rates don't rise high enough to eat your earnings, but if they do, you can always liquidate your investments and pay the remainder of the loan."}
{"id": "430718", "text": "\"According to the IRS, you must have written confirmation from your broker \"\"or other agent\"\" whenever you sell shares using a method other than FIFO: Specific share identification.   If you adequately identify the shares   you sold, you can use the adjusted basis of those particular shares to   figure your gain or loss. You will adequately identify your mutual fund shares, even if you   bought the shares in different lots at various prices and times, if   you: Specify to your broker or other agent the particular shares to be sold or transferred at the time of the sale or transfer, and Receive confirmation in writing from your broker or other agent within a reasonable time of your specification of the particular   shares sold or transferred. If you don't have a stockbroker, I'm not sure how you even got the shares. If you have an actual stock certificate, then you are selling very specific shares and the purchase date corresponds to the purchase date of those shares represented on the certificate.\""}
{"id": "430769", "text": "Mint can probably do this. They probably have apps now and their online service has had charts for years."}
{"id": "430900", "text": "Unlike other responses, I am also not good with money.  Actually, I understand personal finance well, but I'm not good at executing my financial life responsibly.  Part is avoiding tough news, part is laziness. There are tools that can help you be better with your money.  In the past, I used YNAB (You Need a Budget).  (I'm not affiliated, and I'm not saying this product is better than others for OP.)  Whether you use their software or not, their strategy works if you stick with it.  Each time you get paid, allocate every dollar to categories where your budget tells you they need to be, prioritizing expenses, then bills, then debt reduction, then wealth building.  As you spend money, mark it against those categories.  Reconcile them as you spend the money.  If you go over in one category (eating out for example), you have to take from another (entertainment).  There's no penalties for going over, but you have to take from another category to cover it.  So the trick to all of it is being honest with yourself, sticking to it, recording all expenditures, and keeping priorities straight.   I used it for three months.  Like many others, I saved enough the first month to pay the cost of the software.  I don't remember why I stopped using it, but I wish I had not.  I will start again soon."}
{"id": "430911", "text": "A good resource for this type of help is the National Foundation for Credit Counseling (NFCC). They provide free and low-cost credit counselors who can... Most importantly, avoid those for-profit debt consolidation companies. They are ripoffs."}
{"id": "430997", "text": "No, you're not missing anything. RSUs are pretty simple when it comes to taxes. They are taxed as compensation at fair market value when they vest, basically equivalent to the company giving you a cash bonus and then using it to buy company stock. The fair market value at vesting then becomes your cost basis. Assuming the value has increased since vesting, selling the shares that vested at least a year ago (to qualify for lower long-term capital gains tax rates) with the highest cost basis with result in the minimum taxes."}
{"id": "431349", "text": "\"If you're making $80k, and you're consulting for an extra $400/wk or $20,800/yr, you're earning a total of $100,800.  That's assuming you do it for a full calendar year of course.  Either way, assuming you can deduct/exclude at least $11k of income (as almost everyone can), you're paying 25% on your marginal dollars.  (This also assumes you're single; if you're married/filing jointly, this may not be true.)  Note, you're right at the edge of the 25% bracket if you earn this in a full calendar year - but if you have a 401k, health insurance, or other reductions you'll be fine.  Additionally, for this year you'll be under (again assuming single and no other income) because you aren't earning a full year's worth. Assuming your $80k is precisely taken care of by your regular withholding, then, you will literally pay 25%*$400/week in additional taxes - $100 per week.  So if you are paid biweekly, you need to add $200/week in withholding on your W-4.  If you expect to overpay taxes (if you own a house with a mortgage for example, you often do), you can reduce it some, but adding $200/biweekly paycheck should bring you right to where you were before the extra income. The general rule is to calculate your marginal (not effective) tax rate before the new income, assuming default withholding takes care of that, and then withhold the marginal rate for the new income [checking that the new income doesn't push the marginal rate up - if so, calculate in two parts, the part in the lower marginal rate and the part in the higher marginal rate]. You can google \"\"2014 tax brackets\"\", or look at the IRS tax tables for detailed information about marginal rates.\""}
{"id": "431386", "text": "\"TL;DR: If your currently held bond's bid yield is smaller than another bonds' ask yield. You can swap your bond for bigger returns. Let's imagine you buy a long bond for $12000 (face value of $10000) and it has 6% coupon. The cash flows will have an internal return rate of 4.37%, this is the published \"\"ask yield\"\" in 2014 of the bond. After six years, prices have fallen, inflation and yields went up. So you can sell it for only $10000. If you would do it, the IRR will be only 2.55%, so there will be less return, than if you keep it.  But if you would \"\"undo\"\" the transaction, then the future cash flows would yield 6.38%. This is the \"\"bid yield\"\" in 2020 of the bond. If you can find an offer that yields more than 6.38%, you have better returns if you sell your bond and invest that $10000 in the other bond.  But as other answers pointed it out, you rarely have this opportunity as the market is very effective. (Assuming everything else is equal.)\""}
{"id": "431395", "text": "\"First, let's look at the tax brackets for single taxpayers in 2016: The cutoff between the 25% and 28% tax bracket is $91,150.  You said that your gross is $87,780.  This will be reduced by deductions and exemptions (at least $10,350).  Your rental income will increase your income, but it is offset in part by your rental business expenses. For this year, you will almost certainly be in the 25% bracket, whether or not you receive your backpay this year.  Next year, if you receive your backpay then and your salary is $11k higher, I'm guessing you'll be close to the edge. It is important to remember that the tax brackets are marginal.  This means that when you move up to the next tax bracket, it is only the amount of income that puts you over the top that is taxed at the higher rate.  (You can see this in the chart above.)  So if, for example, your taxable income ends up being $91,160, you'll be in the 28% tax bracket, but only $10 of your income will be taxed at 28%.  The rest will be taxed at 25% or lower.  As a result, this probably isn't worth worrying about too much. A bit more explanation, requested by the OP: Here is how to understand the numbers in the tax bracket chart.  Let's take a look at the second line, $9,276-$37,650.  The tax rate is explained as \"\"$927.50 plus 15% of the amount over $9,275.\"\"  The first $9,275 of your taxable income is taxed at a 10% rate.  So if your total taxable income falls between $9,276 and $37,650, the first $9,275 is taxed at 10% (a tax of $927.50) and the amount over $9,275 is taxed at 15%.  On each line of the chart, the amount of tax from all the previous brackets is carried down, so you don't have to calculate it. When I said that you have at least $10,350 in deductions and exemptions, I got that number from the standard deduction and the personal exemption amount.  For 2016, the standard deduction for single taxpayers is $6,300.  (If you itemize your deductions, you might be able to deduct more.)  Personal exemptions for 2016 are at $4,050 per person.  That means you get to reduce your taxable income by $4,050 for each person in your household.  Since you are single with no dependents, your standard deduction plus the personal exemption for yourself will result in a reduction of at least $10,350 on your taxable income.\""}
{"id": "431443", "text": "\"If the investments are in a non-retirement, taxable account, there's not much you can do to avoid short-term capital gains if you sell now. Ways to limit short-term capital gains taxes: Donate -- you can donate some of the stock to charity (before selling it). Transfer -- you can give some of the stock to, say, a family member in a lower tax bracket. But there are tons of rules, gift limits, and won't work for little kids or full time students. They would still pay taxes at their own rate. Protect your gains by buying puts. Wait it out until the long-term capital gains rate kicks in. This allows you to lock in your gains now (but you won't benefit from potential future appreciation.) Buying puts also costs $, so do the ROI calculation. (You could also sell a call and buy a put at the same time and lock in your gains for certain, but the IRS often looks at that as locking in the short-term capital gain, so be careful and talk to a tax professional if you are considering that method.) Die. There's a \"\"step-up\"\" basis on capital gains for estates. source: http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/30/avoid-capital-gains-tax-anschutz-personal-finance-baldwin-tax-strategy.html\""}
{"id": "431610", "text": "You are still selling one investment and buying another - the fact that they are managed by the same company should be irrelevant.  So yes, it would get the same tax treatment as if they were managed by different companies."}
{"id": "431637", "text": "US Bank just introduced this feature, but they want $.50 per deposit!  No way man. Schwab has an Android App I have used a dozen times.   Very easy and pretty consistent.  It worked on folded checks, pictures on a reflective background (kitchen table top), big company issued checks and of course personal checks. Very positive feeling from this app and the ability to deposit."}
{"id": "431676", "text": "In Canada, it is similarly taxed as CQM states. Mining is considered business income and you need to file a T1 form. Capital appreciation is no different than treating gains from stock."}
{"id": "431754", "text": "Charging very high prices for additional standard services: See Commission & Fees: https://brokerage-static.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/robinhood/legal/RHF%20Retail%20Commisions%20and%20Fees%20Schedule.pdf Link is down in the footer, to the left..."}
{"id": "431840", "text": "I would go with option B. That is safer, as it would leave you with more options, in case of an unexpected job loss or an emergency."}
{"id": "431912", "text": "Why would his prediction be doubted? The guy predicted the housing bubble because he saw middle managers in every place of business being replaced by software. They were unable to find a new similar paying job and thus lost their houses. Now he sees 500,000 full-time job loses and 800,000 part-time job gains in one financial quarter. He sees 200,000 jobs created last month in July with 140,000 of those jobs being low wage service jobs. The guy is not a prophet. He is a realist. You investors who see the economy with rose-colored glasses are riding high on maximized profits as a result of low-wage earning skeleton operation crews. You'll be in for a rude awakening to find fewer customers able to buy the products and services being offered."}
{"id": "432054", "text": "Yea, honestly taking in debt is pretty much never a good idea. Even borrowing from your own family can cause issues. It better be a very serious issue if you're trying to borrow and use money you don't have. Especially if we're talking about figured that are high relative to your income stream and/or that of the person you're borrowing from if it's not an official entity."}
{"id": "432550", "text": "It is ordinary income to you. You should probably talk to a California licensed CRTP/EA/CPA, but I doubt they'll say anything different. You would probably ask them whether you can treat some of it as a refund of rent paid, but I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with that."}
{"id": "432935", "text": "It's been a couple years since I worked on Transfer Pricing project.   It makes sense though. I'd imagine that's why Texas and Florida are doing, tax wise, so much better than California and other high tax states."}
{"id": "432939", "text": "Also, consider the possibility of early withdrawal penalties.  Regular 401k early withdrawal (for non-qualified reasons) gets you a 10% penalty, in addition to tax, on the entire amount, even if you're just withdrawing your own contributions.  Withdrawing from a Roth 401k can potentially mean less penalties (if it's been in place 5 years, and subject to a bunch of fine print of course)."}
{"id": "433032", "text": "Classes of shares are not necessarily standardized. Some share classes have preference above others in the event of a liquidation. Some share classes represent a different proportion of ownership interest. Any time you see multiple share classes, you need to research what is different for that specific corporation."}
{"id": "433245", "text": "You will not be able to.  Here is why you don't have the collateral.   You have a car that is probably not worth 10k.  Also you probably do not have a simple interest loan.  You have to look at your contract.  Make sure that there is not early payment fee.  Also look for the rule of 78's   Explanation of Rule of 78's I can't sugarcoat this chances are you were ripped off because you had bad credit putting you into an even deeper hole."}
{"id": "433684", "text": "It's the rate of return on new opportunities. The rate on existing projects isn't relevant. If you buy a bond 10 years ago when market Interest rates were 8%, and you have cash to buy another bond today, it is today's interest rates that are relevant, not the rates 10 years ago."}
{"id": "433766", "text": "First, request that you complete a tax return. On this tax return, you will complete both the employed and self employed sections. This will give you a total income and tax liability. You will already have paid some tax via PAYE, but you will have to pay additional tax for any other income. For future years there is the option, depending on amount, to collect extra tax through PAYE to cover the other earnings. If it is likely to be the same for the next few years, this may be a better option than paying a lump sum. The tax return is now mostly online, and not too bad if your affairs are otherwise simple. The hardest part will be keeping a good record of your other earnings. Remember that you have to keep these records for seven years in case HMRC ever want to audit them, and it's a good idea to have a separate account for the income, or some other way of easily identifying it."}
{"id": "434201", "text": "\"Been here in Japan 12 years mate, and you're right, the investment options here suck. Be very wary of them, they will take all your money in outrageous fees--3% in and 3% out of some \"\"investment\"\" options. It's a scam. Send the money back home and manage it there. I recommend setting up a Vanguard account back in the UK, then you can invest in Vanguard index funds. Vanguard charges no commission for buying and selling their funds when you have a Vanguard account. I have nearly all my money there (Vanguard US), and I use the free Personal Capital online software to understand how to best manage the allocations in my portfolio. Of course you'll lose a bit of money on wire transfer fees, but you'll more than make up for it if in the long-term, and they may also be offset by currency rate anyway (right now the yen is strong, so a good time to use it to buy GBP). Also you may never need to send the money back to Japan unless you plan on retiring here.\""}
{"id": "434211", "text": "I actually do know what I'm talking about, no need to be rude.  Believe me I understand tax advantages of each I'm subjected to them every single day at my work. I am of the belief that buybacks are great when used responsibly, however at the recent rate and scope that companies have been using them I think it's overkill and will have a negative future impact on real company growth."}
{"id": "434279", "text": "\"Here is the \"\"investing for retirement\"\" theoretical background you should have. You should base your investment decisions not simply on the historical return of the fund, but on its potential for future returns and its risk. Past performance does not indicate future results: the past performance is frequently at its best the moment before the bubble pops. While no one knows the specifics of future returns, there are a few types of assets that it's (relatively) safe to make blanket statements about: The future returns of your portfolio will primarily be determined by your asset allocation . The general rules look like: There are a variety of guides out there to help decide your asset allocation and tell you specifically what to do. The other thing that you should consider is the cost of your funds. While it's easy to get lucky enough to make a mutual fund outperform the market in the short term, it's very hard to keep that up for decades on end. Moreover, chasing performance is risky, and expensive. So look at your fund information and locate the expense ratio. If the fund's expense ratio is 1%, that's super-expensive (the stock market's annualized real rate of return is about 4%, so that could be a quarter of your returns). All else being equal, choose the cheap index fund (with an expense ratio closer to 0.1%). Many 401(k) providers only have expensive mutual funds. This is because you're trapped and can't switch to a cheaper fund, so they're free to take lots of your money. If this is the case, deal with it in the short term for the tax benefits, then open a specific type of account called a \"\"rollover IRA\"\" when you change jobs, and move your assets there. Or, if your savings are small enough, just open an IRA (a \"\"traditional IRA\"\" or \"\"Roth IRA\"\") and use those instead. (Or, yell at your HR department, in the event that you think that'll actually accomplish anything.)\""}
{"id": "434351", "text": "You can and are supposed to report self-employment income on Schedule C (or C-EZ if eligible, which a programmer likely is) even when the payer isn't required to give you 1099-MISC (or 1099-K for a payment network now). From there, after deducting permitted expenses, it flows to 1040 (for income tax) and Schedule SE (for self-employment tax). See https://www.irs.gov/individuals/self-employed for some basics and lots of useful links. If this income is large enough your tax on it will be more than $1000, you may need to make quarterly estimated payments (OR if you also have a 'day job' have that employer increase your withholding) to avoid an underpayment penalty. But if this is the first year you have significant self-employment income (or other taxable but unwithheld income like realized capital gains) and your economic/tax situation is otherwise unchanged -- i.e. you have the same (or more) payroll income with the same (or more) withholding -- then there is a 'safe harbor': if your withholding plus estimated payments this year is too low to pay this year's tax but it is enough to pay last year's tax you escape the penalty. (You still need to pay the tax due, of course, so keep the funds available for that.) At the end of the first year when you prepare your return you will see how the numbers work out and can more easily do a good estimate for the following year(s). A single-member LLC or 'S' corp is usually disregarded for tax purposes, although you can elect otherwise, while a (traditional) 'C' corp is more complicated and AIUI out-of-scope for this Stack; see https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/business-structures for more."}
{"id": "434694", "text": "Probably.  It sounds like you're looking for a 1031-exchange for stocks and bonds.  From the wikipedia page for 1031-exchanges: To qualify for Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, the properties exchanged must be held for productive use in a trade or business or for investment. Stocks, bonds, and other properties are listed as expressly excluded by Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, though securitized properties are not excluded.  1031-exchanges usually are applicable in real estate."}
{"id": "434906", "text": "I read, however, that if the company's assets are not kept separate from our assets then if we got sued, the corporate veil would be pierced. This whole venture would be to give us additional income so my wife could watch our daughter and have an income."}
{"id": "434986", "text": "\"Central Banks are essentially a cartel, designed to let banks in general borrow money from depositors at relatively low interest rates.  They do this in two ways:  By reassuring depositors that momentary cash flow problems at banks will not result in banks failing, they lower the interest rates that depositors demand.  And by imposing strict regulations on banks that are borrowing from depositors at high interest rates.  (People who move money to the banks offering the highest interest rates are especially likely to participate in bank runs.) Borrowing \"\"too much\"\" from the Central Bank is considered to be a sign of a bank that is too weak to attract deposits from depositors at \"\"reasonable\"\" interest rates. If a bank borrows \"\"too much\"\" (as a percentage of the bank's assets) from the Central Bank, the bank regulators will subject the bank to heavy scrutiny.  If the bank fails to find ways to reduce its borrowing from the Central Bank, the bank regulators are likely to steal the bank from its shareholders, and sell the bank to a \"\"stronger\"\" bank that pays lower interest rates.\""}
{"id": "435065", "text": "I've used prosper for a while and have a pretty good return based purely on shotgun approach.  I recently invested a few thousand with their automated tool.  Some people will default, but that's expected and part of their expected return calculation."}
{"id": "435125", "text": "\"Most companies are taken over. One can reasonably guess that company X will be taken over for a price P, at some future point in time. Then the company has a value today, that is less than price P, by a large enough margin so that the investor will likely \"\"make out\"\" when the company finally is taken over at some unknown point in time. The exception is a company like Microsoft or Apple that basically grow too large to be taken over. But then they eventually start paying dividends when they become \"\"mature.\"\" Again, the trick, during the non-dividend paying period (e.g. ten or fifteen years ago) is to guess what dividends will be paid in some future time, and price the stock low enough today so that it will be worthwhile for the buyer.\""}
{"id": "435230", "text": "Not really practical... The real problem is getting the money into a form where you *can* invest it in something.  It's not like E\\*Trade will let you FedEx them a briefcase of sequentially numbered hundreds and just credit your account, no questions asked.  That **is** the hard part."}
{"id": "435363", "text": "\"You can do a lot of deduction FINRA keeps a \"\"REG-SHO\"\" list created daily that tells what the daily short volume is. March 26th 2014's list: http://regsho.finra.org/FNSQshvol20140326.txt If you are talking about the United States, this answer may be better ;)\""}
{"id": "435405", "text": "\"(Insert the usual disclaimer that I'm not any sort of tax professional; I'm just a random guy on the Internet who occasionally looks through IRS instructions for fun. Then again, what you're doing here is asking random people on the Internet for help, so here goes.) The gigantic book of \"\"How to File Your Income Taxes\"\" from the IRS is called Publication 17. That's generally where I start to figure out where to report what. The section on Royalties has this to say: Royalties from copyrights, patents, and oil, gas, and mineral properties are taxable as ordinary income. In most cases, you report royalties in Part I of Schedule E (Form 1040). However, if you hold an operating oil, gas, or mineral interest or are in business as a self-employed writer, inventor, artist, etc., report your income and expenses on Schedule C or Schedule C-EZ (Form 1040).  It sounds like you are receiving royalties from a copyright, and not as a self-employed writer. That means that you would report the income on Schedule E, Part I. I've not used Schedule E before, but looking at the instructions for it, you enter this as \"\"Royalty Property\"\". For royalty property, enter code \u201c6\u201d on line 1b and leave lines 1a and 2 blank for that property. So, in Line 1b, part A, enter code 6. (It looks like you'll only use section A here as you only have one royalty property.) Then in column A, Line 4, enter the royalties you have received. The instructions confirm that this should be the amount that you received listed on the 1099-MISC. Report on line 4 royalties from oil, gas, or mineral properties (not including operating interests); copyrights; and patents. Use a separate column (A, B, or C) for each royalty property. If you received $10 or more in royalties during 2016, the payer should send you a Form 1099-MISC or similar statement by January 31, 2017, showing the amount you received. Report this amount on line 4.  I don't think that there's any relevant Expenses deductions you could take on the subsequent lines (though like I said, I've not used this form before), but if you had some specific expenses involved in producing this income it might be worth looking into further. On Line 21 you'd subtract the 0 expenses (or subtract any expenses you do manage to list) and put the total. It looks like there are more totals to accumulate on lines 23 and 24, which presumably would be equally easy as you only have the one property. Put the total again on line 26, which says to enter it on the main Form 1040 on line 17 and it thus gets included in your income.\""}
{"id": "435463", "text": "Ask the folks administering your plan. They're the ones who define and implement the available choices for that specific plan."}
{"id": "435576", "text": "\"You seem to really have your financial act together.  Your combination of assets, and ongoing savings makes you the ideal candidate for paying it off. One way to look at it is that your mortgage offers you a place to 'invest' at a fixed 2-7/8% rate. \"\"I'd really like to not have a house payment\"\" is all I need to hear.  The flip side is the lecture that talks about long term market returns, the fact that the combination of your deductible mortgage, but 15% cap gain rate means you need 2.5% return to break even, and odds are pretty high that will occur over the next 15 years. \"\"pretty high\"\" does not equal \"\"guaranteed\"\". And I won't debate the value of sleeping soundly vs an excess 5-8% return on this money that you'd maybe achieve.  You haven't missed anything. In fact, though I advocate saving first, you are already doing that. This is above and beyond. Good work.\""}
{"id": "435722", "text": "what do you mean exactly?  Do you have a future target price and projected future dividend payments and you want the present value (time discounted price) of those? Edit: The DCF formula is difficult to use for stocks because the future price is unknown.  It is more applicable to fixed-income instruments like coupon bonds.  You could use it but you need to predict / speculate a future price for the stock. You are better off using the standard stock analysis stuff: Learn Stock Basics - How To Read A Stock Table/Quote The P/E ratio and the Dividend yield are the two most important.  The good P/E ratio for a mature company would be around 20.  For smaller and growing companies, a higher P/E ratio is acceptable.  The dividend yield is important because it tells you how much your shares grow even if the stock price stays unchanged for the year. HTH"}
{"id": "435883", "text": "I am not a tax professional, only an investment professional, so please take the following with a grain of salt and simply as informational guidance, not a personal recommendation or solicitation to buy/sell any security or as personal tax or investment advice. As Ross mentioned, you need to consult a tax advisor for a final answer concerning your friend's personal circumstances. In my experience advising hundreds of clients (and working directly with their tax advisors) the cost basis is used to calculate tax gain or loss on ordinary investments in the US. It appears to me that the Edward Jones description is correct. This has also been the case for me personally in the US with a variety of securities--stocks, options, futures, bonds, mutual funds, and exchange traded funds.  From the IRS: https://www.irs.gov/uac/about-form-1099b Form 1099-B, Proceeds From Broker and Barter Exchange Transactions A broker or barter exchange must file this form for each person: Edward Jones should be able to produce a 1099b documenting the gains/losses of any investments. If the 1099b document is confusing, they might have a gain/loss report that more clearly delineates proceeds, capital returns, dividends, and other items related to the purchase and sale of securities."}
{"id": "435940", "text": "You have to balance several concerns here. The primary problem is that if you go to the effort of saving your money you want to also be sure that your savings will not lose too much of its value to inflation. Ukraine had a terrible inflation spike in 2015 for obvious reasons. Even as inflation has settled down in 2016, it is stabilizing around 12% which is very high  Exchange rates are your next concern. If you lose a large percentage of the value of your money just in the process of exchanging it, that also eats away at the value of your money. If you accept the US Federal Reserve target of 2% inflation, then you should only exchange money that you will hold long enough that both exchange fees will outweigh the 10% inflation advantage. Even in cases where you have placed your money in a foreign currency, there's a chance that your government could freeze accounts denominated in foreign currencies, so there's always the political risk that you have to factor in. For that reason keeping foreign currency in cash also has some appeal because it cannot be confiscated as easily. You could still certainly be robbed, so keeping all of your savings in cash isn't a great solution either. All in all, you are diversifying your savings if you use the strategy of balancing all three methods. Splitting it evenly to 5% for each method isn't the most important. I would suggest taking advantage of good exchange rates (as they appear) to time when you buy foreign currency."}
{"id": "436020", "text": "\"TD e-series index funds are great for regular contributions every paycheck since there is no trading commission.  The personal finance blog \"\"Canadian Couch Potato\"\" has great examples of what they call \"\"model portfolios\"\" and one consists of entirely TD e-series index funds.  Check it out:  http://canadiancouchpotato.com/model-portfolios-2/ The e-series portfolio that is described in the Model Portfolios (linked above) made returns of just over 10%.  This is very similar to the ETF Model Portolio.   One thing to remember is that these funds have a 30 day no sell time frame, otherwise a 2% fee is applied to the funds you withdraw.\""}
{"id": "436331", "text": "I suggest rolling it over to the 401(k) with your new employer.  Particularly if they match any percentage of your contribution, it would be in your interest to take as much of that money as possible. When it comes to borrowing money from your 401(k), it looks like the issues AbraCadaver mentioned only apply if you don't pay back the money (http://www.kiplinger.com/article/real-estate/T010-C000-S002-borrowing-from-your-retirement-plan-to-buy-a-home.html).  The reasonable argument against taking money out of your 401(k) to buy a home is that it leaves a dent in your retirement nest egg (and its earning power) during key earning years.  On the plus side for borrowing from your 401(k), it's very low interest--and it's interest you're paying back to yourself over a 5-year period.  At its current value, the most you could borrow from your 401(k) is $35K.  If you're fortunate in where you live, that could be most or all of the downpayment. In my own experience, my wife borrowed against her 401(k) balance for the earnest money when we purchased a new home.  Fortunately for us, an investor snapped up my previous home within 4 days of us listing it, so she was able to pay back her loan in full right away."}
{"id": "436493", "text": "\"Stripping away the minutia, your question boils down to this: Should I take a loan for something that I may not be able to repay? The correct answer, is \"\"No\"\".\""}
{"id": "436530", "text": "\"From Pub 550: More or less stock bought than sold.   If the number of shares of   substantially identical stock or securities you buy within 30 days   before or after the sale is either more or less than the number of   shares you sold, you must determine the particular shares to which the   wash sale rules apply. You do this by matching the shares bought with   an equal number of the shares sold. Match the shares bought in the   same order that you bought them, beginning with the first shares   bought. The shares or securities so matched are subject to the wash   sale rules. You must match \"\"beginning with the first shares bought.\"\" If only activity 1 & 4 happened, you'd have bought and sold stock with no wash sale. If you remove activity 1 & 4 from consideration because they are a \"\"normal\"\" or non-wash sale transaction, then the Activity 2 or Activity 3 trigger a wash sale. The shares in lot 1 are sold for disallowed loss, so the disallowed basis would be added to shares in lot 2 because lot 2 was purchased before lot 3. (hat tip to user662852 who had much better wording) Second example: Activity 5, 7, and 8 all together would not be a wash sale.   The addition of activity 6 creates a wash sale. The shares in Activity 5 are sold for a disallowed loss in Activity 7 & 8 because of the wash sale triggering purchase in Activity 6.   Activity 6 is where you add the disallowed basis because they are the \"\"first shares bought\"\" that cause the wash sale rule to be triggered.\""}
{"id": "436562", "text": "There are two problems with your understanding: The companies I have worked for match based on a percentage of your salary. That is a percentage of your gross pay. It was not based on the percentage of your net pay or after-tax pay. Net pay would be too hard to know. What I mean is the amount of insurance, HSA, Flex spending accounts, etc. determine how much is taxable and thus what is your after-tax pay . In fact if you split between the Roth and Pre-tax forms of the 401K your retirement contribution would influence the amount of the after tax contribution. All matching funds no matter the nature of the contribution (pre-tax, post-tax, Roth) are always considered pre-tax. You didn't pay taxes on the money when it was credited to your account."}
{"id": "436930", "text": "$10.90 for every $1000 per year. Are you kidding me!!! These are usually hidden within the expense ratio of the plan funds, but >1% seems to be quite a lot regardless. FUND X 1 year return 3% 3 year return 6% 10 year return 5% What does   that exactly mean? This is the average annual rate of return. If measured for the last 3 years, the average annual rate of return is 6%, if measured for 1 year - it's 3%. What it means is that out of the last 3 years, the last year return was not the best, the previous two were much better. Does that mean that if I hold my mutual funds for 10 years I will get   5% return on it. Definitely not. Past performance doesn't promise anything for the future. It is merely a guidance for you, a comparison measure between the funds. You can assume that if in the past the fund performed certain way, then given the same conditions in the future, it will perform the same again. But it is in no way a promise or a guarantee of anything. Since my 401K plan stinks what are my options. If I put my money in a   traditional IRA then I lose my pre tax benefits right! Wrong, IRA is pre-tax as well. But the pre-tax deduction limits for IRA are much lower than for 401k.  You can consider investing in the 401k, and then rolling over to a IRA which will allow better investment options. After your update: Just clearing up the question. My current employer has a 401K. Most of   the funds have the expense ratio of 1.20%. There is NO MATCHING   CONTRIBUTIONS. Ouch. Should I convert the 401K of my old company to Traditional IRA and   start investing in that instead of investing in the new employer 401K   plan with high fees. You should probably consider rolling over the old company 401k to a traditional IRA. However, it is unrelated to the current employer's 401k. If you're contributing up to the max to the Roth IRA, you can't add any additional contributions to traditional IRA on top of that - the $5000 limit is for both, and the AGI limitations for Roth are higher, so you're likely not able to contribute anything at all to the traditional IRA. You can contribute to the employer's 401k. You have to consider if the rather high expenses are worth the tax deferral for you."}
{"id": "437100", "text": "\"This is not intended as legal advice, and only covers general knowledge I have on the subject of wills as a result of handling my own finances.   Each state of the USA has its own laws on wills and trusts.  You can find these online.  For example, in Kentucky I found state laws here:  http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/titles.htm and Title XXXIV is about wills and trusts.  I would recommend reading this, and then talking to a lawyer if it is not crystal clear.   Generally, if a lawyer does not draft your will, then either (1) you have no will, or (2) you use a form or computer program to make a will, that must then be properly witnessed before it is valid.  If you don't have it witnessed properly, then you have no will.  In some states you can have a holographic will, which means a will in your own handwriting.  That's when you have that 3am heart attack, and you get out a pad of paper and write \"\"I rescind all former wills hereby bequeathing everything to my mistress Samantha, and as to the rest of you go rot in hell. \"\" One issue with these is that they have to get to court somehow, and someone has to verify the handwriting, and there are often state laws about excluding a current spouse, so you can guess for yourself whether that one might disappear in the fireplace when another family member finds it next to the body or if a court would give it validity. And there can be logic or grammar problems with do it yourself wills, made in your own handwriting, without experience or good references on how to write things out.  Lawyers who have done a bunch of these know what is clear and makes sense.  (1) In Tennessee, where I live, an intestate's property, someone who died with no will, is divided according to the law.  The law looks to find a spouse or relatives to divide the property, before considering giving it to the state.  That might be fine for some people.  It happened once in my family, and was resolved in court with minimal red tape.  But it really depends on the person.  Someone in the middle of an unfinalized divorce, for instance, probably needs a will help to sort out who gets what.   (2) A form will is valid in Tennessee if it is witnessed properly.  That means two witnesses, who sign in yours' and each others' presence.  In theory they can be called to testify that the signature is valid.  In practice, I don't know if this happens as I am not a lawyer. I have found it difficult to find witnesses who will sign a form will, and it is disconcerting to have to ask friends or coworkers for this sort of favor as most people learn never to sign anything without reading it.  But a lawyer often has secretaries that do it...  There is a procedure and a treaty for international wills, which I know about from living overseas. To streamline things, you can get the witnesses to each sign an affidavit after they signed the will.  The affidavit is sworn written testimony of what happened, that they saw the person sign their will and sign in each others' presence, when, where, no duress, etc.  If done correctly, this can be sufficient to prove the will without calling on witnesses.  There is another option (3) you arrange your affairs so that most of your funds are disbursed by banks or brokers holding your accounts.  Option (3) is really cheap, most stock brokers and banks will create a Transfer-On-Death notice on your account for free.  The problem with this is that you also need to write out a letter that explains to your heirs how to get this money, and you need to make sure that they will get the letter if you are dead.  Also, you can't deal with physical goods or appoint a guardian for children this way.  The advantage of a lawyer is that you know the document is correct and according to local law and custom, and also the lawyer might provide additional services like storing the will in his safe.  You can get personalized help that you can not get with a form or computer program.\""}
{"id": "437149", "text": "\"Collateralized & Secured are interchangeable terms. Note the following two quotes from wikipedia (links below): \"\"A secured loan is a loan in which the borrower pledges some asset (e.g. a car or property) as collateral for the loan, which then becomes a secured debt owed to the creditor who gives the loan.\"\" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secured_loan \"\"In lending agreements, collateral is a borrower's pledge of specific property to a lender, to secure repayment of a loan.\"\" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateral_%28finance%29 This website also uses the terms interchangeably: http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-collateral-loan.htm Loan & Line of Credit are not interchangeable terms.  In a loan, you receive a one time disbursement & repay it over a fixed amortization schedule. (Think home mortgage) In a line of credit, you can pay back & re-borrow from your credit line as often as you need. (Think credit card or Home Equity Line of Credit)\""}
{"id": "437194", "text": "\"Assuming the numbers work out roughly the same (and you can frankly whip up a spreadsheet to prove that out), a defined benefit scheme that pays out an amount equal to an annuitized return from a 401(k) is better.  The reason is not monetary - it is that the same return is being had at less risk. Put another way, if your defined benefit was guaranteed to be $100/month, and your 401(k) had a contribution that eventually gets to a lump sum that, if annuitized for the same life expectancy gave you $100/month, the DB is better because there is less chance that you won't see the money. Or, put even simpler, which is more likely? That New York goes Bankrupt and is relieved of all pension obligations, or, the stock market underperforms expectations.  Neither can be ruled out, but assuming even the same benefit, lower risk is better. Now, the complication in your scenario is that your new job pays better.  As such, it is possible that you might be able to accumulate more savings in your 401(k) than you might in the DB scheme.  Then again, even with the opportunity to do so, there is no guarantee that you will.  As such, even modelling it out really isn't going to dismiss the key variables. As such, can I suggest a different approach?  Which job is going to make you happier now?  Part of that may be money, part of that may be what you are actually doing.  But you should focus on that question. The marginal consideration of retirement is really moot - in theory, an IRA contribution can be made that would equalize your 401(k), negating it from the equation.  Grant you, there is very slightly different tax treatment, and the phaseout limits differ, but at the salary ranges you are looking at, you could, in theory, make decisions that would have the same retirement outcome in any event. The real question is then not, \"\"What is the effect in 20 years?\"\" but rather, which makes you happier now?\""}
{"id": "437373", "text": "Here is a simple answer: Most merchants do not charge customers, but you can."}
{"id": "437465", "text": "Yahoo provides dividend data from their Historical Prices section, and selecting Dividends Only, along with the dates you wish to return data for. Here is an example of BHP's dividends dating back to 1998. Further, you can download directly to *.csv format if you wish: http://real-chart.finance.yahoo.com/table.csv?s=BHP.AX&a=00&b=29&c=1988&d=06&e=6&f=2015&g=v&ignore=.csv"}
{"id": "437659", "text": "This isn't totally wrong- there are hedge funds that are long 150% of AUM and short 50%. However, Rentech has said that holding a position for 8 seconds is long for them, so that's not what they're doing. I'd assume the 4X leverage most just refers to option positions that have delta 4 on average. They also may be borrowing money, which they can probably do extremely cheaply since they have a 35 year track record showing they're essentially risk-free."}
{"id": "437706", "text": "Your comment regarding your existing finances is very relevant and helpful. You need to understand that generally in personal finance circles, when a strong earning 22 year-old is looking for a loan it's usually a gross spending problem.   Their car costs $1,000 /month and their bar tabs are adding up so the only logical thing to do is get a loan.  Most 22-year-olds don't have a mortgage soaking up their income, or a newborn.   With all of this in mind I essentially agree with DStanley and, personally, and many people here would probably disagree, I'd stop the 401(K) contribution and use that money to pay the debt.  You're still very young from a retirement standpoint, let the current balance ride and forego the match until the debt is paid.  I think this is more about being debt free at 22 quickly than it's about how much marginal money could be saved via 401(k) or personal loan or this strategy or that strategy.  I think at your age, you'll benefit greatly from simply being debt free. There are other very good answers on this site and other places regarding the pitfalls of a 401(k) loan.  The most serious of which is that you have an extremely limited time to pay the entire loan upon leaving the company.  Failure to repay in that situation incurs tax liability and penalties.   From my quick math, assuming your contribution is 8% of $70,000 /year, you're contributing something in the neighborhood of $460/month to your 401(k).  If you stopped contributing you'd probably take home a high $300 number net of taxes.  It'll take around 20 months to pay the loan off using this contribution money without considering your existing payments, in total you're probably looking at closer to 15 months.  You'll give up something in the neighborhood of $3,500 in match funds over the repayment time.   But again, you're 22, you'll resume your contributions at 24; still WAY ahead of most people from a retirement savings standpoint.  I don't think my first retirement dollar was contributed until I was about 29.  Sure, retirement savings is important, but if you've already started at age 22 you're probably going to end up way ahead of most either way.  When you're 60 you're probably not going to bemoan giving up a few grand of employer match in your 20s. That's what I would do. Edit: I actually like stannius's suggestion in the comments below.  IF there's enough vested in your plan that is also available for withdrawal that you could just scoop $6,500 out of your 401(k) net of the 10% penalty and federal and state taxes (which would be on the full amount) to pay the debt, I'd consider that instead of stopping the prospective contributions.  That way you could continue your contributions and receive the match contributions on a prospective basis.  I doubt this is a legitimate option because it's very common for employers to restrict or forbid withdrawal of employee and/or employer contributions made during your employment, but it would be worth looking in to."}
{"id": "437954", "text": "Also - the more credit facilities you have, the risikier you get. Say Company A lends you $8.000 for a down-payment - let's say you then go out and max out your other 100k facilities - you now have debt of 108k. What guarantee does the Company A have of repayment? Fewer credit facilities = better chance of getting a new loan."}
{"id": "437987", "text": "Sounds like he's just had the theory playing in his head since someone told him they did that instead of just purchasing it and going in to payments.  Perhaps I need to sit down and calculate it for my clueless self."}
{"id": "438302", "text": "\"Although this has been touched upon in comments, I think the following line from the currently accepted answer shows the biggest issue: There is a clear difference between investing and gambling. The reality is that the difference isn't that clear at all. Tens of comments have been written arguing in both directions and looking around the internet entire essays have been written arguing both positions. The underlying emotion that seems to shape this discussion primarily is whether investing (especially in the stock market) is a form of gambling. People who do invest in this way tend to get relatively emotional whenever someone argues that this is a form of gambling, as gambling is considered a negative thing. The simple reality of human communication is that words can be ambiguous, and the way investors will use the words 'investments' and 'gambles' will differ from the way it is used by gamblers, and once again different from the way it's commonly used. What I definitely think is made clear by all the different discussions however is that there is no single distinctive trait that allows us to differentiate investing and gambling. The result of this is that when you take dictionary definitions for both terms you will likely end up including lottery tickets as a valid form of investment.  That still however leaves us with a situation where we have two terms - with a strong overlap - which have a distinctive meaning in communication and the original question whether buying lottery tickets is an investment. Over on investorguide.com there is an absolutely amazing strongly recommended essay which explores countless of different traits in search of a difference between investing and gambling, and they came up with the following two definitions: Investing: \"\"Any activity in which money is put at risk for the purpose of making a profit, and which is characterized by some or most of the following (in approximately descending order of importance): sufficient research has been conducted; the odds are favorable; the behavior is risk-averse; a systematic approach is being taken; emotions such as greed and fear play no role; the activity is ongoing and done as part of a long-term plan; the activity is not motivated solely by entertainment or compulsion; ownership of something tangible is involved; a net positive economic effect results.\"\" Gambling: \"\"Any activity in which money is put at risk for the purpose of making a profit, and which is characterized by some or most of the following (in approximately descending order of importance): little or no research has been conducted; the odds are unfavorable; the behavior is risk-seeking; an unsystematic approach is being taken; emotions such as greed and fear play a role; the activity is a discrete event or series of discrete events not done as part of a long-term plan; the activity is significantly motivated by entertainment or compulsion; ownership of something tangible is not involved; no net economic effect results.\"\" The very interesting thing about those definitions is that they capture very well the way those terms are used by most people, and they even acknowledge that a lot of 'investors' are gambling, and that a few gamblers are 'investing' (read the essay for more on that). And this fits well with the way those two concepts are understood by the public. So in those definitions normally buying a lottery ticket would indeed not be an investment, but if we take for example Vadim's operation example If you have $1000 and need $2000 by next week or else you can't have an operation and you will die (and you can't find anyone to give you a loan). Your optimal strategy is to gamble your $1000, at the best odds you can get, with a possible outcome of $2000. So even if you only have a 1/3 chance of winning and getting that operation, it's still the right bet if you can't find a better one. this can suddenly change the perception and turn 'gambling' into 'high-risk investing'.\""}
{"id": "438419", "text": "Looks like there are no specific rule in India to prevent Wash sales. See the link below.  http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/personal-finance-news/investors-can-rejig-portfolio-book-short-term-loss-to-save-tax/articleshow/7812788.cms?intenttarget=no"}
{"id": "438525", "text": "I am sure there would be many views on the above topic, my take is that DIY takes the following: Now, for many, one or more of the other factors are missing. In this case, it is probably best to go for a financial adviser. There are others who have some of the above in place and are interested but probably cannot spend enough time. For them a middle ground of Mutual Funds probably is a good choice. Here they get to choose the fund they invest in and the fund manager manages the fund. For the people who have the above more or less in place and also are willing to take risk and learn, they probably can do a DIY for a while and find out the actual result. Just my views and opinion."}
{"id": "438547", "text": "There are many ways to calculate the return, and every way will give you a different results in terms of a percentage-value. One way to always get something meaningful - count the cash. You had 977 (+ 31) and in the end you have 1.370, which means you have earned 363 dollars. But what is your return in terms of percentage? One way to look at it, is by pretending that it is a fund in which you invest 1 dollar. What is the fund worth in the beginning and in the end? The tricky part in your example is, you injected new capital into the equation. Initially you invested 977 dollars which later, in the second period became worth 1.473. You then sold off 200 shares for 950 dollars. Remember your portfolio is still worth 1.473, split between 950 in cash and 523 in Shares. So far so good - still easy to calculate return (1.473 / 977 -1 = 50.8% return). Now you buy share for 981 dollars, but you only had 950 in cash? We now need to consider 2 scenarios. Either you (or someone else) injected 31 dollars into the fund - or you actually had the 31 dollars in the fund to begin with. If you already had the cash in the fund to begin with, your initial investment is 1.008 and not 977 (977 in shares and 31 in cash). In the end the value of the fund is 1.370, which means your return is 1.370 / 1.007 = 36%. Consider if the 31 dollars was paid in to the fund by someone other than you. You will then need to recalculate how much you each own of the fund. Just before the injection, the fund was worth 950 in cash and 387 in stock (310 - 200 = 110 x 3.54) = 1.339 dollars - then 31 dollars are injected, bringing the value of the fund up to 1.370. The ownership of the fund is split with 1.339 / 1.370 = 97.8% of the value for the old capital and 2.2% for the new capital. If the value of the fund was to change from here, you could calculate the return for each investor individually by applying their share of the funds value respective to their investment. Because the value of the fund has not changed since the last period (bullet 3), the return on the original investment is (977 / 1.339 - 1 = 37.2%) and the return on the new capital is (31 / 31 = 0%). If you (and not someone else) injected the 31 dollar into the fund, you will need to calculate the weight of each share of capital in each period and get the average return for each period to get to a total return. In this specific case you will still get 37.2% return - but it gets even more comlex for each time you inject new capital."}
{"id": "438801", "text": "Your taxable income is your total income from however many sources of income you have. If you are in employment and doing self-employed job at the same time, your taxable income will be a combination of both incomes.  For example if in employment you make \u00a310000 and self employed you make another \u00a310000 - your total income is \u00a320000 and this is your taxable income.  And even if your self-employed job does not bring you more than personal allowance, how would HMRC know that without you filling-in tax return?"}
{"id": "439295", "text": "Are mortgages always sold for less than the remaining principal? No, they're almost always sold for more than that. The buyer will take a loss if the homeowner pays off the loan immediately, but that's very unlikely. The buyer is hoping that the owner will payoff the loan as scheduled and they'll make a tidy profit from the interest charged. The originator now makes their profit immediately and has their capital back so they can make more loans."}
{"id": "439349", "text": "\"In Italy (even with taxes that are more than 50% on income) owning garages is generally a good business, as you said: \"\"making money while you sleep\"\", because of no maintainance. Moreover garages made by real concrete (and not wood like in US) are still new after 50 years, you just repaint them once every 20 years and you change the metal door gate once every 30 years. After 20 years you can be sure the price of the garage will be higher than what you paied it (at least for the effect of the inflation, after 20 years concrete and labour work will cost more than today). The only important thing before buying it is to make sure it is in an area where people are eager to rent it. This is very common in Italian cities' downtown because they were built in dark ages when cars did not exists, hence there are really few available parkings.\""}
{"id": "439459", "text": "Paying off the debt is low-risk, low-reward.  You're effectively guaranteed a 4% return.  If you buy a mutual fund, you're going to have to take some risk to have a decent chance of getting better than 4% and change return in the long run, which probably means a fund that invests primarily in stocks.  Buying a stock mutual fund is high-risk, high reward, especially when you're in significant debt.  On the other hand, 4% and change is very low-interest.  If you wanted to buy stocks on margin, financing stock investments directly with debt, you'd pay a heck of a lot more.  Bottom line:  It comes down to your personal risk tolerance."}
{"id": "439540", "text": "\"In general, a lack of endorsement (meaning nothing written by the receiver on the back of the check) is equivalent to it being endorsed \"\"as deposit only\"\" to a bank that the depositor has an account with. (See Uniform Commercial Code \u00a74-205.) That is, the bank that receives a deposit without any endorsement promises to the banks that process the check along the line all the way back to your bank, that they properly deposited the money into the account of the entity that the check was made out to. With checks being processed with more and more automation, it's getting fairly common for there to be little writing needed on the check itself, as the digital copy gets submitted to the banking system for clearing. If you're concerned about there being some sort of fraud, that perhaps the entity that you're sending money to isn't the ones that should be getting it, or that they're not actually getting the money, or something like that, that's really an entirely different concern. I would expect that if you were saying that you paid something, and the payee said that you hadn't, that you would dispute the transaction with your bank. They should be able to follow the electronic trail to where the money went, but I suspect they only do so as part of an investigation (and possibly only in an investigation that involved law enforcement of some type). If you're just curious about what bank account number your deposit went into, then it just looks like you're the one trying to commit some sort of fraud (even if you're just being curious), and they don't have much incentive to try to help you out there.\""}
{"id": "439593", "text": "How does paying off a mortgage early work? Example: I have a 30 year fixed rate mortgage of 3.5%, the amount borrowed is $300,000. I have just inherited $300,000. I am in the first year of the mortgage. Can I give the bank the $300,000 to clear the mortgage, or must I pay off the total interest that was agreed upon for the 30 year term? This depends on the country regulation and your agreement. Generally speaking the calculations are on daily reducing balance. so you just pay 300K I'm curious why the bank would let you do this, since they will lose out on a lot of profit"}
{"id": "440012", "text": "\"The key part of your question is the \"\"so far\"\".  So you didn't need a credit card today, or yesterday, or last month - great!  But what about tomorrow?  The time may come when you really need to spend a little more than you have, and a credit card will let you do that, at a very modest cost if you pay it off promptly (no cost, if paid within 30 days). I learned this when I was traveling and stranded due to bad weather.  I had almost nothing in my bank account at the time, and while I actually did have a small student-type credit card, I came really close to having to sleep at the train station when I didn't have enough for another night in a hotel. As an example, if you have close friends or family living across the country, and something tragic were to happen, would you be able to pay for a flight to attend the funeral?  What if you'd recently had an accident and a big medical bill (it doesn't take much, a broken arm can cost $10,000)?  Perhaps you have a solid nest egg, but breaking a CD ahead of schedule or taking short-term capital gains on a mutual fund will usually cost more than one or two months of interest payments.\""}
{"id": "440061", "text": "It appears to me that the tax code gives significant advantages to being a corporation as opposed to being a person due to the relative ease of legal tax avoidance.   As an individual, avoiding taxes is much harder than it is for a corporation.   I mean, why can't I claim my deficit last year as an operating loss and use it to offset my taxes?  I mean suppose I had to borrow money to afford food, that's pretty vital to my business (staying alive) operations. Why can't I offset my income with my borrowing like a corporation can?"}
{"id": "440417", "text": "\"Don't put money in things that you don't understand. ETFs won't kill you, ignorance will. The leveraged ultra long/short ETFs hold swaps that are essentially bets on the daily performance of the market. There is no guarantee that they will perform as designed at all, and they frequently do not. IIRC, in most cases, you shouldn't even be holding these things overnight. There aren't any hidden fees, but derivative risk can wipe out portions of the portfolio, and since the main \"\"asset\"\" in an ultra long/short ETF are swaps, you're also subject to counterparty risk -- if the investment bank the fund made its bet with cannot meet it's obligation, you're  may lost alot of money. You need to read the prospectus carefully. The propectus re: strategy. The Fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to twice the inverse (-2x) of the daily performance of the Index. The Fund does not seek to achieve its stated investment objective over a period of time greater than a single day. The prospectus re: risk. Because of daily rebalancing and the compounding of each day\u2019s return over time, the return of the Fund for periods longer than a single day will be the result of each day\u2019s returns compounded over the period, which will very likely differ from twice the inverse (-2x) of the return of the Index over the same period. A Fund will lose money if the Index performance is flat over time, and it is possible that the Fund will lose money over time even if the Index\u2019s performance decreases, as a result of daily rebalancing, the Index\u2019s volatility and the effects of compounding. See \u201cPrincipal Risks\u201d If you want to hedge your investments over a longer period of time, you should look at more traditional strategies, like options. If you don't have the money to make an option strategy work, you probably can't afford to speculate with leveraged ETFs either.\""}
{"id": "440418", "text": "Yah, I haven't played in this space very much. My only exposure was visiting a weather insurance company who wanted the fund I was at to take the other side of their bets - paying us a fixed amount and having us cover them whenever their losses were over a certain amount for the month. It looked like a pretty bad deal, but apparently some multi-strat hedge-fund eventually went with it for the uncorrelated beta."}
{"id": "440458", "text": "1) Yes, both of your scenarios would lead to earning $10 on the transaction, at the strike date. If you purchased both of them (call it Scenario 3), you would make $20. 2) As to why this transaction may not be possible, consider the following: The Call and Put pricing you describe may not be available. What you have actually created is called 'arbitrage' - 2 identical assets can be bought and sold at different prices, leading to a zero-risk gain for the investor. In the real marketplace, if an option to buy asset X in January cost $90, would an option to sell asset X in January provide $110?  Without adding additional complexity about the features of asset x or the features of the options, buying a Call option is the same as selling a Put option [well, when selling a Put option you don't have the ability to choose whether the option is exercised, meaning buying options has value that selling options does not, but ignore that for a moment]. That means that you have arranged a marketplace where you would buy a Call option for only $90, but the seller of that same option would somehow receive $110.  For added clarity, consider the following: What if, in your example, the future price ended up being $200? Then, you could exercise your call option, buying a share for $90, selling it for $200, making $110 profit. You would not exercise your put option, making your total profit $110. Now consider: What if, in your example, the future price ended up being $10? You would buy for $10, exercise your put option and sell for $110, making a profit of $100. You would not exercise your call option, making your total profit $100. This highlights that if your initial assumptions existed, you would earn money (at least $20, and at most, unlimited based on a skyrocketing price compared to your $90 put option) regardless of the future price. Therefore such a scenario would not exist in the initial pricing of the options. Now perhaps there is an initial fee involved with the options, where the buyer or seller pays extra money up-front, regardless of the future price. That is a different scenario, and gets into the actual nature of options, where investors will arrange multiple simultaneous transactions in order to limit risk and retain reward within a certain band of future prices.  As pointed out by @Nick R, this fee would be very significant, for a call option which had a price set below the current price. Typically, options are sold 'out of the money' initially, which means that at the current share price (at the time the option is purchased), executing the option would lose you money. If you purchase an 'in the money' option, the transaction cost initially would by higher than any apparent gain you might have by immediately executing the option. For a more realistic Options example, assume that it costs $15 initially to buy either the Call option, or the Put option. In that case, after buying both options as listed in your scenarios you would earn a profit if the share price exceeded $120 [The $120 sale price less the $90 call option = $30, which is your total fee initially], or dropped below $80 [The $110 Put price less the $80 purchase price = $30]. This type of transaction implies that you expect the price to either swing up, or swing down, but not fall within the band between $80-$120. Perhaps you might do this if there was an upcoming election or other known event, which might be a failure or success, and you think the market has not properly accounted for either scenario in advance. I will leave further discussion on that topic [arranging options of different prices to create specific bands of profitability / loss] to another answer (or other questions which likely already exist on this site, or in fact, other resources), because it gets more complicated after that point, and is outside the root of your question."}
{"id": "440485", "text": "In the US, you would probably look at a certificate of deposit (CD).   I imagine there is a similar financial product in the UK, but don't know first hand.   I think it is wise to be risk averse in this situation, but be aware that your interest rate will be dismal for guaranteed returns."}
{"id": "440506", "text": "I have researched this question extensively in previous years as we have notoriously high taxes in California, while neighboring a state that has zero corporate income tax and personal income tax. Many have attempted pull a fast one on the California taxation authorities, the Franchise Tax Board, by incorporating in Nevada or attempting to declare full-year residence in the Silver State. This is basically just asking for an audit, however.  California religiously examines taxpayers with any evidence of having presence in California. If they deem you to be a resident in California, and they likely will based on the fact that you live in California (physical presence), you will be subject to taxation on  your worldwide income. You could incorporate in Nevada or Bangladesh, and California will still levy its taxation on any business income (Single Member LLCs are disregarded as separate corporate entities, but still taxed at ordinary income rates on the personal income tax basis). To make things worse, if California examines your Single Member LLC and finds that it is doing business in California, based on the fact that its sole owner is based in California all year long, you could feasibly end up with additional penalties for having neglected to file your LLC in California (California LLCs are considered domestic, and only file in California unless they wish to do business in other states; Nevada LLCs are considered foreign to California, requiring the owner to file a domestic LLC organization in Nevada and then a foreign LLC organization in California, which still gets hit with the minimum $800 franchise fee because it is a foreign LLC doing business in California).  Evading any filing responsibility in California is not advisable. FTB consistently researches LLCs, S-Corporations and the like to determine whether they've been organized out-of-state but still principally operated in California, thus having a tax nexus with California and the subsequent requirement to be filed in California and taxed by California. No one likes paying taxes, and no one wants to get hit with franchise fees, especially when one is starting a new venture and that minimum $800 assessment seems excessive (in other words, you could have a company that earns nothing, zero, zip, nada, and still has to pay the $800 minimum fee), but the consequences of shirking tax laws and filing requirements will make the franchise fee seem trivial in comparison.  If you're committed to living in California and desire to organize an LLC or S-Corp, you must file with the state of California, either as a domestic corporation/LLC or foreign corporation/LLC doing business in California. The only alternatives are being a sole proprietor (unincorporated), or leaving the state of California altogether. Not what you wanted to hear I'm sure, but that's the law."}
{"id": "440719", "text": "There are a lot of open questions about if this is your only accessible money or if you have other emergency funds, and if you have any retirements savings and when do you plan to retire, but leaving this all aside: You currently pay 2.65% on the mortgage, and you make less on savings (maybe 1 or 1.5%). So putting the savings into the mortgage makes you the difference, which is a good deal. However, you need to reflect this with your risk-averisty, and your long term goals, and look at potential even better deals. For example, you could put the savings into higher risk/higher gain investments (let\u2019s assume index funds), and make 6 - 10% per year in average. That obviously is a lot more. Why would you not want to do that? Investing like this is a long term plan. If this is your only savings/emergency fund, or if you need the money within the next five years, you should not do it; it could catch you in a bad market situation, and then it might be a severe loss. If you are sure you don\u2019t need it for at least five if not ten years, invest it and keep the mortgage, you will easily beat its interest rate. If you are risk-averse, and can\u2019t sleep with your savings doing loopings while you watch, that is also not a plan for you. There are many things to consider, and your personal situation is relevant for the decision. Consider all options, and be sure to always have a emergency fund remaining. It is also not black and white - there are options in between of your two propositions - pay some in, and keep some for emergencies."}
{"id": "440779", "text": "Minimizing tracking error and offering good redemption liquidity is the priority. A few concerns off the top of my head are entrants and exits of the S&amp;P 500. Vanguard needs to dump a good amount of one stock quickly and purchase another big stake simultaneously. Everyone also knows that the large orders are coming so trying to do it efficiently is one challenge. When a company in the S&amp;P 500 spins off a stock as a dividend, you could be holding on to a bunch of shares in a new stock that you need to get rid off. Again, a lot of selling at once, need to keep costs of that low."}
{"id": "440794", "text": "\"I think the issue you are having is that the option value is not a \"\"flow\"\" but rather a liability that changes value over time. It is best to illustrate with a balance sheet. The $33 dollars would be the premium net of expense that you would receive from your brokerage for having shorted the options. This would be your asset. The liability is the right for the option owner (the person you sold it to) to exercise and purchase stock at a fixed price. At the moment you sold it, the \"\"Marked To Market\"\" (MTM) value of that option is $40. Hence you are at a net account value of $33-$40= $-7 which is the commission. Over time, as the price of that option changes the value of your account is simply $33 - 2*(option price)*(100) since each option contract is for 100 shares. In your example above, this implies that the option price is 20 cents. So if I were to redo the chart it would look like this If the next day the option value goes to 21 cents, your liability would now be 2*(0.21)*(100) = $42 dollars. In a sense, 2 dollars have been \"\"debited\"\" from your account to cover your potential liability. Since you also own the stock there will be a credit from that line item (not shown). At the expiry of your option, since you are selling covered calls, if you were to be exercised on, the loss on the option and the gain on the shares you own will net off. The final cost basis of the shares you sold will be adjusted by the premium you've received. You will simply be selling your shares at strike + premium per share (0.20 cents in this example)\""}
{"id": "440882", "text": "\"Easiest thing ever. In fact, 99% of people are loosing money. If you perform worse then 10% annually in cash (average over 5-10 years), then you better never even think about trading/investing. Most people are sitting at 0%..-5% annually. They win some, loose some, and are being outrun by inflation and commissions. In fact, fall of market is not a big deal, stock indexes are often jump back in a few months. If you rebalance properly, it is mitigated. Your much bigger enemy is inflation. If you think inflation is small, look at gold price over past 20 years. Some people, Winners at first, grow to +10%, get too relaxed and start to grow already lost position. That one loose trade eats 10% of their portfolio. Only there that people realize they should cut it off, when they already lost their profits. And they start again with +0%. This is hard thing to accept, but most of people are not made for that type of business. Even worse, they think \"\"if I had bigger budget, I would perform better\"\", which is kind of self-lie.\""}
{"id": "440930", "text": "\"I gather from your mention of \"\"stamp duty\"\" that you're in Britain?  I'm only familiar with US cards, but for them I can't see that there is any reason (other than a lack of self-discipline) not to use a credit card wherever possible, especially these days. 1) There are plenty of cards with no annual fee. 2) You get anywhere from 1-5% discount/cash back on purchases. 3) Many will give you sign-up bonuses, and a year or more of zero interest.  (So you put that money in your investment account, and odds are you make a profit on it.) 4) Even after the introductory 0% interest period, you get on average about a month of 0% interest between purchase and due date, during which period the money can be earning interest for you. I've made a good many thousands of dollars over the years doing this.  Again, the only drawback I can see is that you may not have the self-discipline to pay off the accounts before they start charging interest.\""}
{"id": "440959", "text": "\"Prices reflect all available information. (Efficient markets hypothesis) A lot can happen between the time a stock closes on one day and opens on another. Particularly in a heavily traded stock such as IBM. Basically, you have a different \"\"information set\"\" the following day, which implies a different price. The instances where you are most likely to have a stock where the price opens at the same price is at the previous close is a thinly traded stock on which you have little information, meaning that the \"\"information set\"\" changes less from day to day.\""}
{"id": "441143", "text": "The obligation is contractual, so you need to read the contract to answer your question. However, since you paid for the service provided, I see no way they can force you buy any other service from them. They cannot file your tax returns without your explicit consent (on a form dedicated to that, dated and having the numbers matching the return filed - not something you can sign before the actual return is ready). Worst case they can claim you owe them more money, but since you paid for the services provided, I can't see how they can have that stand in court as well. Bottom line - even if the contract has such an obligation, I cannot see how it can be enforced. As to the mistake they noted... I wouldn't rely on H&R Block advice in any matter. Very likely, the person you were talking to was not even licensed to provide tax advice. You're lucky if the person has passed CRTP exams (in California they're legally required), but I seriously doubt their clerks are EAs or CPAs (the only designations other than a lawyer legally allowed to provide tax advice). Tax preparers (CRTPs included) are only allowed to provide advice pertaining to the preparation of the tax return they're currently engaged to prepare. Claiming income is sourced or not sourced in NY is borderline, IMHO. If they got it wrong (and to me it sounds as they did) you can sue them for damages. If your situation is tricky and it is too late to get an appointment with a proper adviser - file an extension (form 4868) and deal with it after the April busy season."}
{"id": "441176", "text": "If you are making regular periodic investments (e.g. each pay period into a 401(k) plan) or via automatic investment scheme in a non-tax-deferred portfolio (e.g. every month, $200 goes automatically from your checking account to your broker or mutual fund house), then one way of rebalancing (over a period of time) is to direct your investment differently into the various accounts you have, with more going into the pile that needs bringing up, and less into the pile that is too high. That way, you can avoid capital gains or losses etc in doing the selling-off of assets. You do, of course, take longer to achieve the balance that you seek, but you do get some of the benefits of dollar-cost averaging."}
{"id": "441384", "text": "The methods for valuing a company are multiple and there is no one that is better than another. Depending on what information we have, we will find it more satisfying than another. FNBC Florida business broker is the best tool dedicated to the purchase and creation of companies through the network. In FNBC Florida we know that the needs of an entrepreneur are diverse, and therefore, the type of business that seeks to realize can be encompassed in various modalities, which can be found on the portal."}
{"id": "441462", "text": ""}
{"id": "441518", "text": "\"A good question -- there are many good tactical points in other answers but I wanted to emphasize two strategic points to think about in your \"\"5-year plan\"\", both of which involve around diversification: Expense allocation: You have several potential expenses. Actually, expenses isn't the right word, it's more like \"\"applications\"\". Think of the money you have as a resource that you can \"\"pour\"\" (because money has liquidity!) into multiple \"\"buckets\"\" depending on time horizon and risk tolerance. An ultra-short-term cushion for extreme emergencies -- e.g.  things go really wrong -- this should be something you can access at a moment's notice from a bank account. For example, your car has been towed and they need cash. A short-term cushion for emergencies -- something bad happens and you need the money in a few days or weeks. (A CD ladder is good for this -- it pays better interest and you can get the money out quick with a minimal penalty.) A long-term savings cushion -- you might want to make a down payment on a house or a car, but you know it's some years off. For this, an investment account is good; there are quite a few index funds out there which have very low expenses and will get you a better return than CDs / savings account, with some risk tolerance. Retirement savings -- $1 now can be worth a huge amount of money to you in 40 years if you invest it wisely. Here's where the IRA (or 401K if you get a job) comes in. You need to put these in this order of priority. Put enough money in your short-term cushions to be 99% confident you have enough. Then with the remainder, put most of it in an investment account but some of it in a retirement account. The thing to realize is that you need to make the retirement account off-limits, so you don't want to put too much money there, but the earlier you can get started in a retirement account, the better. I'm 38, and I started both an investment and a retirement account at age 24. They're now to the point where I save more income, on average, from the returns in my investments, than I can save from my salary. But I wish I had started a few years earlier. Income: You need to come up with some idea of what your range of net income (after living expenses) is likely to be over the next five years, so that you can make decisions about your savings allocation. Are you in good health or bad? Are you single or do you have a family? Are you working towards law school or medical school, and need to borrow money? Are you planning on getting a job with a dependable salary, or do you plan on being self-employed, where there is more uncertainty in your income? These are all factors that will help you decide how important short-term and long term savings are to your 5-year plan. In short, there is no one place you should put your money. But be smart about it and you'll give yourself a good head start in your personal finances. Good luck!\""}
{"id": "442110", "text": "75k is short of the 'highly compensated' category.  Most US citizens in that pay range would consider paying someone to do their taxes as an unnecessary expense.  Tax shelters usually don't come into play for this level of income.  However, there are certain things which provide deductions. Some things that make it better to pay someone:   Use the free online tax forms to sandbox your returns.  If all you're concerned about is ensuring you pay your taxes correctly, this is the most cost efficient route. If you want to minimize your tax burden, consult with a CPA.  Be sure to get one who is familiar with resident aliens from your country and the relevant tax treaties. The estimate you're looking at may be the withholding, of which you may be eligible for a refund for some part of that withholding.   Tax treaties likely make sure that you get credit on each side for the money paid in the other.  For example, as a US citizen, if I go to Europe and work and pay taxes there, I can deduct the taxes paid in Europe from my tax burden in the US.  If I've already paid more to the EU than I would have paid on the same amount earned in the US, then my tax burden in the US is zero.  By the same token, if I have not paid up to my US burden, then I owe the balance to the US.  But this is way better than paying taxes to your home country and to the host country where you earned the money."}
{"id": "442142", "text": "I suggest to start charging slightly more than needed to cover expenses. All you need is to show profit. It doesn't have to be significant - a couple of hundred of dollars of consistent yearly profit should suffice to show a profitable business. Then you can deduct on Schedule C all the related expenses. The caveat is that the profit (after the deduction of the expenses will be a bit smaller) will be subject to not only income tax but also the self-employment tax. But at least you'll pay tax on profit that is not entirely phantom. I remember suggesting you getting a professional consultation on this matter a while ago. You should really do that - talk to a EA/CPA licensed in your state, it may be well worth the $100-200 fee they'll charge for the consultation (if at all...)."}
{"id": "442146", "text": "Yes, you can send in a 2012 1040-ES form with a check to cover your tax liability. However, you will likely have to pay penalties for not paying tax in timely fashion as well as interest on the late payment. You can have the IRS figure the penalty and bill you for it, or you can complete Form 2210 (on which these  matters are figured out) yourself and file it with your Form 1040. The long version of Form 2210 often results in the smallest extra amount due but is considerably more time-consuming to complete correctly. Alternatively, if you or your wife have one or more paychecks coming before the end of 2012, it might be possible to file a new W-4 form with the HR Department with a request to withhold additional amounts as Federal income tax. I say might because if the last paycheck of the year will be issued in just a few days' time, it might already have been sent for processing, and HR might tell you it is too late. But, depending on the take-home pay, it might be possible to have the entire $2000 withheld as additional income tax instead of sending in a 1040-ES. The advantage of doing it through withholding is that you are allowed to treat the entire withholding for 2012 as satisfying the timely filing requirements. So, no penalty for late payment even though you had a much bigger chunk withheld in December, and no interest due either.  If you do use this approach, remember that Form W-4 applies until it is replaced with another, and so  HR will continue to withhold the extra amount on your January paychecks as well.  So, file a new W-4 in January to get back to normal withholding. (Fix the extra exemption too so the problem does not recur in 2013)."}
{"id": "442340", "text": "The PAYE tax and NI will be deducted as usual. Send HMRC a P85 form to tell them you're emigrating, and they will refund the tax."}
{"id": "442896", "text": "A friend tweeted a similar question regarding student loans, and I responded with Student Loans and Your First Mortgage.  The punchline is that you need to be aware of the 28/36 ratios in a bank qualifying you for your mortgage. Even though you have a house, you may not be aware of this.  Simply put, 28% of gross monthly income can be used to qualify for your house burden, loan, taxes, etc. 36% for total debt. So the student loan may fit in that 8% gap, and paying it all off reduces the cash you have without helping you borrow more money.  3-5 years is short term, and to that part of the question, this money should not be invested in anything at risk. A 3 year treasury or CD would be it, in my opinion."}
{"id": "442968", "text": "I know a guy on a much higher rate than me, about \u00a3500 per day, and he claims to pay around 18% tax which has me bewildered He will be showing expenses, which are deductible. Check with your accountant about expenses, which can be legally claimed as expenses. This is the main benefit of operating through a limited company. Legtimate business expenses can be claimed, which you cannot do if you are a permanent employee. Your friend might also be claiming false expenses, with a shady accountant. If HMRC does decide to give a call, he might have to pay n times the money he has saved till now. And my suggestion is always ask your accountant first. He(she) knows the legal stuff, so he(she) would give you the legally correct options. If you aren't comfortable with him(her), you can always change accountants. holiday pay, sick pay and job security You miss those that is why you are paid at a rate much higher than an employee.  benefit of a limited company  You can arrange your salary to pay no PAYE and take the rest as dividends. You willn't have to pay PAYE on that. Secondly if you have a partner(s), all of you can be paid dividends without paying PAYE(if you don't cross the threshold)."}
{"id": "443315", "text": "It looks like RK is encouraging tax fraud. Suggesting that one have their business cover personal expenses sounds like the advice that got Leona Helmsley in hot water."}
{"id": "443354", "text": "Yes (most likely). If you are exchanging investments for cash, you will have to pay tax on that - disregarding capital losses, capital loss carryovers, AGI thresholds, and other special rules (which there is no indication of in your question). You will have to calculate the gain on Schedule D, and report that as income on your 1040. This is the case whether you buy different or same stocks."}
{"id": "443419", "text": "In the United States, when applying for credit cards, proof of income is on an honor system. You can make $15k a year and write on your application that you make $150k a year. They don't check that value other than to have their computer systems figure out risk and you get a yes or no. It was traditionally easy to attain credit, but that got tightened in 2008/2009 with the housing crisis. This is starting to change again and credit is flowing much more easily."}
{"id": "443752", "text": "In Keynes' day, money was gold. Convertible at a fixed exchange rate. His recommendation was that the government saved gold in good times, to ensure that it wouldn't run out of gold in the bad times.  That particular advice has zero relevance to a government that only borrows its own free-floating currency, as governments do not and can not run out of their own free-floating currency."}
{"id": "443852", "text": "\"Short answer: NO.  Do NOT buy a house.  Houses are a \"\"luxury\"\" good (see Why is a house not an investment?).  Although the experience of the early 2000s seemed to convince most people otherwise, houses are not an investment.  Historically, it has usually been cheaper to rent, because owning a house has non-pecuniary benefits such as the ability to change things around to exactly the way you like them.  Consult a rent vs. buy calculator for your area to see if your area is exceptional.  I also would not rely on the mortgage interest deduction for the long term, as it seems increasingly likely the Federal government will do away with it at some point. The first thing you must do is eliminate your credit card and other debts.  Try to delay paying your lawyers and anyone else who is not charging you interest (or threatening to harm you in other ways) as long as possible.  Save enough money to maintain your current standard of living for 6 months should you lose your job, then put the rest in your 401(k). Another word of advice: learn to live with less.  Your kids do not need separate bedrooms.  Hopefully one day the time will come when you can afford a larger house, but it should not be your highest priority.  You and your kids will all be worse off in the end should you have unexpected financial difficulties and you have overextended yourself to buy a house. Now that your credit score is up, see if you can renegotiate your credit card loans or negotiate a new loan with lower interest.\""}
{"id": "444044", "text": "It is not necessarily proportional. 401k are all unique per the plan and how they are set up. It is impossible to find any two exactly alike. You should have separate buckets of the money types. Pre tax, after tax, roth, employer contribution,etc... If the plan is good you may have a Source Specific Withdraw option which allows you to take only roth or pretax at your choosing. They should track the growth of each bucket separately. It does indeed appear complicated but just think of it as different buckets of cash store in the same vault. Most people end up rolling over the 401k into an ira when they retire for flexibility to get out from under the plan rules. When you do this you will create a roth ira and a traditional ira. Then you can pick and choose when you want to take what type of money."}
{"id": "444461", "text": "Oh it is ok. I was a little confused, because I tried to read up on future options and options as much as possible, and to still get question marks worried me. I mean to my knowledge, options can be traded as is without margin, while futures do need margin. If you are a starving artist, you can see the draw of not having to have margin to keep track of, but be able at the same time to learn about another market to trade in (commodities)."}
{"id": "444477", "text": "The problem is, you are trying to qualify for a loan that has a 25% down payment using money you don't have, which defeats the purpose of having a down payment. The best thing to do is have your parents buy the house for you. You then rent the house from them where your rent is equal to the mortgage + x. Your parents then put x into savings account for you and then once you have 25% in that account, they gift it to you and you purchase the house from them using that 25% as the downpayment for the mortgage."}
{"id": "444540", "text": "You're confused because the source you cite leaves out one number that isn't relevant to the argument they're making: total costs. The number you're expecting, $9 x 365 or $3285 is the total cost of buying the jewelry which, when subtracted from the $3650 sales volume gives us the net profit of $365.  The investment is the amount of money original put into a system our company. In this case the merchant bought his first piece of jewelry for $9, sold it for $10, took one dollar in profit and used the other 9 to reinvest by buying a new piece of jewelry. We can extend the analogy further. After 9 days of selling, the merchant will posses $18, allowing him to now buy 2 pieces of jewelry each morning and sell them for $20. Every day his costs will be $18 and he'll turn a $2 profit, all with the original investment of $9."}
{"id": "444562", "text": "Do you realise that the examples you have given are for stock splits not for dividends, that is why the date payable is before the ex-date for the split. The payments for the split occur on 30th June and the first day the stock trades with the new split is on the next trading day, being the ex-date, 1st July."}
{"id": "444620", "text": "\"If the IRS changes your return in any way (including math errors) - they send a letter explaining the change and the reasons for it. You should read that letter, it will answer your question (Usually its a CP12 notice). If you didn't receive it - you can call them and ask to resend it (they're unlikely to answer over the phone, but you can try asking). I'm confused by your using the word \"\"estimate\"\". Your tax return is not supposed to be estimate, it supposed to be precise. Why are you considering your tax return \"\"estimate\"\"? If your filed tax return shows refund of $X and you received $X+$180 - then as I said, a letter of explanation from the IRS is due. If you don't know what the refund amount on your return is and you're trying to \"\"estimate\"\" it now - you better get a copy of that return.\""}
{"id": "444899", "text": "With a $40,000 payment there is a 100% chance that the owner will be claiming this as a business expense on their taxes.  The IRS and the state will definitely know about it, and the risk of interest and penalties if it is not claimed as income make the best course of action to see a tax adviser. Because taxes will not be taken out by the property owner, the tax payer should also make sure that the estimated $10,000 in federal taxes, if they are in the 25% tax bracket, doesn't trigger other tax issues that could result in penalties, or the need to file quarterly taxes next year. This kind of extra income could also result in a change or an elimination of a health care subsidy. A unexpected mid-year  change could trigger the need to refund the subsidy received this year via the tax form next April."}
{"id": "444910", "text": "\"In most industries it's really hard to tell if Bob is in a minority or not. Why do people not subscribe after their x months of a free trial? How do you know that? The good thing about \"\"Bob\"\" is that he's willing to tell you the reason why *at least* one person fell out of the funnel. That's very valuable information.\""}
{"id": "444911", "text": "\"In the UK there are Premium Bonds, http://www.nsandi.com/. In simple terms these get you a \"\"raffle ticket\"\" for each \u00a31 you invest. Each month multiple tickets are drawn and they each win between \u00a325 and \u00a31m. Your capital does not go down but you aren't guaranteed to win. So you can't lose your money but there's potential to not make any either.\""}
{"id": "445052", "text": "He has included this on Schedule D line 1a, but I don't see any   details on the actual transaction. It is reported on form 8949. However, if it is fully reported in 1099-B (with cost basis), then you don't have to actually detail every position. Turbotax asked me to fill in individual stock sales with proceeds and cost basis information. ... Again, it seems to be documented on Schedule D in boxes 1a and 8a. See above. I received a 1099-Q for a 529 distribution for a family member. It was   used for qualified expenses, so should not be taxable. Then there's nothing to report. I believe I paid the correct amounts based on my (possibly flawed) understanding of estimated taxes. His initial draft had me paying a penalty. I explained my situation for the year, and his next draft had the   penalties removed, with no documentation or explanation. IRS assesses the penalty. If you volunteer to pay the penalty, you can calculate it yourself and pay with the taxes due. Otherwise - leave it to the IRS to calculate and assess the penalty they deem right and send you a bill. You can then argue with the IRS about that assessment. Many times they don't even bother, if the amounts are small, so I'd suggest going with what the CPA did."}
{"id": "445053", "text": "To add a little to mhoran_psprep's answer, the clause in question is not binding in perpetuity but only for the duration of the construction loan.  I assume that you are getting the loan from a bank rather than through  the builder.  The way a construction loan works is that the bank  agrees to loan you a certain amount of money for you to pay the builder but you don't get the money upfront to hold  till the construction is complete, or to pay to the builder each month. Each month, or whenever a major phase of the construction is completed, the builder submits a request for payment of (say) $X to you stating what part of the  whole work has been completed and attaching lien waivers from all the subcontractors that did any part of the work that they have been paid in full.  It is up to you to verify  (for your own protection) that the work has in fact been completed and that the work is satisfactory.  If everything looks OK, you send the  request (together with the lien waivers) to the bank which sends its own home inspector to verify that the work has in fact been completed. After the inspector's OK, the bank pays the builder $X  (more commonly $0.95X or $0.9X) and gets a lien waiver from the builder in the amount of the payment.  At this point, the amount that you  owe the bank increases by the amount paid. This goes on till the  house is completed, the municipality or county issues a Certificate  of Occupancy (meaning that that august body is satisfied that  there are no building code violations etc. and the place is  habitable) and the penultimate request for payment is made. Penultimate because a good construction contract withholds  some amount (5% or 10%) of the money owed to the builder  for anywhere from three  months to a year to ensure that the builder will come back  and fix things that were done incorrectly but not noticed  till the house was lived in. (For example, one drywall nail had penetrated an electrical wire creating leakage. This was not discovered during inspection - flip the switch; light turns on? yes, so flip the switch back and move on - but when the light was turned on for three hours after the house was occupied, an electrical fire began inside the wall!)  So, after this settle-down period is over, the builder submits the final payment request and gives a final lien waiver to the effect that everything owed to him has been paid. It is during this period of time that the bank wants to make sure that you don't take on additional loans or debts, or make any material changes to the facts that the bank used in assessing your credit-worthiness and making the decision to loan you the money. Hence the clause that is causing you to worry.  Construction loans usually are at higher interest rates than regular mortgages so that once construction is complete, it is in your best interest to replace the construction loan (paying off its mortgage) with a regular home-owner loan and mortgage.  If you get the regular mortgage from the same bank, you might be able to get some of the fees waived while going to another bank will mean that appraisal fee, termite inspection fee, etc will have to be paid. But in either case, the prohibition against buying that Beemer will disappear; just don't take out that auto loan between the mortgage application and the closing on the regular mortgage as mhoran_psprep's buyer did!"}
{"id": "445230", "text": "sometimes we advise very old or incapacitated people to apply the refund to the next year as check writing from time to time & mailing may be a hassle for them."}
{"id": "445298", "text": "\"AFAIK, there are two kinds of taxes your web freelancing income may be subject to in Quebec: On the income taxes:  The net income you realize from your web freelancing activities would be considered taxable income.  Assuming you are not operating as an incorporated business, you would need to declare the freelancing income on both your federal and provincial tax returns.  You should be able to deduct certain costs related to your business \u2013 for instance, if you paid for software, hosting, domain name registration, etc.  That is, only the profit from your business would be subject to income tax.  With income and expenses arising from self-employment, you may want to use a professional to file your taxes. On the sales taxes: You may also need to charge federal GST and provincial QST (Quebec Sales Tax) on your services:  You must enroll and charge GST and QST once you exceed the \"\"small supplier\"\" revenue threshold of $30,000 measured over four consecutive quarters.  (You can still choose to enroll for GST/QST before you reach that amount, but over that amount enrollment becomes mandatory.  Some businesses enroll before the threshold is reached so they can claim input tax credits for tax paid on expenses, but then there's more paperwork \u2013 one reason to perhaps avoid enrolling until necessary.) In Quebec, the Minist\u00e8re du Revenu du Qu\u00e9bec administers both GST (on behalf of the federal government) as well as provincial QST.  Be sure to also check out their informative booklet, Should I Register with Revenu Quebec? (PDF).  See also General Information Concerning the QST and the GST/HST (PDF).\""}
{"id": "445549", "text": "I guess Bitcoin are not that popular yet and hence there are no specific regulations. If currently it gets debated, it would be treated more like a Pre-Paid card or your Paypal account. As you have already paid taxes on the $$ you used to buy the Bitcoins there is no tax obligation as long as you keep using it to buy something else. The other way to look at it is as a commodity. If you have purchased a commodity and it has appreciated in value in future you may be liable to pay tax on the appreciated value. Think of it as a if you bought a house with the $$ and sold it later.   Once more serious trade starts happening, the governments around the world would bring in regulations. Till then there is nothing to worry about."}
{"id": "445782", "text": "The 20%+ returns you have observed in the mutual funds are not free money.  They are compensation for the risk associated with owning those funds.  Given the extraordinarily high returns you are seeing I would expect extremely high risk.  This means there is a good possibility of extreme losses at some point.  By putting a lot of money in those mutual funds you are taking a gamble that may or may not pay off. Assuming what your friend is paying you for rent is fair, you are not losing money on your house relative to the market.  You are earning less because you are invested in a less risky asset.  If you want a higher return, you should borrow some money (or sell your house) and invest in the market.  You may make more money that way. But if you do that, you will have a larger chance of losing a lot of money at some point.  That's the way risk works.  No one can promise a 20% return on a risky asset, they can only hint that it may do in the future what it did in the past. A reasonable approach to investment is to get invested in lots of different things: stocks, bonds, real estate.  If you are afraid of risk and willing to earn less, keep more money in safe assets.  If you are willing to take big risks in exchange for the possibility of high returns, move more assets into risky stuff.  If you want extreme returns and are willing to take extreme risk, borrow and use the money to invest in risky assets. As you look over investment options, remember that anything that pays high returns most likely has high risk as well."}
{"id": "445930", "text": "Household debt as a percentage of disposable income rose from 68% in 1980 to a peak of 128% in 2007, prior to dropping to 112% by 2011.  The typical American family's income has fallen every year since 2007 by 2011 it had fallen back to 1997 levels.   So where is the money going to come from to pay off all this new debt?"}
{"id": "445943", "text": "\"Supply and Demand, pure and simple! There are two basic forms of this - a change in the quantity demanded/supplied at any given price, and a true change in the amount of demand/supply itself. Please note that this can be distinct from the underlying change in the value of the company and/or its expected future cash flows, which are a function of both financial performance and future expectations. If more people want the stock that are willing to sell it at a given price at a given point in time, sellers will begin to offer the stocks at higher prices until the market is no longer willing to bear the new price, and vice versa. This will reduce the quantity of stocks demanded by buyers until the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied once again reach an equilibrium, at which point a transaction occurs. Because people are motivated to buy and sell for different reasons at different times, and because people have different opinions on a constant flow of new information, prices change frequently. This is one of the reasons why executives of a recent IPO don't typically sell all of their stock at once. In addition to legal restrictions and the message this would send to the market, if they flooded the market with additional quantities of stock supplied, all else being equal, since there is no corresponding increase in the quantity demanded, the price would drop significantly. Sometimes, the demand itself for a company's stock shifts. Unlike a simple change in price driven by quantity supplied versus quantity demanded, this is a more fundamental shift. For example, let's suppose that the current demand for rare earth metals is driven by their commercial applications in consumer electronics. Now if new devices are developed that no longer require these metals, the demand for them will fall, regardless of the actions of individual buyers and sellers in the market. Another example is when the \"\"rules of the game\"\" for an industry change dramatically. Markets are behavioral. In this sense prices are most directly driven by human behavior, which hopefully is based on well-informed opinions and facts. This is why sometimes the price keeps going up when financial performance decreases, and why sometimes it does not rise even while performance is improving. This is also why some companies' stock continues to rise even when they lose huge sums of money year after year. The key to understanding these scenarios is the opinions and expectations that buyers and sellers have of that information, which is expressed in their market behavior.\""}
{"id": "445994", "text": "Yes, you can do what you are contemplating doing, and it works quite well. Just don't get the university's payroll office too riled by going in each June, July, August and September to adjust your payroll withholding! Do it at the end of the summer when perhaps most of your contract income for the year has already been received and you have a fairly good estimate for what your tax bill will be for the coming year. Don't forget to include Social Security and Medicare taxes (both employee's share as well as employer's share) on your contract income in estimating the tax due. The nice thing about paying estimated taxes via payroll deduction is that all that tax money can be counted as having been paid in four equal and timely quarterly payments of estimated tax, regardless of when the money was actually withheld from your university paycheck. You could (if you wanted to, and had a fat salary from the university, heh heh) have all the tax due on your contract income withheld from just your last paycheck of the year! But whether you increase the withholding in August or in December, do remember to change it back after the last paycheck of the year has been received so that next year's withholding starts out at a more mellow pace."}
{"id": "446059", "text": "\"There are two places to start, the spending side and the income side. Many (in the personal finance blogosphere) have pointed out that frugal has its limits. You can only live so cheaply, eat so little, turn the heat down so much.  Your income and your wife's income has no limit. Not to put this all in her lap, but why isn't she working? Between the two of you, there are hundreds of things you can consider doing that will generate a few hundred dollars a week extra income.  You said \"\"we can live fairly comfortably paycheck-to-paycheck and routinely put some money into savings,\"\" but you are still paying off debt, and don't have the emergency fund to handle the routine things that come around on a regular basis. The difference between breaking even, and making extra money, is the ability to fund that account. It's important to have a defined plan to pay the remaining debt, and build your fund in as short a time period as you can.  As Bren stated, you need to plan for the unexpected. I don't know what appliance will go this year or what day it will break, I just know something will happen and I have the funds to pay for it. The extra income is vital to a workable plan.\""}
{"id": "446117", "text": "\"From the IRS page on Estimated Taxes (emphasis added): Taxes must be paid as you earn or receive income during the year, either through withholding or estimated tax payments. If the amount of income tax withheld from your salary or pension is not enough, or if you receive income such as interest, dividends, alimony, self-employment income, capital gains, prizes and awards, you may have to make estimated tax payments. If you are in business for yourself, you generally need to make estimated tax payments. Estimated tax is used to pay not only income tax, but other taxes such as self-employment tax and alternative minimum tax. I think that is crystal clear that you're paying income tax as well as self-employment tax. To expand a bit, you seem to be confusing self-employment tax and estimated tax, which are not only two different things, but two different kinds of things.  One is a tax, and the other is just a means of paying your taxes. \"\"Self-employment tax\"\" refers to the Social Security and Medicare taxes that you must pay on your self-employment income.  This is an actual tax that you owe.  If you receive a W-2, half of it is \"\"invisibly\"\" paid by your employer, and half of it is paid by you in the form of visible deductions on your pay stub.  If you're self-employed, you have to pay all of it explicitly. \"\"Estimated tax\"\" does not refer to any actual tax levied on anyone.  A more pedantically correct phrasing would be \"\"estimated tax payment\"\".  Estimated taxes are just payments that you make to the IRS to pay tax you expect to owe.  Whether you have to make such payments depends on how much tax you owe and whether you've paid it by other means.  You may need to pay estimated tax even if you're not self-employed, although this would be unusual.  (It could happen, for instance, if you realized large capital gains over the year.)  You also may be self-employed but not need to pay estimated tax (if, for instance, you also have a W-2 job and you reduce your withholding allowances to have extra tax withheld). That said, if you earn significant income from self-employment, you'll likely have to make estimated tax payments.  These are prepayments of the income tax and Social Security/Medicare taxes you accrue based on your self-employment income. As Pete B. mentioned in his answer, a possible reason that your estiamtes are low is because some taxes have already been withheld from the paychecks you received so far during the year (while you were an employee).  These represent tax payments you've already made; you don't need to pay that money a second time, but you may need to make estimated tax payments for your income going forward.\""}
{"id": "446190", "text": "\"I assume you are filing US taxes because you are a US citizen, resident alien, or other \"\"US person\"\". If you have a total of $10,000 or more in assets in non-US accounts, you are required to file FinCEN Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts, also known as FBAR, to report those accounts.  See Comparison of Form 8938 and FBAR Requirements.  Note this refers to the total balance in the account (combined with any other accounts you may have); the amount you transferred this year is not relevant.  Also note that the FBAR is filed separately from your income tax return (it does not go to the IRS), though if you have over $50,000 in offshore assets you may also have to file IRS Form 8938. Simply reporting those accounts does not necessarily mean you will owe extra taxes.  Most US taxes are based on income, not assets. According to the page linked, the maximum penalty for a \"\"willful\"\" failure to report such accounts is a fine of $100,000 or 50% of the assets in question, whichever is greater, in addition to possible criminal sanctions. There may be other US filing requirements that I don't know about, so you may want to consult a tax professional.  I do not know anything about your filing requirements under Indian law.\""}
{"id": "446397", "text": "\"Do you not understand my example at all?  You are better off having an $8M open position (by not selling) than $6.67M in cash (by selling).  It's literally as simple as 8M &gt; 6.67M.  And before someone argues that \"\"you will eventually have to sell the 8M open position, at which point it'll be worth only ~5M after taxes\"\" - no, you don't necessarily \"\"have\"\" to sell it. You can keep it forever and live off the dividends, or by borrowing against it, or you can pass it onto heirs in a tax-free or at least more tax efficient way, etc.\""}
{"id": "446553", "text": "When your debt is forgiven, you have to consider the amount written off as an ordinary income item (with the exclusion of the debt originated from the purchase of primary home). If you're trying to write the debt off from your taxes - then it won't work. Even if you can expense the debt forgiveness, you will incur tax liability on your personal taxes side, and in addition you'll be out of cash in your business. So basically you'll end up paying it with after tax money, exactly the thing you're trying to avoid. In addition, you're dealing with related persons here, which means that the loss deduction might not be allowed (depends on the actual details of the transaction), so you might actually end up paying more taxes with this scheme that just paying off the loan directly (if your business pays taxes separately from your person). A loss on the sale or exchange of property between related persons is   not deductible. This applies to both direct and indirect transactions,   but not to distributions of property from a corporation in a complete   liquidation. For the list of related persons, see Related persons   next."}
{"id": "446615", "text": "You can't directly contribute more. However, it seems that there is something you can do that can achieve a similar effect. You can withdraw your entire account (principal + earnings, though in your case that's less than the principal), and then contribute up to the $5500 contribution limit again. The end result is that you put in a net amount of $500, and the account ends up with $5500, which is what you want. The first step is a return of contributions made for the contribution year before the tax filing deadline for that year. This kind of withdrawal is not subject to tax, and counts as if you never made the contribution at all. Since you are considered to have never made a contribution, you still have $5500 that you can contribute before you hit the limit."}
{"id": "446633", "text": "\"It sounds good, but perhaps they've overlooked several things that would need to be addressed before anything like this could work well.  1) If there is a leak in the overall flow, such as a HFT hedge fund sucking money out of the markets at an enormous rate into a tax haven, such a system would just perpetuate the existing rise of the superwealthy entities. They still get richer without spending much in return.  2) As described they have only talked about one government, one nation, one monetary recycling system, as if nations are closed boxes. They are not. Money flows across borders with ease. Nations **compete** to maximise the amount of assets they hold within their borders at any given time. These can be fixed capital assets too. So nothing prevents the \"\"global equity investment\"\" they mention from starting to resemble all the powerful corporations concentrated in a single favoured nation over time. That would represent a lot of political power concentrated in ways that are not necessarily favourable to individual sovereign national legal systems elsewhere.  It is possible that this could mean that nations would compete to lower taxes to zero to attract corporations, thereby risking bankrupting governments unless the income from the global equity index compensated enough. At 6% it won't match current tax rates.  The second point also means that nations cannot unilaterally decide to implement this unless they have a guaranteed additional inflowing income from transnational activities that could compensate for excessive outflow.\""}
{"id": "446799", "text": "Publication 17 is a start. From that pub -   I don't know what the stipend was for or whether is was tax free. So I can't say for sure, myself."}
{"id": "446803", "text": "That sucks.  If BofA is taking responsibility for the insurance payment, then they should..., well, take responsibilty - full responsibility.  I hope these people get reimbursed fairly.  Didn't their insurance company contact them about the policy?  If not, I'd certainly be shopping for a new insurance company, and possibly I'd include them in a lawsuit.  The insurance company should be contacting the bank **and** their customer.  Mine sent me a couple of letters, saying a copy was sent to the bank (although I think they still had the original bank, not BofA).  But BofA had recently paid the premium, so they ignored it - basically dropped the ball.  When I got the 2nd letter from the insurance company, I called again, and the guy at BofA got right on the ball, checked it out, and fixed it very quickly, then helped me cancel my escrow so I could handle it directly in the future.  Perhaps I was lucky to get someone who cared about their job enough to follow through.  But I also jumped in to make sure it got taken care of, so if he hadn't, I would have been bothering them until they did."}
{"id": "446843", "text": "Reducing your income by 20k is guaranteed to lower your tax bill by less than 20k (because there are no tax rates greater than 100%).  Your goal shouldn't be to minimize taxes but to maximize total net income."}
{"id": "446856", "text": "Yes. If I own a call, an American call option can be exercised at my wish. A European call can only be exercised at expiration, by the way.  Your broker doesn't give you anything but a current quote for a given strike price. There are a number of good option related questions here. A bit of searching and reading will help you understand the process."}
{"id": "446877", "text": "How you use the metric is super important.   Because it subtracts cash, it does not represent 'value'.  It represents the ongoing financing that will be necessary if both the equity plus debt is bought by one person, who then pays himself a dividend with that free cash.   So if you are Private Equity, this measures your net investment at t=0.5, not the price you pay at t=0.  If you are a retail investor, who a) won't be buying the debt, b) won't have any control over things like tax jurisdictions, c) won't be receiving any cash dividend, etc etc .... the metric is pointless."}
{"id": "446889", "text": "You pay it this tax year.  Whether that's now due to W-2 withholding, or later with your 1040 next year, or with your 1040-ES all depends on your particular situation."}
{"id": "447010", "text": "If these are children that may be employed, in a few years, it may well be worth walking them through some basics of the deductions around employment, some basic taxes, uses of banks, and give them enough of a basis in how the economy of the world works.  For example, if you get a job and get paid $10/hour, that may sound good but how much do various things eat at that so your take-home pay may be much lower?  While this does presume that the kids will get jobs somewhere along the way and have to deal with this, it is worth making this part of the education system on some level rather than shocking them otherwise. Rather than focusing on calculations, I'd be more tempted to consider various scenarios like how do you use a bank, what makes insurance worth having(Life, health, car, and any others may be worth teaching on some level), and how does the government and taxes fit into things. While I may be swinging more for the practical, it is worth considering if these kids will be away in college or university in a few years, how will they handle being away from the parents that may supply the money to meet all the financial needs?"}
{"id": "447336", "text": "Don't forget the risk of not finding tenants and having your property be empty. Or having bad tenants who destroy the place. Or just spending all your time  (because time is money) on general upkeep/maintenance (or, if you subcontract that out, making sure a decent job was done)"}
{"id": "447482", "text": "if you have a work-sponsored retirement plan  A 401k plan counts as a work-sponsored retirement plan. If you are a highly compensated employee (this is $115,000 for 2012), even your 401k contributions are limited.  Given that, is there any difference at all between having a traditional IRA and a normal, taxable (non-retirement) investment account?  You should consider a Roth IRA if you are making too much for a traditional IRA. When you make even more, then you can't contribute to a Roth, but can only contribute post-tax money to a traditional IRA.  Use Form 8606 to keep track of non-deductable contributions over the years. Publication 590 is the official IRS explanation of what is deductable or not."}
{"id": "447567", "text": "That doesn't sound like dollar cost averaging. That sounds like a form of day trading. Dollar cost averaging is how most people add money to their 401K, or how they add money to some IRA accounts. You are proposing a form of day trading."}
{"id": "447619", "text": "\"Why is nobody providing a service that is basically: Give me your money. I will invest it as I see fit. A year later I will return the capital to you, plus half of any profits or losses. This means that if your capital under my management ends up turning a profit, I will keep half of those profits, but if I lose you money, I will cover half those losses. Because they can already make lots of money by just charging people an unconditional fee and not having to cover their losses.  Why take on the risk of having to cover your losses when they can just take a percentage of your assets and stick you with any losses? In addition, as Charles E. Grant mentioned in a comment on another answer, if a person has both sufficient capital to cover your losses and sufficient confidence in their investing acumen that they don't think they will have to do so, they have little need for your money.  Rather than take half the gains on your money, they will invest their own money (they must have some, or else they can't guarantee your losses) and take all the gains. Your scheme would only be plausible as a partnership between a person with investing skills but little capital, and another person with ample capital and less skill.  In that case, the investment whiz could genuinely benefit from access to the bankroller's capital.  As quid noted in chat, this does exist in the form of ad-hoc private equity arrangements between individuals.  However, such a setup is unlikely to exist as an \"\"off-the-shelf product\"\" marketed at retail investors, because financial institutions have more capital than any individual retail investor -- and, more generally, anyone with sufficient skill to pull this off will (at least in theory) quickly accumulate enough capital that they can negotiate a less risky payment plan.\""}
{"id": "447781", "text": "If you are going to be a long term investor you are only going to buy and hold. You will not sell. Thus future price is not relevant. Only dividend payout is relevant. Divide the dividend by the price you paid to get the yeald.  Edit:  once again the sitesite will not allow me to add a comment, so I have to edit a previous post...  What you call 'active investor' is not really investing, it is speculating. When you try to 'buy low, sell high' you have, at best, a 50-50 chance of picking the low. You then pay a commission on that buy. After you buy then you have a 50-50 chance, at best, of picking the high. You also have to pay the commission on the sell. 50% times 50% is 25%.So you have, at best a 25% chance of buying low and selling high. You are churning your account which makes money for the broker whether you make money or not. If, instead, you buy and hold a dividend paying security then the going price is irrelevant. You paid for the security once and do not have to pay for it again. Meanwhile the dividends roll in forever. 'Buy low, sell high' is a fools game. Warren Buffet does not do it, he buys and holds."}
{"id": "447812", "text": "I'm guessing you're talking about options given to employees. The company can issue stock options at whatever strike price it wants. The difference between the strike price and the actual market value is considered income to the employee. You can get the options at $0 strike just as well (although companies generally just give RSUs instead in this case)."}
{"id": "447886", "text": "\"After learning about things that happened in the \"\"flash crash\"\" I always use limit orders. In an extremely rare instance if you place a market order when there is a some glitch, for example some large trader adds a zero at the end of their volume, you could get an awful price.  If I want to buy at the market price, I just set the limit about 1% above the market price. If I want to sell, I set the limit 1% below the market price. I should point out that your trade is not executed at the limit price. If your limit price on a buy order is higher than the lowest offer, you still get filled at the lowest offer. If before your order is submitted someone fills all offers up to your limit price, you will get your limit price. If someone, perhaps by accident, fills all orders up to twice your limit price, you won't end up making the purchase. I have executed many purchases this way and never been filled at my limit price.\""}
{"id": "447983", "text": "Only if (or to put it even more bluntly, when) they default. If your friend / brother / daughter / whoever needs a cosigner on a loan, it means that people whose job it is to figure out whether or not that loan is a good idea have decided that it isn't.  By co-signing, you're saying that you think you know better than the professionals. If / when the borrower defaults, the lender won't pursue them for the loan if you can pay it.  You're just as responsible for the loan payments as the original borrower, and given that you were a useful co-signer, probably much more likely to be able to come up with the money.  The lender has no reason to go after the original borrower, and won't.  If you can't pay, the lender comes after both of you. To put it another way:  Don't think of cosigning as helping them get a loan.  Think of it as taking out a loan and re-loaning it to them."}
{"id": "448615", "text": "\"You may want, or at least be thinking of, the annualized method described in Pub 505 http://www.irs.gov/publications/p505/ch02.html#en_US_2015_publink1000194669 (also downloadable in PDF) and referred to in Why are estimated taxes due \"\"early\"\" for the 2nd and 3rd quarters only? . This doesn't prorate your payments as such; instead you use your income and deductions etc for each of the 3,2,3,4-month \"\"quarters\"\" to compute a prorated tax for the partial year, and pay the excess over the amount already paid. If your income etc amounts are (nearly) the same each month, then this computation will result in payments that are 3,2,3,4/12ths of 90% of your whole-year tax, but not if your amounts vary over the year. If you do use this method (and benefit from it) you MUST file form 2210 schedule AI with your return next filing season to demonstrate that your quarterly computations, and payments, met the requirements. You need to keep good per-period (or per-month) records of all tax-relevant amounts, and don't even try to do this form by hand, it'll drive you nuts; use software or a professional preparer (who also uses software), but I'd expect someone in your situation probably needs to do one of those anyway. But partnership puts a wrinkle on this. As a partner, your taxable income and expense is not necessarily the cash you receive or pay; it is your allocated share of the partnership's income and expenses, whether or not they are distributed to you. A partnership to operate a business (like lawyers, as opposed to an investment partnership) probably distributes the allocated amounts, at least approximately, rather than holding them in the partnership; I expect this is your year-end draw (technically a draw can be any allowed amount, not necessarily the allocated amount). In other words, your husband does earn this money during the year, he just receives it at the end. If the year-end distribution (or allocation if different) is significant (say more than 5% of your total income) and the partnership is not tracking and reporting these amounts (promptly!) for the IRS quarters -- and I suspect that's what they were telling you \"\"affects other partners\"\" -- you won't have the data to correctly compute your \"\"quarterly\"\" taxes, and may thus subject yourself to penalty for not timely paying enough. If the amount is reasonably predictable you can probably get away with using a conservative (high-side) guess to compute your payments, and then divide the actual full-year amounts on your K-1 over 12 months for 2210-AI; this won't be exactly correct, but unless the partnership business is highly seasonal or volatile it will be close enough the IRS won't waste its time on you. PS- the \"\"quarters\"\" are much closer to 13,9,13,17 weeks. But it's months that matter.\""}
{"id": "448890", "text": "As always with investments, it depends on your risk adversity. I don't want to repeat the content of hundreds of recommendations here, so just the nutshell: (For qualified investments,) the more risk you are willing to take, the more returns you'll get. The upper end is the mutual funds and share market, where you have long-term expectations of 8 - 10 % (and corresponding risks of maybe +/- 50% per year), the lower end is a CD, where you can expect little to no interest, corresponding to little to no risk. Investing in shares/funds is not 'better' than investing in CDs, it is different. Not everybody likes financial roller-coasters, and some people mainly consider the high risk, which gives them sleepless nights; while others just consider the expected high long-term gains as all that counts. Find out what your personal risk adversity is, and then pick accordingly."}
{"id": "449001", "text": "There are too many nuances to the question asked to explore fully but here are a few points to keep in mind. If you are a cash-basis taxpayer (most individuals are), then you are not required to pay taxes on the money that has been billed but not received as yet.  If you operate on an accrual basis, then the income accrues to you the day you perform the service and not on the day you bill the client. You can make four equal payments of estimated tax on the due dates, and if these (together with any income tax withholding from wage-paying jobs) are at least 90% of your tax liability for that year, then you owe no penalties for underpayment of tax regardless of how your income varied over the year. If your income does vary considerably over the year (even for people who only have wages but who invest in mutual funds, the income can  vary quite a bit since mutual funds typically declare dividends and capital gains in December), then you can pay different amounts in each quarterly installment of estimated tax. This is called the annualization method (a part of Form 2210 that is best avoided unless you really need to use it).  Your annualized income for the payment due on June 15 is 2.4 = 12/5 times your taxable income through May 31. Thus, on Form 2210, you are allowed to assume that your average monthly taxable income  through May 31 will continue for the rest of the year. You then compute the tax due on that annualized income and you are supposed to have paid at least 45% of that amount by June 15. Similarly for September 15 for which you look at income through August 31, you use a multiplier of 1.5 = 12/8 and need to pay 67.5% of the tax on the annualized income, and so on.  If you miscalculate these numbers and pay too little tax in any installment, then you owe penalties for that quarter.  Most people find that guesstimating the tax due for the entire year and paying it in equal installments is simpler than keeping track of nuances of the annualized method. Even simpler is to pay 100% of last year's tax in four equal installments (110% for high earners) and then no penalty is due at all. If your business is really taking off and your income is going to be substantially higher in one year, then this 100%/110% of last year's tax deal could allow you to postpone a significant chunk of your tax bill till April 15."}
{"id": "449082", "text": "As Pete B says, something is not adding up. If your story is correct you should still have the legitimate check from your employer. If that is the case, your solution is simple. You    If you do not have the good cheque then you are in deep trouble - because then either you didn't have it (in which case you have been lying to us) or you cashed it and spent the money (which means you knew that you had given the bad cheque to the liquor store). Either of those mean you have been deliberately perpetrating a fraud. As for the consequences - be aware that passing a bad cheque is a crime, and if the store reports it as such, it is not unlikely that the police will want to investigate. If they decide you did this deliberately you could be arrested, and you might well end up in jail.  We will do you the favour of assuming that you still have the good cheque, and option 1 is possible."}
{"id": "449116", "text": "\"You would put your earnings (and expenses, don't forget) on Schedule C, and then do a Schedule SE for self-employment tax. http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98846,00.html 1040ES isn't used to compute taxes, it's used to pay taxes. Generally you are supposed to pay taxes as you go, rather than when you file. There are exceptions where you won't be penalized for paying when you file, \"\"most taxpayers will avoid this penalty if they owe less than $1,000 in tax after subtracting their withholdings and credits, or if they paid at least 90% of the tax for the current year, or 100% of the tax shown on the return for the prior year, whichever is smaller\"\" from http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc306.html  i.e. there's a safe harbor as long as you pay as much as you owed the year before. If you owe a lot at the end of the year a second time in a row, then you get penalized.\""}
{"id": "449131", "text": "A retail revolving account is a more formal name for a general credit card.   A revolving account is an account created by a lender to represent debts where the outstanding balance does not have to be paid in full every month by the borrower to the lender. The borrower may be required to make a minimum payment, based on the balance amount. Retail Revolving Account Wikipedia This is different from something like a car loan or mortgage or other more structured or secured debt.   It used to be somewhat common for very large retailers to issue lines of credit to their customers in the form of a store card.  This card was a lot like a credit card but only accepted at the specific retailer.  These kinds of cards are all but extincted.  Now major retailers will simply co-brand a credit card with a major bank, the differentiation being preferred rewards when used at the retailer."}
{"id": "449294", "text": "If you can get a rate of savings that is higher than your debt, you save.  If you can't then you pay off your debt.  That makes the most of the money you have. Also to think about:  what are you goals?  Do you want to own a home, start a family, further your education, move to a new town?  All of these you would need to save up for.  If you can do these large transactions in cash you will be better off. If it were me I would do what I think is a parroting of Dave Ramsay's advice Congratulations by the way.  It isn't easy to do what you have accomplished and you will lead a simpler life if you don't have to worry about money everyday."}
{"id": "449333", "text": "\"Steve VanWieren, VP of DATA   \"\"it bothered me how much access just about any employee had to the personally identifiable attributes. I would see printed credit files sitting near shredders, and I would hear people speaking about specific cases, speaking aloud consumer\u2019s personally identifiable information.\"\"  TL;DR - Pretty much a majority of employees were LAZY, talked to each other about the files, made fun of the scores, printed them out, and did not give shit.\""}
{"id": "449359", "text": "\"Gold is not debt, \"\"money\"\" is debt (whatever it is made of).  In the example above, everything could have been exactly the same, except using certificates written on sharks instead of on paper.   Now, sharks have value, paper has value, and gold has value. When you print money, the stuff you make it out of has some utility separate from its use as currency. But when you are using it as currency (regardless of what it is made from), it is a marker for debt.   You go to work for an hour, your boss gives you a marker that you can trade for a cheeseburger or some gasoline or a ferret or cantaloupes, or whatever you want. That marker is an IOU for the work you did. You give it to the cantaloupe store, and it becomes an IOU for the value of one cantaloupe. They give it to the store employees or the cantaloupe-grower or whatever, and so on.   It doesn't matter what that marker is made out of, its function is the same. If it were gold, you could melt it down and make a ring out of it. If it's paper, you could use it as a bookmark or a shopping list or to blow your nose, if it's a shark you scare people with it in the pool.  N.B., this is totally separate from the question of whether we should be using gold as a currency, which has to do with the fact that the gold supply is a lot more stable than the paper supply, and whether being able to easily print more money on demand is a good thing or a bad thing.\""}
{"id": "449828", "text": "\"Your retirement PLAN is a lifelong plan and shouldn't be tied to your employer status. Max out your 401(k) contribution to the maximum that your employer matches (that's a 100% ROI!) and as much as you can afford. When you leave the work force rollover your 401(k) to an IRA account (e.g.: you can create an IRA account with any of the online brokerage firms Schwab, E-Trade, Sharebuilder, or go with a brick-and-mortar firm like JP Morgan, Stifel Nicolaus, etc.). You should have a plan: How much money do you need/month for your expenses? Accounting for inflation, how much is that going to be at retirement (whatever age you plan to retire)? How much money do you need to have so that 4.5% of that money will provide for your annual living expenses? That's your target retirement amount of savings. Now figure out how to get to that target. Rule #1 Invest early and invest often! The more money you can sock away early in your career the more time that money has to grow. If you aren't comfortable allocating your investments yourself then you could go with a Targeted Retirement Fund. These funds have a general \"\"date\"\" for retirement and the assets are allocated as appropriate for the amount of risk appropriate for the time to retirement.\""}
{"id": "449906", "text": "&gt;The financial press is full of articles about the massive flow of investors to Treasuries  Wow, yeah I mean if you read about it or saw it on the news, then it must be true.  But of course, if that were *really* true, then it would bring about the question... **[why the F! would the Fed have bought 61% of US Treasuries in 2011](http://www.moneynews.com/Headline/fed-debt-Treasury/2012/03/28/id/434106)???**"}
{"id": "450009", "text": "You will probably not be able to figure out the bank from the account number. You can check for your name on registries of abandoned bank accounts or unclaimed money, but without more information, you don't have a lot of options."}
{"id": "450355", "text": "You're not seeing the forest for the trees.    Proper capital allocation takes diligent research from a community in choosing the best prospects.  That community then supports LONG-TERM investment in that company.  This is how proper companies are fostered; proper research is done; technologies advance, societies develop.  Long-term investment leads to proper capital allocation.  Please do tell me how short-term investment has any value in proper capital allocation."}
{"id": "450812", "text": "MICR fields are defined by their distance to the right edge of the check. The routing number is always the same distance from the right edge. Business checks are longer and have more room for auxiliary information on the left if the bank chooses to use it."}
{"id": "450848", "text": "\"I'd also look into index funds (eg Vanguard) as they have low management fees. you can buy these as ETFs as well - so you can buy in at a very low starting amount. An index fund can also be a talking point for your kids about what an industry index is and how it relates to the companies that fall into it. Also about how mutual funds try to \"\"beat the market\"\" - and often fail.\""}
{"id": "450933", "text": "I don't know if I would go so far as to hire an accountant. None of those things you listed really complicates your taxes all that much. If you were self-employed, started a business, got a big inheritance, or are claiming unusually large deductions, etc. then maybe. The only thing new from your post seems to be the house and a raise. The 3rd kid doesn't substantially change things on your taxes from the 2nd. I'd suggest just using tax preparation software, or if you are especially nervous a tax-preparation service. An accountant just seems like overkill for an individual."}
{"id": "451005", "text": "The IRS has a calculator for this purpose."}
{"id": "451020", "text": "\"Its is considered a \"\"hobby\"\" income, and you should be reporting it on the 1040 as taxable income. The expenses (what you pay) are hobby expenses, and you report them on Schedule A (if you itemize). You can only deduct the hobby expenses to the extent of your hobby income, and they're subject to the 2% AGI threshold.\""}
{"id": "451291", "text": "Apparently Amazon's legal team that is battling to prevent online retailers from getting taxed was not consulted as to whether an idea like this would look *really* bad for their case. It's brilliant, but a wee bit diabolical. Brick and mortar retailers really have no recourse against something like this."}
{"id": "451314", "text": "Without more information about what tax bracket you are in, I cannot make a recommendation about what your best option is, but here are a few things to consider:"}
{"id": "451424", "text": "Read more closely:   If you do not change your current withholding arrangement, you will have $7,817 withheld for 2014 resulting in an overpayment of   $2,467. and later... Assuming this recommendation is in effect for the rest of 2014... If you do nothing you would get a refund of the full $2,467. If you follow the advice of whoever wrote that you wouldn't pay as much tax for the rest of the year and consequently will get back less when you file, because you are getting it back now."}
{"id": "451443", "text": "No. $188.23 has $11.76 tax = $199.99 $188.24 has $11.77 tax - $200.01 So, unless the based price contained the half cent for $188.235, the register would never show $200.00 even. How does the receipt to customer look?"}
{"id": "451580", "text": "The short Answer is NO, HMRC do not like disguised employment which is what this is as you fall under IR35 you can bill them via an umbrella company and you should be charging the contractor rate not a permie rate.  http://www.contractoruk.com/"}
{"id": "451598", "text": "The simple answer is that whatever strategy is implemented with e-series, could be implemented at a lower cost with ETFs."}
{"id": "451613", "text": "Having stock options means that you have worked for and rightfully earned a part of the company's capital appreciation. Takeover of the company would indicate someone is interested in the company (something should be valuable). It would be unwise to not strike before the period lapses since the strike price is always lower than market price and takeovers generally increases stock values ... it is capital gains all the way my friend. Good luck. *observations not in professional capacity. pls consult a professional for investment related advice."}
{"id": "451723", "text": "It may work with an individual selling things but not for a retailer.  Imagine the price of an iPhone increasing week on week and then stabilising. Again, this won't work for luxury/veblen goods.  How do we go about it? Focus groups, user surveys, test markets. Not second guessing the price. You will lose all customer loyalty, piss of the later buyers who paid more for it, you'll be seen as fickle and not trustworthy. One pricing, all people, all markets, all time."}
{"id": "451794", "text": "My former accountant, used to provide this service as part of him doing my taxes.  During the off season, he would provide a planning session and he would review strategies that I might look into.  Since he did not make any money off of providing investments, he was about as unbiased as one could be.  However, something like that might not be enough for you guys. You could go with someone online, Scottrade is going into the business of providing advice, as well as Charles Schwab or Fidelity, but you might need someone more personal. In that case, I would use my network.  Talk to people, ask who they use, like, and respect.  I would say it is very easy to find mediocre investment advisers, the good ones are hard. I would look for one that teaches.  It is very easy to tell someone what to do, much harder to teach them what is the right thing.   One thing that is easy about your situation:  Planning to buy a home.  Put money for a down payment in a high interest savings account.  What I mean by high interest, is they still pay almost nothing.  You can't really make a mistake.  If you find one with .5% instead of .85%, what is the real difference after 5 years?  About $180?"}
{"id": "451855", "text": "It says expense ratio of 0.14%. What does it mean? Essentially it means that they will take 0.14% of your money, regardless of the performance. This measures how much money the fund spends out of its assets on the regular management expenses. How much taxes will I be subject to This depends on your personal situation, not much to do with the fund (though investment/rebalancing policies may affect the taxable distributions). If you hold it in your IRA - there will be no taxes at all. However, some funds do have measures of non-taxable distributions vs dividends vs. capital gains. Not all the funds do that, and these are very rough estimates anyway. What is considered to be a reasonable expense ratio? That depends greatly on the investment policy. For passive index funds, 0.05-0.5% is a reasonable range, while for actively managed funds it can go up as much as 2% and higher. You need to compare to other funds with similar investment policies to see where your fund stands."}
{"id": "452899", "text": "If your gross income is only $3000, then you don't need to file: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p501.pdf That said, pay careful attention to: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxpayers-living-abroad You should be reporting ALL income, without regard to WHERE you earned it, on your US taxes. Not doing so could indeed get you in trouble if you are audited. Your level of worry depends on how much of the tax law you are willing to dodge, and how lucky you feel."}
{"id": "452910", "text": "\"It's also refreshing that they were somewhat realistic about their worst-case scenario (only affluent executives would use the service).  Also interesting that they completely glossed over the legal challenges they must have known they'd see from the regulated taxi industry.  One wonders whether they really believed they'd be exempt from medallion requirements because they were a \"\"members only\"\" service.  When you're successful, you get to construe every lucky victory as a strategic masterstroke.\""}
{"id": "453256", "text": "I bought 1000 shares of a $10 stock. When it doubled, I sold half, no need to be greedy. I watched the shares split 2 for one, and sold as it doubled and doubled again. In the end, I had $50,000 in cash pulled out and still had 100 shares. The shares are now worth $84K since they split 7 for one and trade near $120.  Had I just kept the shares till now, no sales, I'd have 14,000 shares of Apple worth $1.68M dollars.  $130K for an initial $10,000 investment is nothing to complain about, but yes, taking a profit can be the wrong thing. 25%? Was that all the potential the company had?  There's one question to ask, not where is the price today compared to last year or two years ago, but what are the company's prospects. Is the reason I bought them still valid? Look at your investment each quarter as if you were making the decision that day. I agree, diversification is important, so the choice is only hold or sell, not to buy more of a good company, because there are others out there, and the one sane thing Cramer says that everyone should adhere to is to not put your eggs in one basket."}
{"id": "453257", "text": "No, there is no special leniency given to first time tax payers. In general, this shouldn't be an issue. The IRS collects your taxes out of every one of your paychecks throughout the entire year in what is called a Withholding Tax. The amount that the IRS withholds is calculated on your W-4 Form that you file with your employer whenever you take a new job. The form helps you calculate the right number of allowances to claim (usually this is the number of personal exemptions, but depending upon if you work a second job, are married and your spouse works, or if you itemize, the number of allowances can be increased. WITHHOLDING TAX Withholding tax (also known as \u201cpayroll withholding\u201d) is essentially income tax that is withheld from your wages and sent directly to the IRS by your employer. In other words, it\u2019s like a credit against the income taxes that you must pay for the year. By subtracting this money from each paycheck that you receive, the IRS is basically withholding your anticipated tax payment as you earn it. In general, most people overestimate their tax liability. This is bad for them, because they have essentially given the IRS an interest free loan (and weren't able to use the money to earn interest themselves.) I haven't heard of any program targeted at first time tax payers to tell them to file a return, but considering that most tax payers overpay they should or they are giving the government a free grant."}
{"id": "453408", "text": "PKO Bank polski has  a feature of free incoming,outgoing transfer."}
{"id": "453480", "text": "\"When we calculate the realized yield of a bond, we assume the coupons are invested at an interest rate. I assume it is some kind of vehicle that guarantees a return, thinking it is government bond, savings account or something. Investing in a benchmark bond index might be risky though for this \"\"interest rate\"\".\""}
{"id": "453513", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-23/brady-signals-retirement-changes-are-still-on-tax-writers-table) reduced by 60%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Almost 12 hours after President Donald Trump ruled out changes to 401(k) retirement-savings plans, a top congressional tax writer indicated that retirement savings remains under review.  &gt; One alternative plan would call for people to fund their retirement with after-tax earnings, but allow them to withdraw the money tax-free later on, according to Senator Rob Portman, an Ohio Republican - essentially moving toward the model for &amp;quot;Roth&amp;quot; individual retirement accounts.  &gt; Giant asset managers such as Vanguard Group and Fidelity Investments have said they fear that cutting 401(k) tax deferrals to just $2,400 a year would reduce the American public&amp;#039;s notoriously low savings rate even more, jeopardizing their retirement income.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/78ovy5/brady_signals_retirement_changes_are_still_on/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~234978 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **save**^#1 **retirement**^#2 **tax**^#3 **accounts**^#4 **income**^#5\""}
{"id": "453829", "text": "At the most basic level, the employee is getting a share of ownership in the company and would get a percentage of the sales price. That said, as littleadv alluded to, different share classes have different priorities and get paid in different orders. In a bankruptcy, for example, some classes almost never get paid in practice because they are so far down the ladder of priority.  The first step you should take would be to try to clarify what you are getting with the company itself. Failing that, contact a financial professional or an attorney in your area who can read the terms and give you a better understanding of the contract before you sign."}
{"id": "453839", "text": "For most goods there is no license required, unless you are trading in restricted goods. Remittance need to be routed via banks and they should comply with FMEA. Your Bank or a qualified CA can guide you."}
{"id": "453919", "text": "&gt;This goes on until they simply drop dead. Substitute debt for alcohol and you have our situation exactly.  *Exactly.* It is well known that the US entered an unprecedented depression after its unprecedented borrowing during World War 2. It is all very simple and easily predicted."}
{"id": "453976", "text": "\"I'm going to give a simpler answer than some of the others, although somewhat more limited: the complicated loan parameters you describe benefit the lender.  I'll focus on this part of your question: You should be able to pay back whenever; what's the point of an arbitrary timeline? Here \"\"you\"\" refers to the borrower.  Sure, yes, it would be great for the borrower to be able to do whatever they want whenever they want, increasing or decreasing the loan balance by paying or not paying arbitrary amounts at their whim.  But it doesn't benefit the lender to let the borrower do this.  Adding various kinds of restrictions and extra conditions to the loan reduces the lender's uncertainty about when they'll be receiving money, and also gives them a greater range of legal recourse to get it sooner (since they can pursue the borrower right away if they violate any of the conditions, rather than having the wait until they die without having paid their debt). Then you say: And if you want, you can set a legal deadline. But the mere deadline in the contract doesn't affect how much interest is paid\u2014the interest is only affected by how much money is borrowed and how long has passed. I think in many cases that is in fact how it works, or at least it is more how it works than you seem to think.  For instance, you can take out a 30-year loan but pay it off in less than 30 years, and the amount you pay will be less if you pay it off sooner.  However, in some cases the lender will charge you a penalty for doing so.  The reason is the same as above: if you pay off the loan sooner, you are paying less interest, which is worse for the lender.  Again, it would be nice for the borrower if they could just pay it off sooner with no penalty, but the lender has no reason to let them do so. I think there are in fact other explanations for these more complicated loan terms that do benefit the borrower.  For instance, an amortization schedule with clearly defined monthly payments and proportions going to interest and principal also reduces the borrower's uncertainty, and makes them less likely to do risky things like skip lots of payments intending to make it up later.  It gives them a clear number to budget from.  But even aside from all that, I think the clearest answer to your question is what I said above: in general, it benefits the lender to attach conditions and parameters to loans in order to have many opportunities to penalize the borrower for making it hard for the lender to predict their cash flow.\""}
{"id": "454287", "text": "\"None of what I say is advice directed to you. It is how I would continue to analyse the situation you have, were it mine. First off, I prefer to work in certainties more than possibilities.  Saying that, paying down the mortgage makes sense as I can calculate the amount I will save. I also believe that rate rises are coming in the future, based on the talk from the BofE, so any money I pay off now means guaranteed less interest to pay in the future. Also, the lower my loan-to-value ratio, the better/lower interest rates I can receive in the mortgage market. If I do not want to work until retirement age, it'd be nice to have as few bills as possible in the decade or so prior to retirement age. I could then do early-retirement or part-time work in the run-up to retirement. I could use my savings to fund life until retirement pays out. I'd be aiming to put 15% of my gross income into \"\"future investing\"\" - using ISAs to build up a savings pot, taking advantage of retirement products. That way all the money is not tied to a normal retirement age before it can accessed. And it's not touchable by future greedy Government taxation... Any income leftover above the 15%, I'd be throwing at the mortgage - taking advantage of the 10% overpay window, remortgaging as LTV comes down. In theory, overpaid mortgage equity is money that could still be accessed (provided house prices don't decline and remortgaging is a possibility). So, in short, I'd follow a plan along these lines of logic. 1) Make sure I have 4-6 months of living expenses as a Rainy Day Fund. Insulate myself from fluctuations in my financial situation. 2) Put away 15% of annual gross income towards \"\"future saving\"\". ISAs first, pension second. 3) Overpay the mortgage and look to remortgage as LTV drops. When LTV nears 60%, look to lock in to a longer-term fix. eg. 2 year fixes at 90% LTV, 5 year fixes at 60%. 4) Reassess steps 2 & 3 as life happens, circumstances change, work fluctuates, etc. 5) Once the mortgage is paid off, build as much wealth as possible - ISAs first, then non-tax efficient savings products. Aim for keeping expenses down and raising my savings % rate as much as possible. [Your analysis was thorough and shows you are thinking through consequences. Never forget to factor in the risk of carrying debt. Having no/low debt as you get older means there's more income left to build wealth. Ignore the American view of carrying debt for life and trusting investments to outperform the debt. You have to pay monthly to keep that debt around - and it ain't a pet!]\""}
{"id": "454409", "text": "\"The complete opposite of \"\"sunk cost\"\" is the term \"\"unrealized gain\"\"; until you sell it, then it is a \"\"realized gain\"\". There is also a term \"\"paper profit\"\" to point out the ephemeral nature of some of these unrealized gains.\""}
{"id": "454465", "text": "If you are trying to invest in closely held / private companies (things that don't trade on the stock market), you will run into a variety of regulatory problems. For various reasons, most private companies only raise funds with accredited investors. To be an accredited investor you basically have to have $1,000,000 in net worth - NOT including your primary residence, OR you have to make over $200,000 a year for the last two years and expect to keep making that much. This is a class distinction the Federal government created, you will see different but similar wealth and investment classes worldwide. So your best most organized opportunities are left out, unless you do qualify as an accredited investor. There are tons of other companies, things you will find locally, that will let you invest in their smaller time operations. (Think like a local yoga studio looking for $20,000 and willing to split the profits with you). But the problem here is lack of accountability, where partners skip town or just stop answering your calls, and the legal remedies cost you more than your claim. That being said there are people that provide capital to smaller publicly traded companies on the bulletin boards and pink sheets. They have opportunities do much better than the actual stock market investors in these companies, because you can negotiate contracts that let you cash out in their inevitable financing death spirals with very little risk to you. You can do these things as an individual or as a holding company, but the holding company will limit your liability to the amount your holding company invested, instead of your personal assets, in case your financing starts to incur liability with the company."}
{"id": "454543", "text": "Say one makes $60k/yr. The net gain is that half these funds are received about 2 weeks prior. To keep the math simple, let's assume a 12% return per year on the funds during this time. $30K * 12% is $3600. But 2 weeks is about 4% of a year, so $144. That's at a 12% return. In an offset mortgage the return will be closer to 4%, a $48/yr benefit.  With short term rates at or below 1%, we're really looking at a gain of $12 or so for the extra time with the funds."}
{"id": "454810", "text": "Hitting the 25% marginal rate does not mean all of your earnings are taxed at 25%, only those that exceed the top of the 15% bracket. You can deduct any expenses for upgrading or repairing your apartments, those are subtracted from the earnings before tax is calculated as income, so you will probably stay in a lower marginal rate. Property tax will hit you annually, and capital gains tax will hit you when you sell them at the end. If you already have experience with this business in your home country, then this sounds like a good option for you. The only caution that I would give you is to find an accountant to help you with your taxes and pay for a consultation before you get started so that you know what to track that will help him/her minimize your tax bill."}
{"id": "454871", "text": "The safest investment is probably a money market fund [originally I said a TIPS fund but they appear to be riskier than I had thought].  But you might not want to invest everything there because the returns are not going to be great.  High returns come with high risk. The best portfolio has some percentage (which may be 0) of your money in a safe asset like a money market and some in a risky portfolio (this percentage may also be zero for some people).  You should consult your own risk aversion and decide how much money to put in each.  If you are super risk-averse, put almost all of it in the money market.  If you want a little more return, put more of it in the risky portfolio.  This is a fundamental result of finance theory. What's the risky asset?  A fully diversified portfolio of bonds and stocks.  People don't agree on exactly what the weights should be.  The rule of thumb back in the day was 60% stock and 40% bonds.  These days lots of financial planners recommend 120 minus your age in stock and the rest in bonds.  But no one really knows what the perfect weights in the risky portfolio should be (the rules of thumb I just gave have little or no theoretical foundation) so you have to choose for yourself what you think makes sense."}
{"id": "455376", "text": "Ok, see that was my thinking too.  Historically, stocks and land values have always gone up, even after the depression.  So, it seems to me, that if you have a buy and hold strategy with a horizon of 10-20 years, then you should be fine.  Is my thinking realistic along those lines?"}
{"id": "455398", "text": "Sounds like a bad idea. The IRA is built on the power of compounding. Removing contributions will hurt your retirement savings, and you will never be able to make that up. Instead, consider tax-free investments. State bonds, Federal bonds, municipal bonds, etc. For example, I invest in California muni bonds fund which gives me ~3-4% annual dividend income - completely tax free. In addition - there's capital appreciation of your fund holdings. There are risks, of course, for example rate changes will affect yields and capital appreciation, so consult with someone knowledgeable in this area (or ask another question here, for the basics). This will give you the same result as you're expecting from your Roth IRA trick, without damaging your retirement savings potential."}
{"id": "455428", "text": "Just as a renter doesn't care what the landlord's mortgage is, the buyer of a house shouldn't care what the seller paid, what the current mortgage is, or any other details of the seller's finances.  Two identical houses may be worth $400K. One still has a $450K loan, the other is mortgage free. You would qualify for the same value mortgage on both houses. All you and your bank should care about is that the present mortgage is paid or forgiven by the current mortgage holder so your bank can have first lien, and you get a clean title.  To answer the question clearly, yes, it's common for a house with a mortgage to be sold, mortgage paid off, and new mortgage put in place. The profit or loss of the homeowner is not your concern."}
{"id": "455609", "text": "I'm not sure it is the best idea, but you can buy only 4 stocks generally.  As you alluded to, you should take notice of the fees.  Also note that many stocks trade at significantly lower prices than Apple's per shares, so you might want to factor that into your decision.  You could probably get a better feel for transactions if you bought say 50 shares of a $30 stock; then it might be easier to see what it's like to sell some, etc. Note that specific trading sites might have various limits in place that would pose as barriers to this sort of behavior though."}
{"id": "455698", "text": "\"Your are mixing multiple questions with assertions which may or may not be true. So I'll take a stab at this, comment if it doesn't make sense to you. To answer the question in the title, you invest in an IRA because you want to save money to allow you to retire. The government provides you with tax incentives that make an IRA an excellent vehicle to do this. The rules regarding IRA tax treatment provide disincentives, through tax penalties, for withdrawing money before retirement. This topic is covered dozens of times, so search around for more detail. Regarding your desire to invest in items with high \"\"intrinsic\"\" value, I would argue that gold and silver are not good vehicles for doing this. Intrinsic value doesn't mean what you want it to mean in this context -- gold and silver are commodities, whose prices fluctuate dramatically.  If you want to grow money for retirement over a long period, of time, you should be invested in diversified collection of investments, and precious metals should be a relatively small part of your portfolio.\""}
{"id": "455976", "text": "\"I'm not intimately familiar with the situation in Australia, but in the US the powers that be have adopted an interventionist philosophy. The Federal Reserve (Central Bank) is \"\"buying back\"\" US Gov't debt to keep rates low, and the government is keeping mortgage rates low buy buying mortgages with the proceeds of the cheap bond sales. While this isn't directly related to Australia, it is relevant because the largest capital markets are in the US and influence the markets in Australia. In the US, the CPI is a survey of all urban consumers. If you're a younger, middle class consumer with income growth ahead of you, your costs are going to shift more rapidly than an elderly or poor person who already owns or is in subsidized housing, and doesn't spend as much on transportation. For example, my parents are in their early 60's and are living in the house that I grew up in, which they own free and clear. There are alot of people like them, and they aren't affected by the swing in housing prices that we've seen in the last decade.\""}
{"id": "456234", "text": "As someone who used to be an IT contractor in the UK and used to work from home, my advice is to talk to your accountant in detail. It's been a few years, but IIRC you can write off some small stuff like proportional heating costs etc, but in my case it was so minuscule that it wasn't worth the effort. You're likely better off to just leave it. <subliminal message> Talk to your accountant :). </subliminal message>"}
{"id": "456436", "text": "The 'same day rule' in the UK is a rule for matching purposes only.  It says that sales on any day are matched firstly with purchases made on the same day for the purposes of ascertaining any gain/loss. Hence the phrase 'bed-and-breakfast' ('b&b') when you wish to crystalise a gain (that is within the exempt amount) and re-establish a purchase price at a higher level.  You do the sale on one day, just before the market closes, which gets matched with your original purchase, and then you buy the shares back the next day, just after the market opens.  This is standard tax-planning.  Whenever you have a paper gain, and you wish to lock that gain out of being taxed, you do a bed-and-breakfast transaction, the idea being to use up your annual exemption each and every year.  Of course, if your dealing costs are high, then they may outweigh any tax saved, and so it would be pointless. For the purpose of an example, let's assume that the UK tax year is the same as the calendar year. Scenario 1. Suppose I bought some shares in 2016, for a total price of Stg.50,000. Suppose by the end of 2016, the holding is worth Stg.54,000, resulting in a paper gain of Stg.4,000. Question.  Should I do a b&b transaction to make use of my Stg.11,100 annual exemption ? Answer.  Well, with transaction costs at 1.5% for a round-trip trade, suppose, and stamp duty on the purchase of 0.5%, your total costs for a b&b will be Stg1,080, and your tax saved (upon some future sale date) assuming you are a 20% tax-payer is 20%x(4,000-1,080) = Stg584 (the transaction costs are deductible, we assume).  This does not make sense. Scenario 2. The same as scenario 1., but the shares are worth Stg60,000 by end-2016. Answer.  The total transaction costs are 2%x60,000 = 1,200 and so the taxable gain of 10,000-1,200 = 8,800 would result in a tax bill of 20%x8,800 = 1,760 and so the transaction costs are lower than the tax to be saved (a strict analysis would take into account only the present value of the tax to be saved), it makes sense to crystalise the gain.  We sell some day before the tax year-end, and re-invest the very next day. Scenario 3. The same as scenario 1., but the shares are worth Stg70,000 by end-2016. Answer.  The gain of 20,000 less costs would result in a tax bill for 1,500 (this is: 20%x(20,000 - 2%x70,000 - 11,100) ).  This tax bill will be on top of the dealing costs of 1,400.  But the gain is in excess of the annual exemption.  The strategy is to sell just enough of the holding to crystallise a taxable gain of just 11,100. The fraction, f%, is given by: f%x(70,000-50,000) - 2%xf%x70,000 = 11,100 ... which simplifies to: f% = 11,100/18,600 = 59.68%. The tax saved is 20%x11,100 = 2,220, versus costs of 2%x59.58%x70,000 = 835.52. This strategy of partial b&b is adopted because it never makes sense to pay tax early ! End."}
{"id": "456474", "text": "\"You may want to look into robo-investors like Wealthfront and Betterment. There are many others, just search for \"\"robo investor\"\".\""}
{"id": "456679", "text": "Debit card purchases without PIN are treated as credit card purchases by merchants, and that includes ID verification. In addition to the ways you mentioned, you can get a debit card in any grocery store and load it with cash, and these debit cards don't have a name imprinted on them. But then if you lose them - you may have troubles proving you did in fact lose them when you try to recover your money, as anyone can use them. Technically you can register them online and call in and request refunds for fraud losses just as any other debit/credit card in the US (with $50 deductible), but in practice it may be difficult. These cards have very high fees, and may not be accepted for rentals etc."}
{"id": "456749", "text": "The default is FIFO: first in - first out. Unless you specifically instruct the brokerage otherwise, they'll report that the lot you've sold is of Jan 5, 2011. Note, that before 2011, they didn't have to report the cost basis to the IRS, and it would be up to you to calculate the cost basis at tax time, but that has been changed in 2011 and you need to make sure you've instructed the brokerage which lot exactly you're selling. I'm assuming you're in the US, in other places laws may be different."}
{"id": "456768", "text": "If the work was 90% finished, you can only defer 10% of the income until next year.  You can only fully defer revenue that you haven't made deliverables on yet - you can fund the project with deferred revenue, however.  Of course, there's a gray area as to completion percentage, but you're starting to play with fire when you do too much of that.  Probably depends on his business, short answer."}
{"id": "457013", "text": "Unless you're running a self-employed business with a significant turnover (more than \u00a3150k), you are entitled to use cash basis accounting for your tax return, which means you would put the date of transactions as the payment date rather than the billing date or the date a debt is incurred. For payments which have a lag, e.g. a cheque that needs to be paid in or a bank transfer that takes a few days, you might also need to choose between multiple payment dates, e.g. when you initiated the payment or when it took effect. You can pick one as long as you're consistent: You can choose how you record when money is received or    paid (eg the date the money enters your account or the date a cheque   is written) but you must use the same method each tax year."}
{"id": "457307", "text": "The deposit slip at the institution that keeps your Roth IRA should have a place where you can designate the tax year the contribution should apply to."}
{"id": "457455", "text": "It essentially works the same. Some states don't have any income taxes at all (like Florida or Wyoming), some only tax income derived in the state, and some tax worldwide income (like New York or California), similarly to the Federal income taxes. However, if you're living abroad (i.e.: you're a citizen or resident of a foreign country and you live there), you're not considered resident by most of the states (check with your state for specific definitions) for most, if not all, the time of your residency abroad. In such case - you don't pay state taxes, only Federal. You have to remember that foreign income exclusion doesn't apply to the income from your 401k, so you pay the taxes as if you're in the US. You can not use foreign taxes credit as well (but depending on the tax treaty with the country you're moving to, your 401k income might not be taxable there). In some cases you may end up with double taxation: US will tax your 401k income as you're a US citizen and the income is derived from the US sources, and the foreign country will tax the income based on its own laws. This is not a tax advice, and this answer was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer."}
{"id": "457529", "text": "I found a good description of these on the Laurentian Bank website.  Very similar to Abraham's answer, but the details are a little different (perhaps because it's Canadian). Certified cheque: A cheque which has been certified by the bank that the funds to be drawn are available and locked in for the sole beneficiary. This type of payment is guaranteed in case of theft, loss or destruction. Certified cheques can be entirely replaced after investigation (may be subject to a fee). Official cheque: As for the certified cheque, the official cheque is guaranteed by the bank against theft, loss or destruction. This type of cheque is different because it will be automatically and fully reimbursed within a 30 to 90-day period. If the amount is over $1,000, fees will be higher than   those of the certified cheque. Money Order: The money order is also a bank-guaranteed payment in case of theft, loss or destruction. As with the official cheque, it will be replaced or totally refunded within a 30 to 90-day period. Its difference resides in the fact that the maximum amount is $1,000 and it can be issued in US dollars. Bank draft: A bank draft is the ideal guaranteed payment vehicle for all your foreign currency transactions. It\u2019s guaranteed against theft, loss or destruction and will be replaced or totally reimbursed within a period that varies according to the currency. If you are an immigrant or an emigrant or if you make purchases outside of the country, you could require this payment vehicle."}
{"id": "457811", "text": "Mutual funds don't have intraday prices. They have net asset values which are calculated periodically (daily or weekly or any other period depending on the fund)."}
{"id": "457851", "text": "There's nothing stopping most of these people from renting or delaying moving out from their parents.   If you're broke but keep shopping at expensive grocers instead of minimizing your consumption so that you're able to eat the next day in case you get fired then it's your fault as well for not planning for it financially.   People over extended themselves and they need to start accepting part of the responsibility. Sometimes the only way to win the game is to not play.  See I can use shitty analogies too when I feel like it."}
{"id": "458029", "text": "When you want the transaction to be concluded in the current year vs an expiration in the next year."}
{"id": "458168", "text": "\"A well diversified retirement portfolio is going to have some component in cash or near-liquid investments. So I tend to put it all in one place knowing that I can draw on it (at least from the ROTH account) in the event of an emergency.  Obviously, you don't want to do this very often, but hopefully emergencies don't happen often either. You also have to attenuate your idea of an emergency so that it doesn't mean \"\"I didn't get a bonus check this year and can't afford gifts for the kids as nice as last year!\"\"\""}
{"id": "458183", "text": "Here would be the general steps to my mind for creating such a plan: Write out the final desired outcome. Is it $x in y years to fund your retirement? Is it $a in b years to put as a house down payment? This is the first step in defining how much money you want at what point in time. Consider what is your risk tolerance and how much time do you plan on spending in this plan. Is it rebalancing once a quarter and that's it or do you plan on doing monthly research and making tweaks all the time? This is slightly different from the first where one has to be mindful of how much volatility would one handle and what time commitment does one have for an investing strategy. Also, how much money would you be adding to the investments on what kind of time table would also be worth noting here. Construct the asset allocation based on the previous two steps along with historical returns averaged out to be a first draft of what you are buying in general. Is it US stocks? Is it a short-term bond fund? There are more than a few choices here that may make sense and it is worth considering based on the first couple of responses that determine what this will look like. Retirement in 40 years may be quite different than a house down payment in 2 years for example. Determine what brokerages or fund companies would offer such funds along with what types of accounts you'd want to have as in some countries there may be tax-advantaged accounts that may be useful to use here. This is where you're almost ready to start by doing the homework of figuring out how will things work. This may vary depending on one's jurisdiction. Get the applications from whatever institutions you'll be using and run with the desired asset allocation across various funds and accounts. Note that in the first few steps there were points of being aware of how much would you have, how aggressive are you investing and so forth. This is where you actually send in the money and get things rolling. Run with the plan and make tweaks as needed to achieve result, hopefully desired or better."}
{"id": "458244", "text": "\"'Buy and Hold' Is Still a Winner: An investor who used index funds and stayed the course could have earned satisfactory returns even during the first decade of the 21st century. by By Burton G. Malkiel in The Wall Street Journal on November 18, 2010: \"\"The other useful technique is \"\"rebalancing,\"\" keeping the portfolio asset allocation consistent with the investor's risk tolerance. For example, suppose an investor was most comfortable choosing an initial allocation of 60% equities, 40% bonds. As stock and bond prices change, these proportions will change as well. Rebalancing involves selling some of the asset class whose share is above the desired allocation and putting the money into the other asset class. From 1996 through 1999, annually rebalancing such a portfolio improved its return by 1 and 1/3 percentage points per year versus a strategy of making no changes.\"\" Mr. Malkiel is a professor of economics at Princeton University. This op-ed was adapted from the upcoming 10th edition of his book \"\"A Random Walk Down Wall Street,\"\" out in December by W.W. Norton. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703848204575608623469465624.html\""}
{"id": "458485", "text": "\"This will happen automatically when you open an interest-bearing account with a bank.   You didn't think that banks just kept all that cash in a vault somewhere, did you?  That's not the way modern banking works.   Today (and for a long, long time) banks will keep only a small fraction of their deposits on hand (called the \"\"reserve\"\") to fund daily withdrawals and other operations.  The rest they routinely lend out to other customers, which is how they pay for their operations (someone has to pay all those tellers, branch managers, loan officers) and pay interest on your deposits, as well as a profit for their owners (it's not a charity service).  The fees charged for loan origination, as well as the difference between the loan interest rate and the deposit rate, make up the profit.   Banks rarely hold their own loans.  Instead, they will sell the loans in portfolios to investors, sometimes retaining servicing rights (they continue to collect the payments and pass them on) and sometimes not (the payments are now due to someone else).  This allows them to make more loans.   Banks may sometimes not have enough capital on hand.  In this case, they can make inter-bank loans to meet their short-term needs.  In some cases, they'll take those loans from a government central bank.  In the US, this is \"\"The Fed\"\", or the Federal Reserve Bank.   In the US, back around the late 1920's, and again in the 1980's some banks experienced a \"\"run\"\", or a situation where people lost confidence in the bank and wanted to withdraw their money.  This caused the bank to have insufficient funds to support the withdrawals, so not everyone got their money.  People panicked, and others wanted to take their money out, which caused the situation to snowball.  This is how many banks failed.  (In the '80s, it was savings-and-loans that failed - still a kind of \"\"bank\"\".)  Today, we have the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) to protect depositors.  In the crashes in the early 2000's, many banks closed up one night and opened the next in a conservatorship, and then were literally doing business as a new bank without depositors (necessarily) even knowing.  This protected the consumers.  The bank (as a company) and its owners were not protected.\""}
{"id": "458529", "text": "\"Though @mehassee mentioned it in a comment, I would like to emphasize the point that the financial planner (CFP) you talked to said that he was a fiduciary.  A fiduciary has an obligation to act in your best interests.  According to uslegal.com, \"\"When one person does agree to act for another in a fiduciary relationship, the law forbids the fiduciary from acting in any manner adverse or contrary to the interests of the client, or from acting for his own benefit in relation to the subject matter\"\".  So, any of these Stack Exchange community members may or may not have your best interest at heart, but the financial advisor you talked to is obligated to. You have to decide for yourself, is it worth 1% of your investment to have someone legally obligated to have your best financial interest in mind, versus, for example, someone who might steer you to an overpriced insurance product in the guise of an investment, just so they can make a buck off of you?  Or versus wandering the internet trying to make sense of conflicting advice?  In my opinion, a fiduciary (registered CFP) is probably the best person to answer your questions.\""}
{"id": "458789", "text": "The setup is a purchase of 200 shares at $40 with a cash deposit of $4000 and margin loan of $4000 which a year later grew to $4240. With a margin requirement of 30%, the loan can be 70% or a total stock value of $6057. 1) $30.29 2) -24.3% (The stock fell to $30.29 from $40) 3) -54.6% (Your $4000 fell to $1817)"}
{"id": "458851", "text": "It would be better for you to sell yourself and pay capital gains tax than to transfer to your parents and pay the gift tax. Also, sham transfer (you transfer to your mother only so that she could sell and transfer back to you without you paying taxes) will be probably categorized as tax evasion, which is a criminal offense that could lead to your deportation. What the US should or should not claim you can take to your congressman, but the fact is that the US does claim tax on capital gains even if you bought the asset before becoming US tax resident, and that's the current law."}
{"id": "459589", "text": "Yes, you may make non-deductible contributions to an IRA. The main benefit of a non-deductible IRA is tax-deferred earnings. If the investment pays out dividends, they will be kept in the IRA (whether you take them in cash and put them in a Cash Management Account, or you automatically reinvest them). You do not get taxed on these earnings until you withdraw from the IRA during retirement. If your income at that time is significantly lower than your income while you're working, you will be in a lower tax bracket (unless tax rates change drastically between now and then), so the taxes you pay on these earnings will be lower than if you'd invested outside the IRA and paid taxes along the way. You also get the benefit of compounding of the tax-deferred earnings. There's one caveat -- when you withdraw from the IRA, all the growth is treated as ordinary income. Even if some of it is capital gains, it will be taxed at your ordinary income rate, not your capital gains rate. So this is most beneficial for investments that produce dividends.  If you have a mix of deductible and non-deductible contributions to your IRA, the tax on the principle portion of your withdrawals is pro-rated based on the ratio of deductible to total contributions. This ensures that you eventually get taxed for the deductible portion (it's not really tax-free, it's tax-deferred), but don't get taxed twice for the non-deductible portion. Another option, if your 401(k) plan allows it, is to make after-tax contributions to the 401(k). At the end of the year, you can make an in-service distribution of these contributions and their earnings from the 401(k) to a Roth Conversion IRA. This allows you to contribute to a Roth IRA even if you're above the income limit for normal Roth IRA contributions. You can also do this even if you're also making non-deductible contributions to your regular IRA."}
{"id": "459677", "text": "\"This is an excellent topic as it impacts so many in so many different ways. Here are some thoughts on how the accounts are used which is almost as important as the as calculating the income or tax. The Roth is the best bang for the buck, once you have taken full advantage of employer matched 401K.  Yes, you pay taxes upfront.  All income earned isn't taxed (under current tax rules).  This money can be passed on to family and can continue forever.  Contributions can be funded past age 70.5.  Once account is active for over 5 years, contributions can be withdrawn and used (ie: house down payment, college, medical bills), without any penalties.  All income earned must be left in the account to avoid penalties.  For younger workers, without an employer match this is idea given the income tax savings over the longer term and they are most likely in the lowest tax bracket. The 401k is great for retirement, which is made better if employer matches contributions.  This is like getting paid for retirement saving.  These funds are \"\"locked\"\" up until age 59.5, with exceptions.  All contributed funds and all earnings are \"\"untaxed\"\" until withdrawn. The idea here is that at the time contributions are added, you are at a higher tax rate then when you expect to withdrawn funds. Trade Accounts, investments, as stated before are the used of taxed dollars.  The biggest advantage of these are the liquidity.\""}
{"id": "459689", "text": "Is this for the US? Or does it apply here in the UK in a general sense?  Obviously I think we are using different terms, but this is just a general run down of the different business types really right?  I'm wondering if the use of a name thing matters here in the UK or not. I'm happy to trade under my actual name, but would prefer a name for the business that is separate to my own name."}
{"id": "459724", "text": "Danger. The affidavit is a legal document. Understand the risk of getting caught. If you are planning on using the condo to generate income the chances that you default on the loan are higher than an owner occupied property. That is why they demand more down payment (20%+) and charge a higher rate.  The document isn't about making sure you spend 183+ nights a year in the property, it is making sure that it isn't a business, and you aren't letting a 3rd party live in the property.  If you within the first year tell the mortgage company to send the bill to a new address, or you change how the property is insured, they will suspect that it is now a rental property.  What can they do? Undo the loan; ask for penalty fee; limit your ability to get a mortgage in the future; or a percentage of the profits How likely is it? The exact penalty will be in the packet of documents you receive. It will depend on which government agency is involved in the loan, and the lenders plan to sell it on the secondary market.  It can also depend on the program involved in the sale of the property. HUD and sister agencies lock out investors  during the initial selling period, They don't want somebody to represent themselves as homeowner, but is actually an investor. Note: some local governments are interested not just in non-investors but in properties being occupied. Therefore they may offer tax discounts to residents living in their homes. Then they will be looking at the number of nights that you occupy the house in a year. If they detect that you aren't really a resident living in the house, that has tax penalties. Suggestion: If you don't want to wait a year buy the condo and let the loan officer know what your plan is. You will have to meet the down payment and interest rate requirements for an investment property. Your question implies that you will have enough money to pay the required 20% down payment. Then when you are ready buy the bigger house and move in. If you try and buy the condo with a non-investment loan you will have to wait a year. If you try and pay cash now, and then get a home equity loan later you will have to admit it is a rental. And still have to meet the investor requirements."}
{"id": "459725", "text": "I don't think you are missing much, if anything, Brendan. You get massive diversification and low fees with a fund like VTI. I'm not sure if it is good to have everything with only one broker though. I would add to the conversation that the goal shouldn't be to have a giant pile of money in x years..and then spend it down in retirement. A much better/safer goal is to have enough dividends being generated that you never have to touch your capital. Looks like you are starting young so congrats."}
{"id": "459825", "text": "Unless you have the storage and transportation facilities for it, or can come up with the money needed to rent or build those, no -- or not in any significant quantity.  Buying oil futures is essentially an on-paper version of the same bet. Futures prices are already taking into account both expectations about price changes and the fact that there's cash tied up until they come due, but storage costs also adjust to follow those expectations."}
{"id": "459906", "text": "You're extremely fortunate to have $50k in CDs, no debt, and $3800 disposable after food and rent. Congrats. Here's how I would approach it. If you see yourself getting into a home in the next couple of years, stay safe and liquid. CDs (depending on the duration) fit that description. Because you have disposable income and you're young, you should be contributing to a Roth IRA. This will build in value and compound over your lifetime, so that when you're in your 70s you'll actually have a retirement.  Financial planners love life insurance because that's how they make all their money. I have whole life insurance because its cash value will be part of my retirement. It may also cover my wife if I ever decide to get married. It may or may not make sense for you now depending on how soon you want to buy a home and home expensive they are in your zip code.  Higher risk, higher reward- you can count on that. Keep the funds in the United States and don't try to get into any slick financial moves.  If you have a school in town, see if you can take an Intro to Financial Planning class. It's extremely helpful for anyone with these kinds of questions."}
{"id": "460325", "text": "Recommend using quickbooks for account management. If you use the manufacturing and wholesale you can track POs from vendors, estimates, bill payment quotes and invoicing (there's an editor to customize your set up)Also, most accountants are very familiar with this platform so come tax time they'll be able to give you a hand no problem. For accepting payments I highly suggest asking for checks. If you do accept credit cards keep in mind most  payment processors charge a percent (1.5-3%) depending on transaction amounts and quantities of transactions. So you'll want to mark up your products by at least that amount.   Another area is sales tax. Since you are not the end user you should be able to avoid sales tax on the items you will be selling to customers. You then charge the customer this sales tax. Not sure about NJ but in Texas we are 8.25%. I then pay the state of Texas the taxes collected quarterly.   Edit: also make sure you have separate finances for the LLC. Separate checking, separate credit card, separate everything! If you end up using an account that is tied to you personally then you run into the risk of losing the protective nature of an LLC from a legal standpoint.   Edit2: by separate I mean using your IRS issued EIN number to open accounts with the LLC name. When you sign anything on behalf of the company make sure to add the name of the company next to it to show the company is making the signature not you. For instance   u/sexlessnights Company name, LLC"}
{"id": "460341", "text": "There's no best strategy. Options are just pieces of paper, and if the stock price goes below the strike price - they're worthless. Stocks are actual ownership share, whatever the price is - that's what they're worth. So unless you expect the company stock prices to sky-rocket soon, RSU will probably provide better value. You need to do some math and decide whether in your opinion the stock growth in the next few years justifies betting on ESOP. You didn't say what country you're from, but keep in mind that stock options and RSUs are taxed differently and that can affect your end result as well."}
{"id": "460348", "text": "The website likely has no differentiation. I am hoping, however, the service does.   I'm not looking to break down a fledgling business plan, I am just looking for information on how and where to build or buy a website that performs thusly:  Company creates account and posts the service they can provide, Consumer applies for said service, I deal with some required middle-man work which is at the cost of the consumer."}
{"id": "460457", "text": "In my mind, when looking at a five year period you have a number of options. You didn't specify where you are based, which admittedly makes it harder, to give you good advice. If you are looking for an investment that can achieve large gains, equities are impossible to ignore. By investing in an index fund or other diverse asset forms (such as mutual funds), your risk is relatively minimal. However there has historically been five year periods where you would lose/flatline your money. If this was to be the case you would likely be better off waiting more than five years to buy a house, which would be frustrating. When markets rebound, they often do it hard. If you are in a major economy, taking something like the top 100 of your stock market is a safe bet, although admittedly you would have made terrible returns if you invested in the Polish markets. While they often achieve lower returns than equity investments, they are generally considered safer - especially government issued bonds. If you were willing to sacrifice returns for safety, you must always consider them.  This is an interesting new addition, and I can't comment on the state of it in the United States, however in Europe we have a number of platforms which do this. In the UK, for example you can achieve ~7.3% returns YoY using sites like Funding Circle. If you invest in a diverse range of businesses, you have minimal risk from and individual company not paying. Elsewhere in Europe (although not appropriate for me as everything I do is denominated in Sterling), you can secure 12% in places like Georgia, Poland, and Estonia. This is a very good rate and the platforms seem reputable, and 'guarantee' their loans. However unlike funding circle, they are for consumer loans. The risk profile in my mind is similar to that of equities, but it is hard to say. Whatever you do, you need to do your homework, and ensure that you can handle the level of risk offered by the investments you make. I haven't included things like Savings accounts in here, as the rates aren't worth bothering with."}
{"id": "460613", "text": "I guess most banks will not have an issue with that arrangement. The bank take collateral in the house for the amount your girlfriend needs to borrow, from her part of the house. Most likely the bank will accept the house' value as what you pay for it, assuming you pay fair market value - otherwise they will contact a valuation company to put a value of your new house. If they feel that her share of the house (50%) can cover her loan, they will definitely agree with the deal. You being a foreigner will, probably, have little to say in the matter, as long as you do not need to borrow money for your share of the house."}
{"id": "460643", "text": "This fortune article is referenced in his either 2003 or 2004 annual report in which he does say that the market will not likely return much in the future and generally talks numbers. I am also a value investor, such that I can be in this environment and believe there is a bit of value in knowing where you think the market is headed but the real value is in underwriting each deal. In long, I agree with you"}
{"id": "460721", "text": "\"Assuming you are paying into and eligible to collect regular Employment Insurance benefits for the job in question, I don't see how owning a side business would, by itself, affect your ability to participate in the workshare program.  Many people own dormant businesses ($0 revenue / $0 income), or businesses with insignificant net income (e.g. a small table at the flea market, or a fledgling web-site with up-front costs and no ad revenue, yet ;-) I think what matters is if your side business generated income substantial enough to put you over a certain threshold. Then you may be required to repay a portion of the EI benefits received through the workshare program.  On this issue, I found the following article informative: How to make work-sharing work for you, from the Globe & Mail's Report on Business site.  Here's a relevant quote: \"\"[...] If you work elsewhere during   the agreement, and earn more than an   amount equal to 40% of your weekly   benefit rate, that amount shall be   deducted from your work sharing   benefits payable that week. [...]\"\" The definitive source for information on the workshare program is the Service Canada web site.  In particular, see the Work-Sharing Applicant Guide, which discusses eligibility criteria.  Section IV confirms the Globe article's statement above: \"\"[...] Earnings received in any week   by a Work-Sharing participant, from   sources other than Work-Sharing   employment, that are in excess of an   amount equal to 40% or $75 (whichever   is greater) of the participant's   weekly benefit rate, shall be deducted   from the Work-Sharing benefits payable   in that week. [...]\"\" Finally, here's one more interesting article that discusses the workshare program: Canada: Employment Law @ Gowlings - March 30, 2009.\""}
{"id": "460839", "text": "\"Google \"\"forex broker\"\" and find one of the thousands that allows you to trade on Gold futures.  Then use one of them to short Gold... just watch your leverage. I would certainly wait before you're shorting gold.  Why tie up capital in a bubble that you think will burst in the next few years.  Wait for the price to increase and monitor for actual signs of the bubble bursting.  Right now with the Euro possibly collapsing shorting gold probably isn't your best bet.\""}
{"id": "461084", "text": "Why shouldn't I just keep my money in the savings account and earn the same amount (both accounts have the same APY in this case)? I will assume that you are transferring money from your savings account into a Traditional IRA and deducting the contribution from your income.  While you may think that the money that is being transferred is yours already -- it is sitting in your savings account, for Pete's sake! -- you are deducting that amount in getting to your taxable income, and so you are effectively contributing it from current income and not paying taxes on the amount contributed. So, consider the same amount of money sitting in your savings account versus the same amount of money sitting in your Traditional IRA account. While you will earn the same amount of interest in both accounts, you will have  to pay taxes each year on the interest earned in the savings account. You might  choose, as most people do, to not take money out of the savings account to pay theses taxes but just pay them from ready cash/checking account/current income etc., or these taxes might just reduce the refund that you will getting from the IRS and your State income tax authority, but in either case, you have paid taxes on the interest earned in your non-IRA savings account, and of course, long ago, you also paid taxes on the original amount in the non-IRA savings account.  So, if you take any money out of the non-IRA savings account, you don't pay any taxes on the amount withdrawn except possibly for the interest earned from January 1 till the date of withdrawal (which you are paying from ready cash). On the other hand, consider the Traditional IRA. The original deposit was not taxed in the sense that you got a deduction (reduced tax or increased refund) when you made the contribution. The annual interest earned was not taxed each year either.  So when you make a qualified withdrawal (after age 59.5 or by meeting one of the other exceptions allowing withdrawal before age 59.5), you are taking money on which you have not paid any taxes at all, and the IRS wants its cut.  The money withdrawn is taxable income to you. Furthermore, the money withdrawn is not eligible for any kind of favorable treatment such as having it count as qualified dividends or as long-term capital gains even if your IRA was invested in stocks and the money in the account is all qualified dividends or long-term capital gains.  If you make an unqualified withdrawal, you owe a penalty (technically named an excise tax) in addition to income tax on the amount withdrawn. If you are investing in a Roth IRA, you will not be getting a deduction when you make the contribution, and qualified withdrawals are  completely tax-free, and so the answer is completely different from the above."}
{"id": "461165", "text": "S&P/TSX 60 VIX (CAD) is an equation and as the implied volatility of two close to the money TSX 60 options change, the output changes. This is why the intra-day price fluctuates on a graph like a traded product.  Although VIXC can't be traded, it can still be used as an important signal for traders. The excerpt is from slide 12, more information can be found here. https://www.m-x.ca/f_publications_en/vixc_presentation_en.pdf Futures (stage 2) Options, ETFs, OTC Products (stage 3) have not been implemented."}
{"id": "461177", "text": "I had a pretty good experience with Lending Tree, although they are a mortgage broker, not a lender themselves."}
{"id": "461233", "text": "\"I think the answer to this question depends on how much you trust yourself. Most people are wonderful at deceiving themselves. I'd personally not trust myself; I'll use Liam's points for the pitfalls some people get into. You can pay off your loans with summer internships and retain the initial cash you had for additional activities that make college enjoyable, i.e - Fraternity/ Sorority, clubs, dinners, and social nights.  This is actually the risk I've seen many people do. They'll blow their money in one semester under the assumption that 'they'll just earn more in Summer and keep it for expenses or the future.\"\" Another benefit to taking these loans would assist in building credit, No Credit (in the USA) is actually a good standing. Many sensible banks or credit unions will happily give people with No Credit a loan. This makes intuitive sense if you think about it. Imagine two people with the same income. One owes money regularly to multiple sources and the other has no debt obligations. Which one are you loaning money to? Simplifying things a lot: Great Credit is best, followed by No Credit, then Good Credit, and then Bad Credit. The advantage of Great Credit over No Credit is simply that some institutions in some sectors don't have the policies in place to process No Credit people (No Credit people plan to not apply for credit often, for self-explanatory reasons, so this is a mote point).\""}
{"id": "461313", "text": "I tried direct indexing the S&amp;P500 myself and it was a lot of work. Lots of buys and sells to rebalance, tons of time in spreadsheets running calculations/monitoring etc, dealing with stocks being added or removed from the index, adding money (inflows). Etc. All of the work is the main reason I stopped. I came to realize the 0.05% I pay Vanguard is a great deal."}
{"id": "461425", "text": "It might be clearer to think of it as price going up when a dividend is expected, since that's money you'll get right back. As the delay before the next dividend payment increases, that becomes less of a factor,"}
{"id": "461446", "text": "\"My sister had a similar problem and went to an actual lawyer, not a  \"\"credit repair agency\"\".  The lawyers settled her debt for a lot less than she owed, and she  also got a bonus: one of the creditors called her repeatedly, even  after her lawyers had told them not to.  The lawyers ended up getting her an extra $40,000. Combined with the  debt settlement, she actually came out ahead.  Of course, her credit score went down, but it recovered in a couple of  years.\""}
{"id": "461795", "text": "Haha seemed like it was a big step in agriculture for me! Not that I'm in the industry, but cool to see the development of tech in various fields.   Title seemed intriguing to me haha maybe I'm not too familiar with PR etiquette! Cool company though"}
{"id": "462033", "text": "\"What disconnect? And I'm not even kidding here - where is it? Do you really think that arbitrage that is a pittance compared to long term trading somehow distorts the process that some people claim is actually socially beneficial? Given that there's really no evidence of it causing misallocation or mispricing, what is the problem? That some dumbass day trader (who is, by the way, trying to make money in exactly the same way as the HFT people - he's just worse at it) got screwed over by some not-quite-as-dumbass people working at Goldman Sachs?  And why would you think that HFT (or any other advancement) is somehow related to such a thing; we've had \"\"speculation\"\" and foul play of various types for hundreds of years. What is it that is fundamentally different this time that wasn't there in, for example, the 80s?\""}
{"id": "462106", "text": "The product descriptions for FFA swaps and options can be found here:  http://www.lchclearnet.com/freight/ffas/products.asp The index (e.g. the BFA) is based on the settlement prices of the P2, P2A, and C4 contracts and the panamax TC routes.  As such it's just a performance index and replicates the returns you'd get from holding a portfolio of the constituents. I think from the clearing descriptions everything should be clear.  The wording in the link on the Baltic Exchange website is a bit nebulous.  I think they mean standardised instead of specified.  Because that's what sets the FFABA apart from OTC agreements or OTC spot markets. Edit: For more information on financial instruments in general see the Handbook of Financial Instuments.  I haven't got the latest edition but I doubt he will mention FFAs, CFSAs, or anything that's specific to maritime markets but after all they're just plain forward agreements over a not-so-common underlying."}
{"id": "462113", "text": "IMO almost any sensible decision is better than parking money in a retirement account, when you are young. Some better choices: 1) Invest in yourself, your skills, your education. Grad school is one option within that. 2) Start a small business, build a customer base. 3) Travel, adventure, see the world. Meet and talk to lots of different people. Note that all my advice revolves around investing in YOURSELF, growing your skills and/or your experiences. This is worth FAR more to you than a few percent a year. Take big risks when you are young. You will need maybe $1m+ (valued at today's money) to retire comfortably. How will you get there? Most people can only achieve that by taking bigger risks, and investing in themselves."}
{"id": "462237", "text": "\"Also here's a source for the $3.7 trillion number.      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-08/u-s-municipal-bond-market-28-larger-than-estimated-federal-reserve-says.html    It's not 'incorrect data'.        EDIT:  Furthermore, in order to know the \"\"extent\"\" of the crime (your own admission) we NEED to know the size of the entire market otherwise you can't have any perspective or determine extent.  So there's no reason it shouldn't be mentioned in the article.\""}
{"id": "462291", "text": "Using a different cost basis than your broker's reporting is NOT a problem. You need to keep your own records to account for this difference. Among the other many legitimate reasons to adjust your cost basis, the most popular is when you have two brokerage accounts and sell an asset in one then buy in another. This is called a Wash Sale and is not a taxable event for you. However from the perspective of each broker with their limited information you are making a transaction with tax implications and their reported 1099 will show as such. Links:  https://www.firstinvestors.com/docs/pdf/news/tax-qa-2012.pdf"}
{"id": "462367", "text": "Questions regarding loans, refinancing, mortgages, credit cards, investing and anything else that may be related to personal finance should be directed towards the subreddit r/personalfinance. We have provided the link to that subreddit below.   [----&gt;  Over there on the sidebar.](http://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/) Jus' say'in."}
{"id": "462384", "text": "No. Busts are very infrequent, and if an equity were illiquid enough to be affected, the bust cost would be enormous. For a liquid equity, the amount of busted volume is insignificant except during a flash crash or flash spike.  Then it would be reasonable to redownload."}
{"id": "462403", "text": "I can't think of any more negatives apart from what you mentioned, but the positives might include higher cost base for when you sell the place (this only applies in Australia if it is an investment property) thus having to pay less tax on the capital gains, and being able to borrowing extra funds which may help with your cashflow (especially if you keep the extra funds in an 100% offset account so your interest payable is not increased until you really need the extra funds)."}
{"id": "462440", "text": "First off, I would question why do you need a LI policy?  While you may be single are you supporting anyone?  If not, and you have some money saved to cover a funeral; or, your next of kin would be able to pay for final expenses then you probably don't have a need.   In, general, LI is a bad investment vehicle.  I do not know hardly anything about the Indian personal finance picture, but here in the US, agents tout LI as a wonderful investment.  This can be translated as they make large commissions on such products. Here in the US one is far better off buying a term product, and investing money elsewhere.  I image it is similar in India. Next time if you want to help a friend, listen to his sales presentation, give some feedback, and hand him some cash.  It is a lot cheaper in the long run."}
{"id": "462481", "text": "\"I'll add 2 observations regarding current answers.  Jack nailed it - a 401(k) match beats all. But choose the right flavor account.  You are currently in the 15% bracket (i.e. your marginal tax rate, the rate paid on the last taxed $100, and next taxed $100.) You should focus on Roth. Roth 401(k) (and if any company match, that goes into a traditional pretax 401(k). But if they permit conversions to the Roth side, do it) You have a long time before retirement to earn your way into the next tax bracket, 25%. As your income rises, use the deductible IRA/ 401(k) to take out money pretax that would otherwise be taxed at 25%.  One day, you'll be so far into the 25% bracket, you'll benefit by 100%   traditional. But why waste the opportunity to deposit to Roth money   that's taxed at just 15%? To clarify the above, this is the single rate table for 2015:  For this discussion, I am talking taxable income, the line on the tax return designating this number. If that line is $37,450 or less, you are in the 15% bracket and I recommend Roth. Say it's $40,000. In hindsight on should put $2,550 in a pretax account (Traditional 401(k) or IRA) to bring it down to the $37,450. In other words, try to keep the 15% bracket full, but not push into 25%.  Last, after enough raises, say you at $60,000 taxable. That, to me is \"\"far into the 25% bracket.\"\" $20,000 or 1/3 of income into the 401(k) and IRA and you're still in the 25% bracket. One can plan to a point, and then use the IRA flavors to get it dead on in April of the following year.  To Ben's point regarding paying off the Student Loan faster - A $33K income for a single person, about to have the new expense of rent, is not a huge income. I'll concede that there's a sleep factor, the long tern benefit of being debt free, and won't argue the long term market return vs the rate on the loan. But here we have the probability that OP is not investing at all. It may take $2000/yr to his 401(k) capture the match (my 401 had a dollar for dollar match up to first 6% of income). This $45K, after killing the card, may be his only source for the extra money to replace what he deposits to his 401(k). And also serve as his emergency fund along the way.\""}
{"id": "462612", "text": "You don't say what kinds of mutual funds, or what bonds. You don't say how old you are. You seem to have enough cushion to strike out on your own comfortably.  This is good. Compared with Vanguard's management fees, the fees you're paying are pretty high. The bottom line of what to invest in rests with you.  If you outsource it, it's still your money.  The managers get paid whether you make money or not. You have lots of other options: real estate from a distressed seller, commodities, currencies, websites, or other things where you have a knowledge advantage. For the time being, though, if you're concerned about your main income stream, I wouldn't get terribly risky with your money.  Cash is just peachy in that case."}
{"id": "462625", "text": "\"As taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_number, \"\"The original purpose of this number was to track individuals' accounts within the Social Security program.\"\" It later became a requirement for claimed dependants for federal taxes and you are required to have one before the age of one.\""}
{"id": "462965", "text": "Regardless, it doesn't indicate any financial stress or credit-related issues.   Just because you are pissed off about the way the financial industry works, doesn't mean the banks are in poor shape. If France and Germany come crashing down, then you may have some evidence to back your point."}
{"id": "463007", "text": "I don't know about keeping different rollover IRAs separate. But I know that there is a reason to keep rollover IRAs separate from other traditional IRAs -- if you want to roll them back into a 401(k) in the future, some 401(k)s only allow funds that were rolled over from a 401(k) originally."}
{"id": "463065", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ten-years-after-subprime-mortgage-crisis-us-credit-card-walden-siew) reduced by 84%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Things have come a really long way since the dark days of the credit crisis, and it&amp;#039;s really flipped completely the other way where now it doesn&amp;#039;t really take great credit to get a credit card.  &gt; MS: This is definitely a case of history repeating itself, but the thing is we don&amp;#039;t know what the tip of the mountain is when it comes to credit card debt, because when credit card debt started to fall in 2008 in the credit crisis, credit card debt wasn&amp;#039;t the central problem that sent us over the edge.  &gt; MS: We really have seen all levels, from folks with less than perfect credit to folks with 800 credit scores spending more, and that has been part of what&amp;#039;s driven up America&amp;#039;s credit card balances to these record levels.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6txd7q/ten_years_after_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis_a_us/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~191596 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **credit**^#1 **card**^#2 **debt**^#3 **really**^#4 **crisis**^#5\""}
{"id": "463289", "text": "Wow, so many idiots. Everyone has a nice fancy car that costs $300/month and cable and fancy clothes, and half of them are in debt. Pathetic. No sympathy whatsoever. I live frugally, which is precisely why I have a large surplus."}
{"id": "463301", "text": "Nobody is going to stop you if you want to try that. But you should keep in mind that you have to invest a lot in getting the best hardware you can lay your hands on, best fail-safe connectivity to the exchanges, best trading algorithms and software that money can buy and loads of other stuff. This all needs quite a big amount of upfront investment without guaranteeing returns. That is why you see institutions with deep pockets i.e. banks and trading firms only involve themselves in HFT."}
{"id": "463382", "text": "You should ask a customer service rep how much you'll net if you close the account. There will probably be a hefty surrender fee. What you get back shouldn't be taxable as its a return of your own money, not a gain."}
{"id": "463631", "text": "I'm not meaning to be condescending and I apologize if it came off that way.  I'm offering my perspective.  I see these relationships and have the perspective to see how the traders move about and where they move to as part of my role.  The most common way I see non-tier 1 grads moving into top tier HF trading roles is via stepping into BB's, moving into market making roles, and then using the position of being at the center of the market to network into roles.  Renaissance tech being the exception... most of the traders sustain research roles as well and are most came in with PhD's and academia backgrounds."}
{"id": "463881", "text": "\"Does your spouse work? That's one factor that can put your income into a higher bracket. The one difference to note is you will pay 2x the social security portion, so even though not \"\"federal\"\" tax, its right off the top nearly 13%. I'm not familiar with your states tax. It's really worth dropping the $75 on a copy of the software and running your own exact numbers.\""}
{"id": "464080", "text": "\"Given that the 6 answers all advocate similar information, let me offer you the alternate scenario - You earn $60K and have an employer offering a 50% match on all deposits. All deposits. (Note, I recently read a Q&A here describing such an offer. If I see it again, I'll link).  Let the thought of the above settle in. You think about the fact that $42K isn't a bad salary, and decide to deposit 30%, to gain the full match on your $18K deposit. Now, you budget to live your life, pay your bills, etc, but it's tight. When you accumulate $2000, and a strong want comes up (a toy, a trip, anything, no judgement) you have a tough decision. You think to yourself, \"\"after the match, I am literally saving 45% of my income. I'm on a pace to have the ability to retire in 20 years. Why do I need to save even more?\"\"  Your budget has enough discretionary spending that if you have a $2000 'emergency', you charge it and pay it off over the next 6-8 months. Much larger, and you know that your super-funded 401(k) has the ability to tap a loan. Your choice to turn away from the common wisdom has the recommended $20K (about 6 months of your spending) sitting in your 401(k), pretax deposited as $26K, and matched to nearly $40K, growing long term.  Note: This is a devil's advocate answer. Had I been the first to answer, it would reflect the above.  In my own experience, when I got married, we built up the proper emergency fund. As interest rates fell, we looked at our mortgage balance, and agreed that paying down the loan would enable us to refinance and save enough in mortgage interest that the net effect was as if we were getting 8% on the money. At the same time as we got that new mortgage, the bank offered a HELOC, which I never needed to use. Did we somehow create high risk? Perhaps. Given that my wife and I were both still working, and had similar incomes, it seemed reasonable.\""}
{"id": "464132", "text": "ELI5 - you sell something that you don't own with the expectation that it will go down, and then you buy it back when it goes down in order to lock in profit.  You are charged fees to borrow the stock from someone else who currently owns it, and you also run the risk of the market going against you by going up."}
{"id": "464277", "text": "\"Let me start by giving you a snippet of a report that will floor you. Beat the market? Investors lag the market by so much that many call the industry a scam.   This is the 2015 year end data from a report titled Quantitive Analysis of Investor Behavior by a firm, Dalbar. It boggles the mind that the disparity could be this bad. A mix of stocks and bonds over 30 years should average 8.5% or so. Take out fees, and even 7.5% would be the result I expect. The average investor return was less than half of this. Jack Bogle, founder of Vanguard, and considered the father of the index fund, was ridiculed. A pamphlet I got from Vanguard decades ago quoted fund managers as saying that \"\"indexing is a path to mediocrity.\"\" Fortunately, I was a numbers guy, read all I could that Jack wrote and got most of that 10.35%, less .05, down to .02% over the years. To answer the question: psychology. People are easily scammed as they want to believe they can beat the market. Or that they'll somehow find a fund that does it for them. I'm tempted to say ignorance or some other hint at lack of intelligence, but that would be unfair to the professionals, all of which were scammed by Madoff. Individual funds may not be scams, but investors are partly to blame, buy high, sell low, and you get the results above, I dare say, an investor claiming to use index funds might not fare much better than the 3.66% 30 year return above, if they follow that path, buying high, selling low. Edit - I am adding this line to be clear - My conclusion, if any, is that the huge disparity cannot be attributed to management, a 6.7% lag from the S&P return to what the average investor sees likely comes from bad trading. To the comments by Dave, we have a manager that consistently beats the market over any 2-3 year period. You have been with him 30 years and are clearly smiling about your relationship and investing decision. Yet, he still has flows in and out. People buy at the top when reading how good he is, and selling right after a 30% drop even when he actually beat by dropping just 22%. By getting in and out, he has a set of clients with a 30 year record of 6% returns, while you have just over 11%. This paragraph speaks to the behavior of the investor, not managed vs indexed.\""}
{"id": "464385", "text": "I was just thinking ahead, can I apply for Limited company now, while fully time employed, and not take any business until I get a contract. Yes. You can open as many companies you want(assuming you are sane). There is no legal provisions regarding who can open a company.   What happens if I create a company and it has no turnover at all? Does this complicate things later? After you open a company, you have to submit your yearly statements to Companies House, whether you have a billion pounds turnover or 0. If you claim VAT that has also to be paid after you register for VAT. VAT registration is another registration different from opening a limited company. Is it the same if I decided to take a 1,2 or x month holiday and the company again will not incur any turnover? Turnover is year end, so at the year end you have to submit your yearly results, whether you took a 12 month holiday or a week's holiday. Is it a OK to do this in foresight or should I wait weeks before actually deciding to search for contracts. No need to open a limited company now, if you are so paranoid. Opening a company in UK takes 5 minutes. So you can open a company after landing a contract."}
{"id": "464657", "text": "In software sales. 90% of the time the purchaser bids out the sale to 4-8 vendors who then have to compete to win the business. One team eats, the rest go hungry. On large enterprise sales, the process can last over a year. It really hurts when you lose those."}
{"id": "464668", "text": "\"The mutual fund is legally its own company that you're investing in, with its own expenses. Mutual fund expense ratios are a calculated value, not a promise that you'll pay a certain percentage on a particular day. That is to say, at the end of their fiscal year, a fund will total up how much it spent on administration and divide it by the total assets under management to calculate what the expense ratio is for that year, and publish it in the annual report. But you can't just \"\"pay the fee\"\" for any given year. In a \"\"regular\"\" account, you certainly could look at what expenses were paid for each fund by multiplying the expense ratio by your investment, and use it in some way to figure out how much additional you want to contribute to \"\"make it whole\"\" again. But it makes about as much sense as trying to pay the commission for buying a single stock out of one checking account while paying for the share price out of another. It may help you in some sort of mental accounting of expenses, but since it's all your money, and the expenses are all part of what you're paying to be able to invest, it's not really doing much good since money is fungible. In a retirement account with contribution limits, it still doesn't really make sense, since any contribution from outside funds to try to pay for expense ratios would be counted as contributions like any other. Again, I guess it could somehow help you account for how much money you wanted to contribute in a year, but I'm not really sure it would help you much. Some funds or brokerages do have non-expense-ratio-based fees, and in some cases you can pay for those from outside the account. And there are a couple cases where for a retirement account this lets you keep your contributions invested while paying for fees from outside funds. This may be the kind of thing that your coworker was referring to, though it's hard to tell exactly from your description. Usually it's best just to have investments with as low fees as possible regardless, since they're one of the biggest drags on returns, and I'd be very wary of any brokerage-based fees when there are very cheap and free mutual fund brokerages out there.\""}
{"id": "464810", "text": "In general, liquidity is a good thing, because it means it is easy for you to buy or sell a stock.   Since high liquidity stocks have a lot of trading, the bid-ask spreads tend to be pretty low.  That means you can go into the market and trade easily and cheaply at just about any time.  For low liquidity stocks, the bid-ask spreads can get pretty high, so it can make it hard or expensive to get into or out of your trades. On the flip side, everyone pays attention to high liquidity stocks, so it's harder to get an edge in your trading.  For a company like Microsoft there are 30-50 full time analysts that cover them, thousands of professional traders and millions of investors in general all reading the same new articles and looking through the same financials as you.  But in low liquidity stocks, there probably aren't any analysts, a few professional traders and maybe a few thousand total investors, so it can be easier to find a good buy (or sell). In general, high liquidity doesn't mean that everyone is selling or everyone is buy, it just means everyone is trading."}
{"id": "465135", "text": "\"After more searching for how the US might treat such an attempt to \"\"rollover\"\" the funds, I found this:   https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/am2008009.pdf So, it seems it is impossible to do without US tax consequences.\""}
{"id": "465260", "text": "\"I believe the banks are protecting themselves when they \"\"require\"\" your endorsement. Years ago. they used to ask for your endorsement, and not require it. If you endorse the check, it legally authorizes them to debit your account, if the check is later returned for non-sufficient funds (NSF). It mostly protects the bank, and not the customer.\""}
{"id": "465370", "text": "Yes, sorry, I should have tried to be clearer. I mean the development appraisal related to construction. Such as residential developments, mixed-use developments etc - what makes these profitable, costs, residual valuation etc.. if this is in the right ballpark"}
{"id": "465648", "text": "Even after the real estate crash, there are banks that lend money outside of the rules I'll share.  A fully qualified mortgage is typically run at debt to income ratios of 28/36, where 28% of your gross monthly income can apply to the mortgage, property tax, and insurance, and the 36% is the total monthly debt (including the mortgage, etc) plus car loan student loan, etc. It's less about the total loan on the potential than about these ratios. The bank may allow for 75% of monthly rent so until rentals are running at a profit, they may seem a loss, even while just breaking even.  This is just an overview, each bank may vary a bit."}
{"id": "465725", "text": "What did you sign when the account was opened? What did you sign when you left the company, to transfer those responsibilities? Unless the bank has a record of someone else being responsible, they are correct in billing the one who signed their paperwork.  Of course this also probably means you still have access to the account, so your ex-partners should be Highly Motivated to help you fix this. If you want a legal opinion, try over in the Law area, or (better) ask a real lawyer in your jurisdiction. That's out of scope here."}
{"id": "465814", "text": "Even if you can get a credit card with a $0 limit, that doesn't necessarily mean that the charges won't succeed. Some of my credit cards have gone over limit by a significant amount (e.g. 140% of limit) without any transactions being declined. The limit just means that the bank is allowed to decline the transaction, but they are also allowed to approve it anyway. So basically what you would have is a credit card where any transaction can always be declined or approved."}
{"id": "466176", "text": "I don't know answers that would be specific to Canada but one of the main ETF funds that tracks gold prices is GLD (SPDR Gold Trust) another is IAU (iShares Gold Trust). Also, there are several ETF's that combine different precious metals together and can be traded. You can find a fairly decent list here on the Stock Encylopedia site."}
{"id": "466213", "text": "\"You file taxes as usual. W2 is a form given to you, you don't need to fill it. Similarly, 1099. Both report moneys paid to you by your employers. W2 is for actual employer (the one where you're on the payroll), 1099 is for contractors (where you invoice the entity you provide services to and get paid per contract). You need to look at form 1040 and its instructions as to how exactly to fill it. That would be the annual tax return. It has various schedules (A, B, C, D, E, F, H, etc) which you should familiarize yourself with, and various additional forms that you attach to it. If you're self employed, you're expected  to make quarterly estimate payments, but if you're a salaried employee you can instruct your employer to withhold the amounts you expect to owe for taxes from your salary, instead. If you're using a tax preparation software (like TurboTax or TaxAct), it will \"\"interview\"\" you to get all the needed information and provide you with the forms filled accordingly. Alternatively you can pay someone to prepare the tax return for you.\""}
{"id": "466249", "text": "At first, that seems right. However, can you run 20 CNC mills while prospecting for new customers?  IF you're getting all that work from just a few customers then you still need to be prospecting simply because you're relying too much on  a few customers.  Sure, there are exceptions, to a degree. But they're few, and aren't much of exceptions once you dig in."}
{"id": "466308", "text": "Why not just roll over part of your IRA to a bank?  I don't know about Capital One, but Bank of America seems to offer a bank-based IRA.   In broker-based IRAs, the closest that I've seen to a savings account is a money market fund.  They often set those as the default investment until money is allocated to more specific funds.  It is conceivably possible that a money market could lose money, but it has never happened."}
{"id": "466315", "text": "Why does the rising price of a bond pushes it's yield down? The bond price and its yield are linked; if one goes up, the other must go down. This is because the cash flows from the bond are fixed, predetermined. The market price of the bond fluctuates. Now what if people are suddenly willing to pay more for the same fixed payments? It must mean that the return, i.e. the yield, will be lower. Here we see that risk associated with the bonds in question has   skyrocketed, and thus bonds' returns has skyrocketed, too. Am I right? The default risk has increased, yes. Now, I assume that bonds' price is determined by the market (issued by   a state, traded at the market). Is that correct? Correct, as long as you are talking about the market price. Then who determines bonds' yields? I mean, isn't it fixed? Or - in the   FT quote above - they are talking about the yields for the new bonds   issued that particular month? The yield is not fixed - the cash flows are. Yield is the internal rate of return. See my answer above to your first question."}
{"id": "466619", "text": "Any fee based financial adviser should be able to help you. I don't think you need to worry about finding a 401K specific adviser. I'm not even sure that's a thing. A good place to start is the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors. The reason I specifically mentioned a fee based adviser is that the free ones are working on sales commissions, which may influence them to give advice that is in their own best interest more than yours."}
{"id": "466640", "text": "\"Software or any online service fits this category I suppose.  There are two apps I pay for that are \"\"free.\"\" Evernote and Pandora.  Evernote is free for 40MB, $45/yr for 500MB/mo transfer. Pandora is free for 40hrs/mo, $36/yr unlimited. When I use a free product and hit the limit it's a sign to me that I value that product and the owners deserve to get paid. To me, both products provide value that's well above the cost they are asking. In this case, both products are annual subscriptions, but offer monthly as well.  You don't mention the type of product you have, the two I listed are similar in billing type, but very difference end uses. The question is - How do you provide value and make your customers want to pay you?  BTW - the ~$40/yr give or take, seems a good price point. Under $50, it feels a fair price to pay for a useful product.\""}
{"id": "466720", "text": "One additional note related to Roth vs regular: for a regular 401k or IRA, you pay the 10% penalty on any withdrawal.  For a Roth, you can withdraw the contributions early (but not the earnings) without any penalty or tax. Of course, if this is a retirement account it's better to leave it that way.  Personally it's one reason I avoid Roth - in addition to probably being in a higher bracket now, I also would prefer not to be able to touch my money.  But for some there could be advantages in having that ability (such as in an emergency)."}
{"id": "466778", "text": "Considering that it's common for the monthly mortgage payment to be 25% of one's income, it's an obvious advantage for that monthly burden to be eliminated.  The issue, as I see it, is that this is the last thing one should do in the list of priorities: The idea of 'no mortgage' is great. But. You might pay early and have just a few years of payments left on the mortgage and if you are unemployed, those payments are still due. It's why I'd suggest loading up retirement accounts and other savings before paying the mortgage sooner. Your point, that rates are low, and your expected return is higher, is well presented. I feel no compulsion to prepay my 3.5% mortgage.  As the OP is in Canada, land of no mortgage interest deduction, I ignore that, till now. The deduction simply reduces the effective rate, based on the country tax code permitting it. It's not the 'reason' to have a loan. But it's ignorant to ignore the math."}
{"id": "467195", "text": "\"You say  Also I have been the only one with an income in our household for last 15 years, so for most of our marriage any debts have been in my name. She has a credit card (opened in 1999) that she has not used for years and she is also a secondary card holder on an American Express card and a MasterCard that are both in my name (she has not used the cards as we try to keep them only for emergencies). This would seem to indicate that the dealer is correct.  Your wife has no credit history.   You say that you paid off her student loans some years back.  If \"\"some years\"\" was more than seven, then they have dropped off her credit report.  If that's the most recent credit activity, then she effectively has none.   Even if you get past that, note that she also doesn't have any income, which makes her a lousy co-signer.  There's no real circumstance where you couldn't pay for the car but she could based on the historical data.  She would have to get a job first.  Since they had no information on her whatsoever, they probably didn't even get to that.\""}
{"id": "467482", "text": "I thought to enlarge on user Zephyr's comment above. PC Financial seems to fail to calculate explicitly and then display the cashback reward return of 1%, for the benefit of consumers; does it want to conceal or mislead or conceal customers.  Anyhow, I show this using this info below. I'll just calculate using the rate for 'everywhere you shop', since many deem travel a luxury. (1) 20,000 PC points = $20 in Free Groceries Minimum redemption is 20,000 PC Points  (2) Earn 10 PC points for every $1 spent, everywhere you shop Earn 20 PC points for every $1 spent on travel services at pctravel.ca\u2020 Cashback Reward Rate = Reward/Expenditure. I find confusing the exposition '20,000 PC points = $20', because this is NOT the cost or expenditure; I regard this as the reward.  The key step is to calculate the expenditure needed to achieve this reward, which again is 20,000 PC points. Thus, we must attain (1) from (2), and must solve for \u00bf in this ratio problem: 10/20,000 = $1/\u00bf  ===> ? = $2000. So $2000 must be spent, to reap $20 as the reward. Altogether, cashback reward = $20/$2000 = 0.01 = 1%. QED. I Googled this card before, and I infer from this article that PC changed its cashback ratios: You get five PC points for every dollar you spend on your bank card at participating stores where President\u2019s Choice products are sold. This is a bit disappointing as I can do the math in my head and determine that the PC points rewards are only worth 0.5% of your purchase amount. I had expected at least 1% to compete with the top reward credit cards. Also, the webpage errs in the following; the 'cent' is supposed to be a dollar: PC points are worth one tenth of a cent each. So if you use the minimum allowable amount of PC points of 20,000, you will get $20.00 worth of groceries."}
{"id": "467509", "text": "\"Keep in mind that many checks are being cashed via scanner or photo. These can be home based, business based or ATM based systems. The key requirement is that the software has to be able to distinguish the \"\"written\"\" parts from the background parts. If the image doesn't have enough contrast for the edge detection to work, the check can't be easily processed. In that case a human looks at the image and decodes the image and processes the transaction. The image is not in color.  Many businesses scan the check and hand the original back to you after having the Point of Sale system process the image. Post 2001 the checks in the united states are no longer moved through the banking system, only their images. With the roll out of these image based systems, in the future almost no physical checks will be seen by banks. Therefore the actual ink color is not important, only the result.\""}
{"id": "467535", "text": "Each situation is different, but it has to do with assessing what the Company is trying to do. People always talk about WACC, but in reality, WACC is less important than figuring how how much debt a Company can support (determined by leverage and solvency statistics).  Here are a few things to think about:  -How stable are the Company's cash flows? (big difference between a Company that has multi-year contracts locked in place vs. variable/cyclical revenue streams; what type of Capex requirement is there?)  -What is the purpose of raising the capital? (growth vs. recapitalization; where are the proceeds going?)  -What collateral is available for creditors?  -What does working capital look like? (is there seasonality?)"}
{"id": "467771", "text": "\"If demand for real goods &amp; services is slow, they apparently play silly-buggers with the financial system by coming up with weird new forms of securities to buy from each other to make it look like they're doing useful with the money, when they're really just pushing it around between each other &amp; not really letting any of it \"\"dribble down\"\" to the peons.\""}
{"id": "467853", "text": "I did this for the last tax year so hopefully I can help you. You should get a 1099-B (around the same time you're getting your W-2(s)) from the trustee (whichever company facilitates the ESPP) that has all the information you need to file. You'll fill out a Schedule D and (probably) a Form 8949 to describe the capital gains and/or losses from your sale(s). It's no different than if you had bought and sold stock with any brokerage."}
{"id": "468010", "text": "Start as soon as you can and make your saving routine.  Start with whatever you feel comfortable with and be consistent.  Increase that amount with raises, income gains, and whenever you want."}
{"id": "468049", "text": "I realize this is a stale topic, but to anybody who may swing by looking for an answer to this question (on the recently revised W-8BEN), a foreign taxpayer can get an individual taxpayer identification number (ITIN) without being resident in the US.  However, an ITIN will often not be necessary for W-8BEN purposes if you have a tax number from your local jurisdiction.  Check the Form W-8BEN instructions for your specific situation, but some taxpayers will need neither a US-issued ITIN nor a foreign-issued TIN. Forming a Delaware or Nevada LLC would be expensive and generally subject to federal and state tax and filing obligations.  It would also moot the need for a W-8BEN, which only applies to foreign taxpayers; the equivalent form for domestic taxpayers is Form W-9."}
{"id": "468086", "text": "If you have the skills and the desire, you can start small as a side business while working a regular job. Get client referrals from friends and friends of friends that utilize your services. I know a few small business owners who started companies exactly that way. Eventually their side gig, became their main gig. Some sold out for millions and others are enjoying what they do, and now employ other people to assist them."}
{"id": "468178", "text": "\"A paper EE series US Savings Bond is what is called a zero-coupon bond: you buy it at a discount from the face value (50% discount for US Savings Bonds), and it earns interest though you don't get the interest as cash (that you could invest elsewhere). Instead, the interest earned increases the  redemption value of the bond -- the money that you will receive if you take the bond to your bank to cash it in before the maturity date. When the bond finally matures, its redemption value has increased to the full face value.  The maturity date for paper EE series US Savings Bonds issued in May 1995 is 17 years. Now, with zero-coupon bonds in general, the IRS requires that the interest earned each year be reported as interest income even though you did not receive any cash income, and tax is due on the interest (unless it is a tax-free municipal bond or the bond is held in a tax-deferred investment such as an IRA or 401(k) plan). However, there is a special exemption for EE Series US Savings Bonds in that the owner has the option of not declaring the interest each year but instead reporting all the accumulated interest as interest income in the year of redemption. (Most people choose this option). It is not capital gains as you would like to be.   So, if your grandfather paid $11K$ for EE series US Savings Bonds in May 1995, the face value of the bonds he received was $22K, and, assuming that your grandfather followed typical practice, the bonds were worth $22K in May 2012, and $11K interest income needed to be declared that year.  This matches up pretty well with the amount the IRS told him was interest income on which he had to pay income tax (though the year is off by 3).  Now, your grandfather died in 2008, and what happened to the bonds depends on in whose name(s) the bonds were registered (e.g. was your father named as the survivor on the bond), or, if your grandfather was the sole owner, how your grandfather's estate was handled (the interest accrued till your grandfather died belonged to the estate). Note also that EE series bonds continue to earn interest in years 18 through 30 after they mature, but at maturity, the interest rate is reset by the Treasury, usually to the long-term interest rate which has been very small over the past many years. So, the interest earned in 2012-2015 when your father effectively redeemed the bond is small enough that the \"\"approximately $11K\"\" could be construed as covering $11.3K consisting of $11K of interest before maturity and $300 interest (at about 1% per annum) over the three-year post maturity period. The $100 interest earned by you for the current year sounds about right too. All in all, it might be the case that your grandfather bought the bonds in his name, your father's name, and your name (were you very young in 1995?), your father and you inherited the bonds in 2008, and then your father removed your grandfather's name from the bonds in 2015, thus transferring the bonds to his name and yours in 2015, and soon thereafter removed his name, transferring the bonds into your name alone. As to why 2015 and not 2008 when your grandfather passed away, did you turn 21 in 2015 (twenty years after the bonds were bought)?\""}
{"id": "468717", "text": "\"Do I make money in the stock market from other people losing money? Not normally.* The stock market as a whole, on average, increases in value over time. So if we make the claim that the market is a zero-sum game, and you only make money if other people lose money, that idea is not sustainable. There aren't that many people that would keep investing in something only to continue to lose money to the \"\"winners.\"\" The stock market, and the companies inside it, grow in value as the economy grows. And the economy grows as workers add value with their work.  Here's an analogy: I can buy a tree seed for very little and plant it in the ground. If I do nothing more, it probably won't grow, and it will be worth nothing. However, by taking the time to water it, fertilize it, weed it, prune it, and harvest it, I can sell the produce for much more than I purchased that seed for. No one lost money when I sell it; I increased the value by adding my effort.  If I sell that tree to a sawmill, they can cut the tree into usable lumber, and sell that lumber at a profit. They added their efforts and increased the value.  A carpenter can increase the value even further by making something useful (a door, for example). A retail store can make that door more useful by transporting it to a location with a buyer, and a builder can make it even more useful by installing it on a house.  No one lost any money in any of these transactions. They bought something valuable, and made it more valuable by adding their effort.  Companies in the stock market grow in value the same way. A company will grow in value as its employees produce things. An investor provides capital that the company uses to be able to produce things**, and as the company grows, it increases in value. As the population increases and more workers and customers are born, and as more useful things are invented, the economy will continue to grow as a whole.  * Certainly, it is possible, even common, to profit from someone else's loss.  People lose money in the stock market all the time.  But it doesn't have to be this way.  The stock market goes up, on average, over the long term, and so long term investors can continue to make money in the market even without profiting from others' failures. ** An investor that purchases a share from another investor does not directly provide capital to the company.  However, this second investor is rewarding the first investor who did provide capital to the company.  This is the reason that the first investor purchased in the first place; without the second investor, the first would have had no reason to invest and provide the capital.  Relating it to our tree analogy: Did the builder who installed the door help out the tree farmer?  After all, the tree farmer already sold the tree to the sawmill and doesn't care what happens to it after that.  However, if the builder had not needed a door, the sawmill would have had no reason to buy the tree.\""}
{"id": "468741", "text": "If you want to subcontract some of your excess work to somebody else, you better be in business!\u00a0 While some kinds of employees (e.g. commissioned salespeople) are permitted to deduct some expenses on their income tax, generally only a real business can deduct wages for additional employees, or the cost of services provided by subcontractors. Do you invoice your clients and charge HST (GST)?  Or do you tell your clients each pay period how many hours you worked and they compensate you through their payroll system like everybody else that walks through the door?  If you're not invoicing and charging HST (GST) (assuming you exceed the threshold, and if you have too much work, you probably do!), then perhaps your clients are treating you as an employee \u2013 by default \u2013 and withholding taxes, CPP, and EI so they don't get in trouble? After all, Canada Revenue Agency is likely to consider any person providing a service to a company to be an employee unless there is sufficient evidence to the contrary, and when there isn't enough evidence, it's the company paying for the services that would be on the hook for unpaid taxes, CPP, and EI. Carefully consider what form of business you are operating, or were intending to operate.  It's essential for your business to be structured appropriately if you want to hire or subcontract.  You ought to be either self-employed as a sole proprietor, or perhaps incorporated if it makes more sense to your situation.  Next, act accordingly. For instance, it's likely that your business should be taking care of the source deductions, CPP, and EI.  In fact, self-employed individuals shouldn't even be paying into EI \u2013 an independent contractor wouldn't qualify to make an EI claim if they lost a contract. As an independent, one doesn't have a job, one has a business, and EI doesn't cover the business itself, only the employees that the business deals with at arm's length.  As a business owner, you would be considered non-arms-length, and exempt from EI. Growing your business in the way that you are suggesting is an important enough a step that you should seek professional advice in advance.  Find a good accountant that deals with self-employed individuals & small businesses and run all this by him.  He should be able to guide you accordingly.  Find a lawyer, too.  A lawyer can guide you on how to properly subcontract others while protecting you and your business. Finally, be mindful of what it is you agreed to in your contract with your client:  Do they expect all services to be performed by you, personally?  Even if it wasn't written down who exactly would be performing the services, there may be an assumption it's you.  Some negotiation may be in order if you want to use subcontractors."}
{"id": "468937", "text": "Isn't it a bit more like job recruiters?  I get an offer letter that a recruiter neither I nor the seller hired steps in, negotiates a lower pay for me, a higher pay from them and scoops the money inbetween?  This isn't adding value anywhere, that value was taken from my home and the business that now have less to work with, when everyone would be better off if the business and I came to a deal in the middle.  There is no added value, nothing is produced at all. Just skimming off the top."}
{"id": "469100", "text": "You didn't give enough information.  What is your goal?  What is your financial situation?   A discount to buy company stock can seem very tempting.  I was tempted by it myself, gee, almost 20 years ago.  I still own some of the stock.  But I held mutual funds first. There are two disadvantages that have disuaded me from partaking in the ESPP of my subsequent employers (one of which was a spin-out company of the stock-issuing company, the other having bought the spin-out).  First, putting a bunch of money in a single stock is rather risky.  single stocks will drop dramatically due to market conditions.  Generally market conditions don't act so dramatically on all stock.  Second, is it wise to put not only your salary but also your saved wealth all in one basket? It worked out reasonably well for me.  The stock doubled right before my division was spun out -- I sold half of my position.    And the resulting stock has continued to provide opportunities to diversify.  However, it could have just as easily dropped in half instead of doubled. What is your timeline for holding the stock -- for realizing any gain?  Can you afford patience if the stock value should drop in half? I have co-workers who continue to invest through our new company's ESPP.  At least one co-worker has the stated goal to sell after every purchase -- he holds the stock long enough to make a long-term gain instead of short term, but he sells after every purchase.  And it seems to him that the stock always drops right when he wants to sell."}
{"id": "469125", "text": "Leverage increase returns, but also risks, ie, the least you can pay, the greater the opportunity to profit, but also the greater the chance you will be underwater. Leverage is given by the value of your asset (the house) over the equity you put down. So, for example, if the house is worth 100k and you put down 20k, then the leverage is 5 (another way to look at it is to see that the leverage is the inverse of the margin - or percentage down payment - so 1/0.20 = 5). The return on your investment will be magnified by the amount of your leverage. Suppose the value of your house goes up by 10%. Had you paid your house in full, your return would be 10%, or 10k/100k. However, if you had borrowed 80 dollars and your leverage was 5, as above, a 10% increase in the value of your house means you made a profit of 10k on a 20k investment, a return of 50%, or 10k/20k*100. As I said, your return was magnified by the amount of your leverage, that is, 10% return on the asset times your leverage of 5 = 50%. This is because all the profit of the house price appreciation goes to you, as the value of your debt does not depend on the value of the house. What you borrowed from the bank remains the same, regardless of whether the price of the house changed. The problem is that the amplification mechanism also works in reverse. If the price of the house falls by 10%, it means now you only have 10k equity. If the price falls enough your equity is wiped out and you are underwater, giving you an incentive to default on your loan. In summary, borrowing tends to be a really good deal: heads you win, tails the bank loses (or as happened in the US, the taxpayer loses)."}
{"id": "469141", "text": "When you are starting out using a balanced fund can be quite advantageous. A balanced fund is represents a diversified portfolio in single fund. The primary advantage of using a balanced fund is that with it being a single fund it is easier to meet the initial investment minimum.  Later once you have enough to transition to a portfolio of diversified funds you would sell the fund and buy the portfolio. With a custom portfolio, you will be better able to target your risk level and you might also be able to use lower cost funds.  The other item to check is do any of the funds that you might be interested in for the diversified portfolio have lower initial investment option if you can commit to adding money on a specified basis (assuming that you are able to). Also there might be an ETF version of a mutual fund and for those the initial investment amount is just the share price. The one thing to be aware of is make sure that you can buy enough shares that you can rebalance (holding a single share makes it hard to sell some gain when rebalancing). I would stay away from individual stocks until you have a much larger portfolio, assuming that you want to invest with a diversified portfolio. The reason being that it takes a lot more money to create a diversified portfolio out of individual stocks since you have to buy whole shares. With a mutual fund or ETF, your underlying ownership of can be fractional with no issue as each fund share is going to map into a fraction of the various companies held and with mutual funds you can buy fractional shares of the fund itself."}
{"id": "469596", "text": "\"Again, the quote by Politifact:  \"\"*The numbers check out. And in fact, the total public debt has dropped another $22 billion since the Gateway Pundit article published, according to data from the U.S. Department of Treasury.*\"\"  Anything not clear here?  What's not clear is how \"\"mostly False\"\" is true.\""}
{"id": "469601", "text": "Here's an answer received elsewhere. Yes, it looks like you have a pretty good understanding the concept   and the process. Your wife's income will be so low - why? If she is a full-time student in any of those months, you may   attribute $250 x 2 children worth of income for each of those months. Incidentally, even if you do end up paying taxes on the extra $3000,   you won't be paying the employee's share of Social Security and   Medicare (7.65%) or state disability on those funds. So you still end   up saving some tax money. No doubt, there's no need to remind you to be sure that you submit all   the valid receipts to the administrator in time to get reimbursed.  And a must-have disclaimer:   Please be advised that, based on current IRS rules and standards, any advice contained herein is not intended to be used, nor can it be used, for the avoidance of any tax penalty that the IRS may assess related to this matter. Any information contained in this email, whether viewed or subsequently printed, cannot be relied upon as qualified tax and accounting advice. ... Any information contained in this email does not fall under the guidelines of IRS Circular 230."}
{"id": "469806", "text": "Yes, that's right, which is why you should get in on it quick, before it goes up even more.   Think about it, one Bitcoin now could buy you a house in about a decade. It'll be the only currency of value in just a few years."}
{"id": "469835", "text": "\"In theory, investing is not gambling because the expected outcome is not random; people are expecting positive returns, on average, with some relationship to risk undertaken and economic reality. (More risk = more returns.) Historically this is true on average, that assets have positive returns, and riskier assets have higher returns. Also it's true that stock market gains roughly track economic growth. Valuation (current price level relative to \"\"fundamentals\"\") matters - reversion to the mean does exist over a long enough time. Given a 7-10 year horizon, a lot of the variance in ending price level can be explained by valuation at the start of the period. On average over time, business profits have to vary around a curve that's related to the overall economy, and equity prices should reflect business profits. The shorter the horizon, the more random noise. Even 1 year is pretty short in this respect. Bubbles do exist, as do irrational panics, and milder forms of each. Investing is not like a coin flip because the current total number of heads and tails (current valuation) does affect the probability of future outcomes. That said, it's pretty hard to predict the timing, or the specific stocks that will do well, etc. Rebalancing gives you an objective, automated, unemotional way to take advantage of all the noise around the long-term trend. Rather than trying to use judgment to identify when to get in and out, with rebalancing (and dollar cost averaging) you guarantee getting in a bit more when things are lower, and getting out a bit more when things are higher. You can make money from prices bouncing around even if they end up going nowhere and even if you can't predict the bouncing. Here are a couple old posts from my blog that talk about this a little more:\""}
{"id": "469938", "text": "greenspans is arguing that the company isn't capable of negoiating away a promise, because if workers want to make this deal, they might be able to turn it into a good one.   It's like winning the lottery in a sense. I can either take payments of $20,000 for the rest of my life, or I can get $6 million now. Well the lottery doesn't continue payments after my death. So I need that money now, so I can turn it into real currency. Take out taxes and I actually have something that I can turn into a better asset.   Some of these folks will fuck up, mind you, but they should be given the opportunity to succeed. Maybe in their area there's some property they can invest in with their payment.  Obviously if the majority of the workers are underwater, giving them a short-term payout to clear their debts before they start begging the state for money probably won't work out well, but again, they should at least be allowed their own choice in the matter."}
{"id": "470062", "text": "If I remember correctly, once you're about to exceed the threshold you really don't have a choice and have to register for VAT. As DumbCoder mentions, the quarterly VAT returns isn't that much of a hassle, plus if you fall under a certain threshold, you can sign up for the annual accounting scheme for VAT, which means you'll have to only put in a single return, but HMRC takes more payments out over the course of the year. This is what I did when I ran my own limited company in the UK."}
{"id": "470232", "text": ""}
{"id": "470334", "text": "\"Edited answer, given that I didn't address the emergency fund aspect originally: None. You've said you don't feel comfortable locking it away where you wouldn't be able to get to it in an emergency. If you don't like locking it away, the answer to \"\"How much money should I lock up in my savings account?\"\" is none. On a more personal note, the interest rates on bonds are just awful. Over five years, you can do better.\""}
{"id": "470708", "text": "I do not believe that this was a case of insider trading. As an example, one of the executives sold only 4% of his total. Now consider that between the 3 of them, the amount sold was only $1.8M. These amounts are minuscule and are in no way indicative of any misconduct. My opinion."}
{"id": "470716", "text": "If the savings rate is the same as the loan rate, mathematically it doesn't make any difference whether you pay down the loan more and save less or vice versa. However, if the loan rate is higher than the savings rate it's better to pay it down as fast as possible. The chart below compares paying down the loan and saving equally (the gradual scenario), versus paying down the loan quickly at 2 x $193 and then saving 2 x $193.  The savings rate, for illustration, is 2%. Paying quickly pays down the loan completely by month 51.  On the other hand, in the gradual scheme the loan can't be paid down (with the savings) until month 54, which then leaves 3 months less for saving.  In conclusion, it's better to pay down the higher rate loan first.  Practically speaking, it may be useful to have some savings available."}
{"id": "470861", "text": "You shouldn't be picking stocks in the first place. From New York Magazine, tweeted by Ezra Klein: New evidence for that reality comes from Goldman Sachs, via Bloomberg News. The investment bank analyzed the holdings of 854 funds with $2.1 trillion in equity positions. It found, first of all, that all those \u201csophisticated investors\u201d would have been better off stashing their money in basic, hands-off index funds or mutual funds last year \u2014 both of them had higher average returns than hedge funds did. The average hedge fund returned 3 percent last year, versus 14 percent for the Standard & Poor\u2019s 500.  Mutual funds do worse than index funds. Tangentially-related to the question of whether Wall Street types deserve their compensation packages is the yearly phenomenon in which actively managed mutual funds underperform the market. Between 2004 and 2008, 66.21% of domestic funds did worse than the S&P Composite 1500. In 2008, 64.23% underperformed. In other words, if you had a fund manager and his employees bringing their skill and knowledge to bear on your portfolio, you probably lost money as compared to the market as a whole. That's not to say you lost money in all cases. Just in most. The math is really simple on this one. Stock picking is fun, but undiversified and brings you competing with Wall Streeters with math Ph.Ds. and twenty-thousand-dollars-a-year Bloomberg terminals. What do you know about Apple's new iPhone that they don't? You should compare your emotional reaction to losing 40% in two days to your reaction to gaining 40% in two days...  then compare both of those to losing 6% and gaining 6%, respectively. Picking stocks is not financially wise. Period."}
{"id": "470968", "text": "\"&gt;Most small business lawsuits are a result of either gross negligence on the business owners part (which would be justified) or terrible or misleading service (again justified). If you're going to do honest business, take responsibility for the work done, and do your due diligence to manage what goes on in your four walls, you'll be fine.   Either that or they are over very \"\"silly\"\" things that general liability insurance will handle -- stuff like slips/falls in front of your retail storefront, etc.\""}
{"id": "471257", "text": "Here's a description. The relevant discussion for tax year 2010 starts on page 22 of the 1040 instructions."}
{"id": "471439", "text": "Not really. A bank will honor a million dollar check if there are funds there to let it clear."}
{"id": "471472", "text": "A 401(k) is just a container. Like real-world containers (those that are usually made out of metal), you can put (almost) anything you want in it. Signing up for your employer's match is a great thing to do. Getting into the habit of saving a significant portion of your take-home pay early in your career is even better; doing so will put you lightyears ahead of lots of people by the time you approach retirement age. Even if you love your job, that will give you options you otherwise wouldn't have. There is no real reason why you can't start out by putting your retirement money in a short-term money-market fund within that 401(k). By doing so you will only earn a pittance, probably not even enough to keep up with inflation in today's economic environment, but at this point in your (savings and investment) career, that doesn't really matter much. What really matters is getting into the habit of setting that money aside every single time you get paid and not thinking much of it. And that's a lot easier if you start out early, especially at a time when you likely have received a significant net pay increase (salaried job vs college student). I know, everyone says to get the best return you can. But if you are just starting out, and feel the need to be conservative, then don't be afraid to at least start out that way. You can always rebalance into investment classes that have the potential for higher return -- and correspondingly higher volatility -- in a few years. In the meantime, you will have built a pretty nice capital that you can move into the stock market eventually. The exact rate of return you get in the first decade matters a lot less than how much money you set aside regularly and that you keep contributing. See for example Your Investment Plan Means Nothing If You Don\u2019t Do This by Matt Becker (no affiliation), which illustrates how it takes 14 years for saving 5% at a consistent 10% return to beat saving 10% at a consistent 0% return. So look through what's being offered in terms of low-risk investments within that 401(k). Go ahead and pick a money-market fund or a bond fund if you want to start out easy. If it gets you into the habit of saving and sticking with it, then the overall return will beat the daylights out of the return you would get from a good stock market fund if you stop contributing after a year or two. Especially (but not only) if you do pick an interest-bearing investment, do make sure to pick one that has as low fees as you can possibly find for what you want, because otherwise the fees are going to eat a lot into your potential returns, benefiting the bank or investment house rather than yourself. Just keep an open mind, and very strongly consider shifting at least some of your investments into the stock market as you grow more comfortable over the next several years. You can always keep a portion of your money in various interest-bearing investments to act as a cushion in case the market slumps."}
{"id": "471592", "text": "##CHAPS The Clearing House Automated Payment System or CHAPS is a British company established in London in February 1984, which offers same-day sterling fund transfers.  A CHAPS transfer is initiated by the sender to move money to the recipient's account (at another banking institution) where the funds need to be available (cleared) the same working day. Unlike with a bank giro credit, no pre-printed slip specifying the recipient's details is required. Unlike cheques, the funds transfer is performed in real-time removing the issue of float or the potential for payments to be purposely stopped by the sender, or returned due to insufficient funds, even after they appear to have arrived in the destination account.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&amp;message=Excludeme&amp;subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/finance/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove"}
{"id": "471668", "text": "\"The S&P 500 index from 1974 to present certainly looks exponential to me (1974 is the earliest data Google has).  If you read Jeremy Siegel's book there are 200 year stock graphs and the exponential nature of returns on stocks is even more evident.  This graph only shows the index value and does not include the dividends that the index has been paying all these years.  There is no doubt stocks have grown exponentially (aka have grown with compound interest) for the past several decades and compounded returns is definitely not a \"\"myth\"\".  The CAGR on the S&P 500 index from 1974 to present has been 7.54%: (1,783 / 97.27) ^ (1 / 40) - 1 Here is another way to think about compounded investment growth: when you use cash flow from investments (dividends, capital gains) to purchase more investments with a positive growth rate, the investment portfolio will grow exponentially.  If you own a $100 stock that pays 10% dividends per year and spend the dividends every year without reinvesting them, then the investment portfolio will still be worth $100 after 40 years.  If the dividends are reinvested, the investment portfolio will be worth $4,525 after 40 years from the many years of exponential growth: 100*(1 + 10%)^40\""}
{"id": "471686", "text": "As I understand it (please correct me if i'm wrong, i've looked at this before and i've been a sole trader briefly but I've never formed a LTD company) there are pros and cons to forming a limited company. Pros Cons"}
{"id": "471723", "text": "AAPL will not drop out of NASDAQ100 tomorrow. From your own quote: The fund and the index are rebalanced quarterly and reconstituted annually"}
{"id": "471730", "text": "Brokers have the right to charge interest on any stock that they lend you. Since you borrowed the TSLA to short it, the owner of those shares can charge you interest until you return them. If you are not getting charged interest on some shares that you have borrowed to short, consider it generosity on the part of the lender."}
{"id": "471911", "text": "Depends entirely on the stock and your perception of it. Would you buy it at the current price? If so, keep it. Would you buy something else? If so, sell it and buy that."}
{"id": "471949", "text": "The way banks generally work is that the front line staff input the ltv, and various data, and are just given a price for the day/week/month. There might be a few bps of maneuverability, but there's not much negotiation to be had. The bank picks its price based on statistical analysis and market knowledge."}
{"id": "471957", "text": "\"My wife and I have close to equal incomes, and are not young.  What we have is this: Some people would classify our system as a bit draconian as we each have \"\"allowance\"\"; however, it makes sure spending does not get out of wack and we work together to meet our goals.\""}
{"id": "471995", "text": "Indeed you are correct sir. But my response would be: does the customer/regulator not also have a model? And can a financial company exist without these two stakeholders explicit endorsement? Models always have assumptions: the key is figuring out what they are and why they should or shouldn't be made. I would argue that any investor sophisticated enough to be stooging around with leveraged ETFs, CDS index tranches, or illiquid long dated interest rate swaps better have a damn good reason to buy 'em...and if their model breaks is that the fault of the bank or the customer?"}
{"id": "472332", "text": "Vehicles (plural, because I'd be filling multiple roles, and also because I'd really prefer to have spare parts). Self-sufficient farm with machine shop, heavy-duty fabric production/sewing capacity. Hunting/camping gear. That kind of thing.  I have about $600 in student loan debt remaining, which should be gone in the next year. No car loan (own my truck outright), don't own a house, carry 0 balance on my credit card. I suspect I'm a bit older than you (28) and I'm finding increasingly that I'm feeling financially strained by both current needs and projected needs. Moreso future than current, as a matter of fact, though I am unemployed right now. No matter how I look at it, barring some exceptional luck, there's no good way to obtain what I feel is needed to ensure that I can retire in safety. The current system basically forces you to take on nigh-crippling debt and hope like hell you can remain employed almost constantly through the most productive years of your life so that you may retire with some degree of security.  75K would make me feel a lot closer, but it only really deals with the immediate concerns and gives me room to hope to rectify the future ones in the next decade. If it were a completely foolproof 75K with no chance of vanishing, it'd go a lot further -- but still wouldn't alleviate my worries entirely."}
{"id": "472470", "text": "Stock acquired through a (non-taxable) stock dividend has the same holding period as the stock on which the dividend was paid."}
{"id": "472500", "text": "\"Some companies have a steady, reliable, stream of earnings. In that case, a low P/E ratio is likely to indicate a good stock. Other companies have a \"\"feast or famine\"\" pattern, great earnings one year, no earnings or losses the following year. In that case, it is misleading to use a P/E ratio for a good year, when earnings are high and the ratio is low. Instead, you have to figure out what the company's AVERAGE earnings may be for some years, and assign a P/E ratio to that.\""}
{"id": "472516", "text": "I can't speak for all brokerages but the one I use requires cash accounts to have cash available to purchase the stock in this situation. With the cash available you would be able to purchase the stock if the option was exercised.  Hope this helps"}
{"id": "472527", "text": "Yep, basically no loans for me for at least two years and new credit cards are at a higher interest rate then I'm comfortable with.  That's fine.  I have two cars that are fully paid for, just paid off one credit card last week and will have the other one paid off before the end of the year. And I have a savings account with a positive balance.  All of this happened by moving to a different house where my rent is $1,500 per month cheaper than I was paying on a house."}
{"id": "472702", "text": "Borrow the lot (as your family recommended)! The extra money will come in useful when you want to buy a house and move back to the area where your employer is. The government loan in the UK is a fantastic system, just a shame they are charging you so much in tuition fees..."}
{"id": "472824", "text": "You are either VAT registered or you are not VAT registered.  If you are not VAT registered, then you are not allowed to charge customers VAT, and you cannot reclaim VAT that you are paying. You are however allowed to deduct the cost of goods including VAT from your expenses. So if you buy a computer for \u00a31000 + \u00a3200 VAT, and you can deduct the computer as an expense to reduce your profits that you pay income tax for, then the expense is \u00a31,200 and not just \u00a31,000.  If you are VAT registered, then you MUST charge every customer 20% VAT. Business customers don't mind at all, but private customers will be happier if you don't charge VAT because your bills will be a lot lower. You take all the VAT that you received, then subtract all the VAT that you paid for business expenses and that you have invoices for, and send the remainder to HMRC four times a year. (The reason that businesses don't mind paying VAT is because they can in turn deduct the VAT they pay you from the VAT that they received and for every pound they give you, they give one pound less to HMRC). Note that when you have expenses that are deductible from your profits, you can now only deduct the cost excluding VAT. On the other hand, the VAT you receive doesn't count as income and doesn't lead to profits that you need to pay income tax for. It's your decision whether you want to be VAT registered or not, unless your revenue exceeds some limit (somewhere between \u00a370,000 and \u00a380,000 per year) where you must register for VAT."}
{"id": "473274", "text": "No, most check deposits are processed that way. Banks transmit the pictures of the checks between themselves, and allow business customers to deposit scans for quite some time now. I see no reason for you to be concerned of a check being in a dusty drawer, it's been deposited, cannot be deposited again. If you're concerned of forgery - well, nothing new there."}
{"id": "473387", "text": "Wait I'm confused maybe you can explain  I'm in the federal reserve and I buy a hundred pounds of coin material for 180 dollars. I put that material into a magic penny machine and get a hundred pounds of pennies. My hundred pounds of pennies will now have a value of 100 dollars.    I had a hundred pounds of mass worth $180 and now have a hundred pounds of mass worth $100.  Where did the 80 dollars go?"}
{"id": "473427", "text": "I read your question that you have a comfortable amount toward retirement.  If not, pad your retirement accounts if possible. If your loan rate is locked at 2.67%, invest that money in the market and pay the loan as agreed.  So long as you feel comfortable in your employment and income status for the next few years, I would bet you will get a lot more out of your cash investing in diversified, low cost funds or ETFs that you will save in interest on that loan. Finally, if you decide to lower your debt instead of increasing investments (based on your tolerance for risk) why not pay more on the mortgage?  If you owe most of your mortgage and it is typically long term, you might cut many years off of the mortgage with a large payment."}
{"id": "473510", "text": "You should not buy soley for the dividend. The price of BHP is going down for a reason. If you hold until the full years dividend is paid you will make 11% (which is $110 if you bought $1000 worth of shares), but if the share price keeps dropping, you might lose 50% on the stock. So you make $110 on dividends but lose $500 on stock price drop. A perfect way to lose money."}
{"id": "473776", "text": "Because someone smarter than you by 50 IQ points (a quant) will depart their larger position long before you have a chance to see it coming. Your stop losses are useless as the market will open with the issue below your sell price. Your trade even if place at the same mine would settle after theirs. don't piss in the tall grass with the big dogs. If they are wrong or right does not matter you will be haircut or whipsawed."}
{"id": "474050", "text": "Set him up to take credit cards just as a convenience thing, and he can advertise that he accepts all major credit cards.    I've been helping my mother set up farmers to do this at the Farmer's  Market she manages.  [Squareup](https://squareup.com/) is ridiculously easy to set up.  You just need a smart phone (iphone or android based) and one of their little square reader thingies that fit into the audio jack, an email, and bank account routing info.  Set up time is ten minutes the first day, 3 minutes once the confirmation info is accounted for.  You can buy the readers at Walgreens...Best Buy...lots of random places, and Squareup reimburses you the $10 cost of the reader so it ends up being free.  I made a test account and I was able to receive funds directly into my bank account within about 4 days."}
{"id": "474129", "text": "\"There's a few layers to the Momentum Theory discussed in that book. But speaking in general terms I can answer the following: Kind of. Assuming you understand that historically the Nasdaq has seen a little more volatility than the S&P. And, more importantly, that it tends to track the tech sector more than the general economy.  Thus the pitfall is that it is heavily weighted towards (and often tracks) the performance of a few stocks including: Apple, Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Amazon, Intel and Amgen.  It could be argued this is counter intuitive to the general strategy you are trying to employ. This could be tougher to justify.  The reason it is potentially not a great idea has less to do with the fact that gold has factors other than just risk on/off and inflation that affect its price (even though it does!); but more to do with the fact that it is harder to own gold and move in and out of positions efficiently than it is a bond index fund.   For example, consider buying physical gold.  To do so you have to spend some time evaluating the purchase, you are usually paying a slight premium above the spot price to purchase it, and you should usually also have some form of security or insurance for it.  So, it has additional costs.  Possibly worth it as part of a long-term investment strategy; if you believe gold will appreciate over a decade. But not so much if you are holding it for as little as a few weeks and constantly moving in and out of the position over the year. The same is true to some extent of investing in gold in the form of an ETF.  At least a portion of \"\"their gold\"\" comes from paper or futures contracts which must be rolled every month.  This creates a slight inefficiency.  While possibly not a deal breaker, it would not be as attractive to someone trading on momentum versus fundamentals in my opinion. In the end though, I think all strategies are adaptable.  And if you feel gold will be the big mover this year, and want to use it as your risk hedge, who am I or anyone else to tell you that you shouldn't.\""}
{"id": "474234", "text": "\"What you are looking for is a pretty terrible deal for you, so I'd say it doesn't exist because there isn't a market for it, or nobody has noticed there is a market for it. In principle I would happily take the deal you offer from as many people as would let me, put the money into treasury bills, and take half the profits while doing pretty much nothing.    If I had more risk tolerance I would be pretty happy to have half the value of my \"\"fund\"\" as zero cost investment capital for more aggressive investments.  My business would then be a lot like an insurance company without the hassle of selling insurance to get hold of float to invest.  Also, most insurance companies actually lose money on policies, but come out ahead by investing the float, so an insurance company with zero cost float is quite a good business. Another answer mentions Berkshire Hathaway.  If you read one of the famous Berkshire Hathaway annual letters to shareholders and read the section about insurance you'll see that very low cost float has a large role in that company's success. So, back to your end of the deal: if the deal is that good for me, how good is it for you?  I'd have to double market returns just for you to break even.  If you're smart enough to pick a financial adviser that can beat the market by that much, how come you aren't able to pick an investment strategy that ties the market?\""}
{"id": "474296", "text": "\"Spend your first 50 euros on research materials. Warren Buffett got started as a boy by reading every book in the Library of Congress on investing and stock market analysis. You can research the company filings for Canadian companies at http://www.sedar.com, U.S companies at http://www.edgar.com, and European companies at https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/companies-house. Find conflicting arguments and strategies and decide for yourself which ones are right. The Motley Fool http://www.fool.ca offers articles on good stocks to add to your portfolio and why, as well as why not. They provide a balanced judgement instead of just hype. They also sell advice through their newsletter. In Canada the Globe & Mail runs a daily column on screening stocks. Every day they present a different stock-picking strategy and the filters used to reach their end list. They then show how much that portfolio would have increased or decreased as well as talking about some of the good & bad points of the stocks in the list. It's interesting to see over time a very few stocks show up on multiple lists for different strategies. These ones in my opinion are the stocks to be investing in. While the Globe's stock picks focus on Canadian and US exchanges, you might find the strategies worthwhile. You can subscribe to the digital version at http://www.theglobeandmail.com  Once you have your analytical tools ready, pick any bank or stock house that offers a free practice account. Use that account and their screening tools to try out your strategies and see if you can make money picking stocks.  My personal stock-picking strategy is to look for companies with: - a long uninterrupted history of paying dividends, - that are regularly increased, - and do not exceed the net profit per share of the company - and whose share price has a long history of increasing These are called unicorn companies, because there are so very few of them.  Another great read is, \"\"Do Stocks Outperform Treasury Bills?\"\" by Hendrik Bessembinder. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2900447 In this paper the author looks at the entire history of the U.S. stock universe and finds that less than 4% of stocks are responsible for 100% of the wealth creation in the U.S. stock market. He discusses his strategies for picking the winners, but it also suggests that if you don't want to do any research, you could pick pretty much any stock at random, short it, and wait. I avoid mutual funds because they are a winner only for the fellas selling them. A great description on why the mutual fund industry is skewed against the investor can be found in a book called \"\"The RRSP Secret\"\" by Greg Habstritt. \"\"Unshakeable\"\" by Tony Robbins also discusses why mutual funds are not the best way to invest in stocks. The investor puts up 100% of the money, takes 100% of the risk, and gets at best 30% of the return. Rich people don't invest like that.\""}
{"id": "474384", "text": "From 26 CFR 1.1012(c)(1)i): ... if a taxpayer sells or transfers shares of stock in a corporation that the taxpayer purchased or acquired on different dates or at different prices and the taxpayer does not adequately identify the lot from which the stock is sold or transferred, the stock sold or transferred is charged against the earliest lot the taxpayer purchased or acquired to determine the basis and holding period of the stock. From 26 CFR 1.1012(c)(3): (i) Where the stock is left in the custody of a broker or other agent, an adequate identification is made if\u2014   (a) At the time of the sale or transfer, the taxpayer specifies to such broker or other agent having custody of the stock the particular stock to be sold or transferred, and ... So if you don't specify, the first share bought (for $100) is the one sold, and you have a capital gain of $800. But you can specify to the broker if you would rather sell the stock bought later (and thus have a lower gain). This can either be done for the individual sale (no later than the settlement date of the trade), or via standing order: 26 CFR 1.1012(c)(8) ... A standing order or instruction for the specific identification of stock is treated as an adequate identification made at the time of sale, transfer, delivery, or distribution."}
{"id": "474467", "text": "You only got 75 shares, so your basis is the fair market value of the stock as of the grant date times the number of shares you got: $20*75.  Functionally, it's the same thing as if your employer did this: As such, the basis in that stock is $1,500 ($20*75). The other 25 shares aren't yours and weren't ever yours, so they aren't part of your basis (for net issuance; if they were sell to cover, then the end result would be pretty similar, but there'd be another transaction involved, but we won't go there).  To put it another way, suppose your employer paid you a $2000 bonus, leaving you with a $1500 check after tax withholding. Being a prudent person and not wishing to blow your bonus on luxury goods, you invest that $1500 in a well-researched investment. You wouldn't doubt that your cost basis in that investment at $1500."}
{"id": "474512", "text": "\"In the US, and in most other countries, dividends are considered income when paid, and capital gains/losses are considered income/loss when realized. This is called, in accounting, \"\"recognition\"\". We recognize income when cash reaches our pocket, for tax purposes. So for dividends - it is when they're paid, and for gains - when you actually sell. Assuming the price of that fund never changes, you have this math do to when you sell: Of course, the capital loss/gain may change by the time you actually sell and realize it, but assuming the only price change is due to the dividends payout - it's a wash.\""}
{"id": "474575", "text": "$10k isn't really enough to make enough money to offset the extremely high risks in investing in options in this area. Taking risks is great, but a sure losing proposition isn't a risk -- it's a gamble. You're likely to get wiped out with leveraged options, since you don't have enough money to hedge your bets. Timing is critical... look at the swings in valuation in the stock market between the Bear Sterns and Lehman collapses in 2009. If you were highly leveraged in QQQQ that you bought in June 2009, you would have $0 in November. With $10k, I'd diversify into a mixture of foreign cash (maybe ETFs like FXF, FXC, FXY), emerging markets equities and commodities. Your goal should be to preserve investment value until buying opportunities for depressed assets come around.  Higher interest rates that come with inflation will be devastating to the US economy, so if I'm betting on high inflation, I want to wait for a 2009-like buying opportunity. Then you buy depressed non-cyclical equities with easy to predict cash flows like utilities (ConEd), food manufacturers (General Mills), consumer non-durables (P&G) and alcohol/tobacco. If they look solvent, buying commodity ETFs like the new Copper ETFs or interests in physical commodities like copper, timber, oil or other raw materials with intrinsic value are good too.  I personally don't like gold for this purpose because it doesn't have alot of industrial utility. Silver is a little better, but copper and oil are things with high intrinsic value that are always needed. As far as leverage goes, proceed with caution. What happens when you get high inflation? High cost of capital."}
{"id": "474745", "text": "Investopedia laid out the general information of tax treatment on the ETF fund structures as well as their underlying asset classes: http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0213/how-tax-treatments-of-etfs-work.aspx"}
{"id": "474842", "text": "No, not a consultant. I'm a systems administrator and part of my job is doing due dilligence on purchases. The reliability of a company is always a factor in large purchases and CEO behavior is a factor in that. When it comes to minor or temporary purchases (bottled water) the CEO and company behavior is irrelevant."}
{"id": "474896", "text": "On the one hand, it's a great idea to open a Roth IRA now, once you've got the cash to contribute. It's a tax designation sounds like it would fit your meager earnings this year. The main reason to open one now rather than later is that some types of withdrawls require the account be aged 5 years. But you can also withdraw the amount you've contributed tax free any time. Student loans right now are pricey, so if you're carrying a balance at say 6.8 percent fixed you should pay that down ASAP. Beyond that, I'd keep the rest liquid for now. Having that kind of liquid cash is extremely reassuring, and many of the biggest returns on investment are going to be in your personal life. More fuel efficient vehicles, energy efficient appliances, computer backups, chest freezers and bulk meat purchases, etc.  One example I see every six months is car insurance: I can pay for six months in full or I can pay a smaller monthly bill plus a small fee. That fee is well above current market rates. You see this everywhere; people searching for lower minimum payments rather than lower total costs. Save your money up and be the smart buyer. It's too damn expensive to be broke."}
{"id": "474962", "text": "I'm hearing that I should maybe wait and see how things go at first as it is only a very small operation.   But if I moved into a side of the trade where I require staff, vehicles, and the likes then I would need to registed as a limited company."}
{"id": "475042", "text": "Is it a gift or a loan? Either way, ask the same lawyer who will do the closing to record a mortgage on the property, your mother holds it.  You are required to pay her market interest, 4% or so should pass IRS scrutiny.  If it's truly a loan, decide on the payoff time and calculate the payments, she'll have a bit of interest income which will be taxable to her, and you might have a write-off if you itemize, which is unlikely.  If it's a gift, since you mentioned gift concerns, she can forgive the interest, and principal each year to total $13K, or file the popular Form 709 to declare the whole gift against her $1M unified lifetime gift exclusion (which negates the whole mortgage/lien thing)"}
{"id": "475104", "text": "The debt is a problem but IF (and the key word is if) other nations are lending to us at rates we dictate, then that is not a problem.  But if our own banks, Central Bank, and the like are buying it then the problem is being kept on our shores.  The issue is with fractional reserve lending, one will always have this issue but if other nations give us items/services for paper/pixels we send them why not continue."}
{"id": "475397", "text": "There is no advantage to using one type of account or the other if you are in the same tax bracket at retirement that you are in during your working years. However, for tax planning reasons, it is good to have some money in both a Roth and a traditional IRA plan.  JoeTaxpayer has often advocated a good rule of thumb to use a Roth when your tax bracket is 15% or lower, and use a traditional account when in the 25% bracket or above. The reason for this rule of thumb is that you are less likely to be in the higher tax bracket when you are living off retirement savings unless you put away an awful lot of money between now and then. If you are making enough money to be paying a 25% marginal rate on some of the money you would be putting away for retirement, then by all means, put all of that money in a traditional 401k. If after contributing that portion of your savings taxed at the higher rate, you still have money to put away for retirement, put the rest in a Roth and pay the 15% taxes on it. When you are younger, it is likely that you are making less than you will a few years hence, and it is also likely that a larger portion of your income will be paying tax deductible interest on a mortgage. If those are true for you, then by all means, use the Roth. That was true of me when I was single and just getting started. When you do finally retire, it is possible that the tax brackets will be increased to match inflation, and if so, then there is no benefit to having tax free money at retirement vs. paying taxes on deferred accounts, but there is also usually more flexibility in when to spend money. You may find that you have a year where you have to spend a lot, so it is good to be able to pull money out without it increasing your marginal rate for that year, and other years where you spend relatively smaller amounts, and you can withdraw taxable money and pay a lower rate on that money. No one knows what the tax code will look like in 40 years, but having some money in each type of account will give you flexibility to minimize your tax bill at retirement."}
{"id": "475640", "text": "All mutual funds disclose their investments, funds are large cap only or midcsp etc. So it depends on what funds you choose."}
{"id": "475663", "text": "I know I'm late to the party, but a couple of rebuttals as a recent bitcoin advocate. I may be out of place in this subreddit as I come from a primarily technological background, not a financial one.   &gt; Bittcoin is not a currency, it's a store of value, because it is not widely accepted as tender by most people.  Bitcoin is not a currency *yet*, but because it does not have widespread adoption *yet*. Like other revolutionary technologies, there is an [inflection point](https://medium.com/@mcasey0827/speculative-bitcoin-adoption-price-theory-2eed48ecf7da) where adoption goes from hardly anyone to almost everyone very quickly. [Example chart](https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/0*E4eb7wxHinGNdYQq.)  &gt;Even as a store of value, it's not very good. It's volatile and the fact that there is a limited supply of bitcoin is not a good thing. Sure, in the short run it results in speculation that drives up the price of a coin and makes it all the rage among gamblers but I don't think anyone can explain how, if used on a larger scale, wouldn't lead to deflation in the price of goods.  To me, this is basic supply and demand, and it would in theory become less volatile and more stable following mass adoption. Bitcoin has virtually no inflation, and I agree that this could lead to the deflation of goods, but only insofar as that valuation is determined in bitcoin. For example, milk is still $2, but as the value of bitcoin fluctuates, I may pay .001 BTC or .0005 BTC for that milk. It's important to remember we're dealing with a digital asset in an increasingly more digitized world, a point-of-sale device like we use for credit cards could certainly tackle that conversion in the future.   &gt;Also, at the end of the day, fiat currencies are based on trust and accountability of the government. How does Bitcoin or any other online currency solve that problem? There's no accountability, and it effectively acts as as an anti-currency, fueled by mistrust in the establishment.  This is the best part of bitcoin, understanding the incentives. If you follow that supply and demand logic, then it is in the best interest of *everyone who uses bitcoin* that the bitcoin software and the system itself be reliable and secure. The software is open source so anyone can see how it works and where its flaws and weaknesses are - and it is still standing strong after 8 years. The biggest weakness so far has been in software updates and changes to the core protocol. Without any central structure (i.e. accountability) it can be slow to reach a democratic consensus is such a way that doesn't split the blockchain or fracture the network. This has led to some of the recent extreme volatility.   Bitcoin (and some other cryptocurrencies) have tremendous potential to disrupt existing financial institutions. The private blockchains peddled by banks are at this point [just databases](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMEOKDVXlUo&amp;index=2&amp;list=LL7mI3EyFeE83Ac-VtxNUhxA). At some point, these institutions will realize that they can't create their own Facebook, they need to find ways to become part of the new Facebook market."}
{"id": "475668", "text": "For reference see this article.  This article does an okay job of explaining why, but it could be better.  To expand on point #4 if you lose your job, you will be forced to repay the loan in 90 days.  If do not pay it back in time, you will be hit with your highest marginal tax rate and a 10% penalty.  How does borrowing money at 40% interest sound? Why do you have credit card debt?  I'll give you the loving answer:  bad behavior.  The longer you hold this debt the more indicative it is about out of control behavior.   To remedy this I would recommend the following: While you are behaving like most people (normal); most people are broke.  Congratulations on having the desire to not be broke.  Do you now have the courage to change?  Having that courage could mean generational wealth building and freedom from debt. As a reformed overspender it has meant exactly that for me and my family."}
{"id": "475748", "text": "Adapted from an answer to a somewhat different question. Generally, 401k plans have larger annual expenses and provide for poorer investment choices than are available to you if you roll over your 401k investments into an IRA. So, unless you have specific reasons for wanting to continue to leave your money in the 401k plan (e.g. you have access to investments that are not available to nonparticipants and you think those investments are where you want your money to be), roll over your 401k assets into an IRA. But I don't think that is the case here.  If you had a Traditional 401k, the assets will roll over into a Traditional IRA; if it was a Roth 401k, into a Roth IRA. If you had started a little earlier, you could have considered considered converting part or all of your Traditional IRA into a Roth IRA (assuming that your 2012 taxable income will be smaller this year because you have quit your job). Of course, this may still hold true in 2013 as well.  As to which custodian to choose for your Rollover IRA, I recommend investing in a low-cost index  mutual fund such as VFINX which tracks the S&P 500 Index. Then, do not look at how that fund is doing for the next thirty years.  This will save you from the common error made by many investors when they pull out at the first downturn and thus end up buying high and selling low. Also, do not chase after exchange-traded mutual funds or ETFs (as many will likely recommend) until you have acquired more savvy or interest in investing than you are currently exhibiting. Not knowing which company stock you have, it is hard to make a recommendation about selling or holding on. But since you are glad to have quit your job, you might want to consider making a clean break and selling the shares that you own in your ex-employer's company. Keep the $35K (less the $12K that you will use to pay off the student loan) as your emergency fund. Pay off your student loan right away since you have the cash to do it."}
{"id": "476088", "text": "I have a Citi card that gives me checks all of the time.  Most of the time it requires the 3%/minimum $10 or whatever, but occasionally when they're trying to sucker you into borrowing money from them they will let you take $1,500 w/ no fee for 6 months.  Outside of that I've never seen it exist in modern credit cards."}
{"id": "476224", "text": "The market maker will always take it off your hands. Just enter a market sell order. It will cost you a commission to pull the loss into this year. But that's it."}
{"id": "476517", "text": "Your idea is a good one, but, as usual, the devil is in the details, and implementation might not be as easy as you think.  The comments on the question have pointed out your Steps 2 and 4 are  not necessarily the best way of doing things, and that perhaps  keeping the principal  amount invested in the same fund instead of taking it all out and re-investing it in a similar, but different, fund might be better. The other points for you to consider are as follows. How do you identify which of the thousands of conventional mutual  funds and ETFs is the average-risk / high-gain mutual fund into which you will place your initial investment?  Broadly speaking, most actively managed mutual fund with average risk are likely to give you  less-than-average gains over long periods of time.  The  unfortunate truth, to which many pay only Lipper service, is that  X% of actively managed mutual funds  in a specific category failed  to beat the average gain of all funds in that category, or the  corresponding index, e.g. S&P 500 Index for large-stock mutual funds, over the past N years, where X is generally between 70 and  100, and N is 5, 10, 15 etc.  Indeed, one of the arguments in  favor of investing in a very low-cost index fund is that you are effectively guaranteed the average gain (or loss :-(, don't forget the possibility of loss). This, of course, is also the argument used against investing in index funds.  Why invest in boring index funds and settle for average gains (at essentially no risk of not getting the average performance: average performance is close to guaranteed) when you can  get much more out of your investments by investing in a fund that is among the (100-X)% funds that had better than average returns?  The difficulty is that which funds are X-rated and which non-X-rated (i.e. rated G = good or PG = pretty good), is known only in hindsight whereas what you need is foresight. As everyone will tell you, past performance does not guarantee future results.  As someone (John Bogle?) said,  when you invest in a mutual fund, you are in the position of a rower in rowboat: you can see where you have been but not where you are going.  In summary, implementation of your strategy needs a good crystal ball to look into the future. There is no such things as a guaranteed bond fund. They also have risks though not necessarily the same as in a stock mutual fund. You need to have a Plan B in mind in case your chosen mutual fund takes a longer time than expected to return the 10% gain that you want to use to trigger profit-taking and investment of the gain into a low-risk bond fund, and also maybe a Plan C in case the vagaries of the market cause your chosen mutual fund to have negative return for some time. What is the exit strategy?"}
{"id": "476812", "text": "I'll give you a stark example of China's debt-driven construction growth: Since '09 China has constructed enough physical office space buildings to give every Chinese man, woman, and child their own cubicle - 3 times over! Given that these buildings were largely financed by debt, its hard to see how those creditors get all their money back given that there simply are not enough Chinese people to occupy and pay/rent that space in order for break-even to occur."}
{"id": "477011", "text": "When you can exercie your option depends on your trading style. In the american options trading style (the most popular) you're allowed to exercice your options and make profit (if any) whenever you want before the expiration date. Thus, the decision of  exercising your option and make a profit out of it does not rely only on the asset price. The reason is, you already paid for the premium to get the option. So, if taken into account the underlying price AND your premium, your investment is profitable then you can exercice your contract anytime."}
{"id": "477172", "text": "The answer to this question requires looking at the mathematics of the Qualified Dividends and Capital Gains Worksheet (QDCGW). Start with Taxable Income which is the number that appears on Line 43 of Form 1040.  This is after the Adjusted Gross Income has been reduced by the Standard Deduction or Itemized Deductions as the case may be, as well as the exemptions claimed.   Then, subtract off the Qualified Dividends and the Net Long-Term Capital Gains (reduced by Net Short-Term  Capital Losses, if any) to get the non-cap-gains part of the Taxable Income. Assigning somewhat different meanings to the numbers in the OPs' question, let's say that the Taxable Income is $74K of which $10K is Long-Term Capital Gains leaving $64K as the the non-cap-gains taxable income on Line 7 of the QDCGW.   Since $64K is smaller than $72.5K (not $73.8K as stated by the OP) and this is a MFJ return, $72.5K - $64K = $8.5K of the long-term capital gains are taxed at 0%. The balance $1.5K is taxed at 15% giving $225 as the tax due on that part.   The 64K of non-cap-gains taxable income has a tax of $8711 if I am reading the Tax Tables correctly, and so the total tax due is $8711+225 = $8936.  This is as it should be; the non-gains income of $64K was assessed the tax due on it, $8.5K of the cap gains were taxed at 0%, and $1.5K at 15%. There are more complications to be worked out on the QDCGW for high earners who attract the 20% capital gains rate but those are not relevant here."}
{"id": "477175", "text": "I use the self-directed option for the 457b plan at my job, which basically allows me to invest in any mutual fund or ETF. We get Schwab as a broker, so the commissions are reasonable. Personally, I think it's great, because some of the funds offered by the core plan are limited. Generally, the trustees of your plan are going to limit your investment options, as participants generally make poor investment choices (even within the limited options available in a 401k) and may sue the employer after losing their savings. If I was a decision-maker in this area, there is no way I would ever sign off to allowing employees to mess around with options."}
{"id": "477226", "text": "The gift card for specific stores has no fee. In our budget of nearly $500/mo for supermarket, it would be easy to just buy 10 x $500 cards, and then be careful with them.  A look at your past 12 mo of spending should provide a hint what GCs might work for you.  Else, for a $4.95 fee, I've bought $500 generic Visa cash cards. When my new credit card offered a 10% cash bonus for spending, I spent. Took us nearly 18 months to burn thru 500 cards. But a net $4500 gain was sweet.  Update - the cash card racks all appear to have a sign that these cards may no longer be bought with a credit card."}
{"id": "477295", "text": "Look at the aristocrat dividend paying stocks (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%26P_500_Dividend_Aristocrats).  These all pay dividends and have consistently outperformed the S&P 500 - 10.6% vs 7.4% the last ten years. While stocks should not be generally considered for short-term investing, I personally think the market is showing a general up trend for the next few years.  Also, the dividends add an additional buffer.   Because you would be making regular monthly investments, you should choose a fund that invests in  aristocrat stocks so you can set up an automatic  depost."}
{"id": "477316", "text": "The old truck is collateral for a loan. The place that made the loan expects that if you can't pay they can repossess that old truck. If you sell it they can't repossess it.  The dealer needs clean title to be able to buy the truck from you, so they can fix up the truck and sell it to somebody else. I am assuming the the lender has filed paperwork with the state to show their lien on the title. Your options are three: As to option 2: If the deal still makes sense the new car dealer can send the $9,000 to the lender that you forgot about. That will of course increase the amount of money you have to borrow.  You will also run into the problem that this loan that you forgot to mention on your credit application may cause them to rethink the decision to loan you the money."}
{"id": "477405", "text": "Hahaha, why are you responding then. You can't disagree with facts. The national debt has gone down while trump had been you're president. That is a fact brought to you. Y the congressional budget office.  Under obama the debt went up 89% or 9 TRILLION DOLLARS. What is there to refute?"}
{"id": "477588", "text": "\"Yes, if it's an American style option. American style options may be exercised at any time prior to expiration (even if they're not in-the-money). Generally, you are required to deliver or accept delivery of the underlying by the beginning of the next trading day. If you are short, you may be chosen by the clearinghouse to fulfill the exercise (a process called \"\"assignment\"\"). Because the clearinghouse is the counter-party to every options trade, you can be assigned even if the specific person who purchased the option you wrote didn't exercise, but someone else who holds a long position did. Similarly, you might not be assigned if that person did exercise. The clearinghouse randomly chooses a brokerage to fulfill an assignment, and the brokerage will randomly choose an individual account. If you're going to be writing options, especially using spreads, you need to have a plan ahead of time on what to do if one of your legs gets assigned. This is more likely to happen just before a dividend payment, if the payment is more than the remaining time value.\""}
{"id": "477597", "text": "If you take the profit or loss next year, it counts on next year's taxes.  There's no profit or loss until that happens."}
{"id": "477907", "text": "In general, saving money should be prioritized over extra debt payments. Every dollar that you spend paying down a debt will decrease the amount of principal owed; this will directly decrease the future interest payments you will make. However, as time goes on, you are dealing with a smaller and smaller set of principal; additionally, it is assumed that your income will grow (or at least keep pace with inflation), making the debt more bearable. On the other hand, every dollar you save (or invest) now will increase your future income - also making the future debt more bearable. Not only that, but the longer you save, the more value to you get from having saved, meaning you should save as early as possible. Finally, the benefits of paying down the mortgage early end when the mortgage is completely paid off, while the benefits of saving will continue (and even grow) after the house is owned free and clear.  That is, if you have an extra $100,000 to put into the mortgage during the life of the loan, you could sink that into the mortgage and see it disappear, or you could invest it, and reap the dividends for the rest of your life. Caveat emptor: behavior trumps numbers. This only works if you will actually be disciplined about saving the extra money rather than paying off debt. If you're the kind of person for whom money burns a hole in your pocket until you spend it, then use it on debt. But if you are able to save and invest that money, you will be better off in the long run."}
{"id": "478026", "text": "Can I bring a bankers cheque or DD from singapore bank . Yes you can.  Remember if they are payable in Singapore, i.e. SGD denominated, they will take time to clear; typically around a month. Alternatively you can approach an Indian Bank in Singapore they can arrange for a Rupee draft payable in city of your choice. The Banks also have a facility of opening an NRE account in the city/Branch of your choice by opening account with wire transfer.  I do not have time for NRE account Money can be transferred into your NRO account as well. You could also use remittance services that provide better exchange rates."}
{"id": "478060", "text": "\"The primary advantage of HFTs is their speed to act upon opportunities that exist for only fractions of a second. The reason why they are able to do this is because they invest heavily in hardware, custom software, and custom algorithms.  Most of the fleeting advantage, as they all manage to top each other's hardware seemingly every other day, is from the hardware investment.  To see the extremes that HFTs will go to invest in hardware, one might view this. It is highly likely that the trader with the market making algorithm could have been ignorant of the \"\"hide not slide\"\" order and missed out on many more opportunities while still being successful.  Haim Bodek, who is very much against this order type, was not so lucky. If it was truly an investment bank then it was unlikely that they were actually front running, which is very illegal and easily possible with much more low tech means, since companies like Citadel handle most orders now, and they have not been successful in investment banking. The reality of HFT is slowly coming to light, that while HFT can provide extremely consistent returns with enormous sharpe ratios, the capital investment is equally enormous, and the amount of capital that can be employed is also as enormously limited.  After all, the richest people on the planet are not HFT owners. Also, when it comes to time periods longer than 500ms, their results become very human.\""}
{"id": "478469", "text": "Power Options is one such example of what you seek, not cheap, but one good trade will recover a year's fee.  There's a lot you can do with the stock price alone as most options pricing will follow Black Scholes.  Keep in mind, this is a niche, these questions, while interesting to me, generate little response here."}
{"id": "478480", "text": "Rate of return is (Current value - initial value) divided by initial value. Buy $10,000 worth of put options and sell them for $15,000, and your rate of return is 0.5, or 50%."}
{"id": "478600", "text": "\"The tax comes when you close the position. If the option expires worthless it's as if you bought it back for $0. There's a short-term capital gain for the difference between your short-sale price and your buyback price on the option. I believe the capital gain is always short-term because short sales are treated as short-term even if you hold them open more than one year. If the option is exercised (calling away your stock) then you add the premium to your sale price on the stock and then compute the capital gain. So in this case you can end up treating the premium as a long-term capital gain. See IRS pub 550 http://www.irs.gov/publications/p550/ch04.html#en_US_2010_publink100010619 Search for \"\"Writers of puts and calls\"\"\""}
{"id": "479093", "text": "\"If a country had a genuine completely flat income tax system, then it wouldn't matter who paid the tax since it doesn't depend on the employee's other income. Since not many countries run this, it doesn't really make sense for the employee to \"\"take the burden\"\" of the tax, as opposed to merely doing the administration and paying the (probable) amount of tax at payroll, leaving the employee to use their personal tax calculation to correct the payment if necessary. Your prospective employer is probably saying that your tax calculation in Singapore is so simple they can do it for you. They may or may not need to know a lot of information about you in order to do this calculation, depending what the Singapore tax authorities say. If you're not a Singapore national, they may or may not be relying on bilateral tax agreements with your country to assert that you won't have to pay any further tax on the income in your own country. It's possible they're merely asserting that you won't owe anything else in Singapore, and in fact you will have taxes to report (even if it's just reporting to your home tax authority that you've already paid the tax). Still, for a foreign worker a guarantee you won't have to deal with the local tax authority is a good thing to have even if that's all it is. Since there doesn't appear to be any specific allowance for \"\"tax free money\"\" in the Singapore tax system, it looks like what you have here is \"\"just\"\" the employer agreeing to do something that will normally result in the correct tax being paid in your behalf. This isn't uncommon, but it's also not exactly what you asked for. And in particular if you have two jobs in Singapore then they can't both be doing this, since tax is not flat. The example calculation includes varying tax rates for the first X amount of income that (I assume without checking) are per person, not per employment. Joe's answer has the link. In practice in the UK (for example), there are plenty of UK nationals working in the UK who don't need to do a full tax return and whose tax is collected entirely at source (between PAYE and deductions on bank interest and suchlike). In this sense the employer is required by law to take the responsibility for doing the admin and making the tax payments to HMRC. Note that a UK employer doesn't need to know your circumstances in detail to make the correct payroll deductions: all they need is a so-called \"\"tax code\"\", which is calculated by HMRC and communicated to the employer, and which basically encodes how much they can pay you at zero rate before the various tax rate tiers kick in. That's all the employer needs to know here for the typical employee: they don't need to know precisely what credits and liabilities resulted in the figure. However, these employers still don't offer empoyees a net salary (that is, they don't take on the tax burden), because different employees will have different tax codes, which the employer would in effect be cancelling out by offering to pay two people the same net salary regardless of their individual circumstances. The indications seem to be that the same applies in Singapore: this offer is really a net salary subject to certain assumptions (the main one being that you have no other tax liabilities in Singapore). If you're a Singapore millionaire taking that job for fun, you might find that the employer doesn't/can't take on your non-standard tax liability on this marginal income.\""}
{"id": "479240", "text": "I like the answers others gave, if it's some substantial debt you definitely could go the bankruptcy route but it damages your future, also it's morally unethical to borrow all that money and not intend to pay. Second, if you can pay off the entire balance and clear out the 23% interest than I'd do that first. One less bill to concern yourself with. Now let's say you've been making $100 payments monthly on each card (my assumption for this examples sale) now instead of paying $100 to the remaining cards balance each month and saving the other $100, pay $200 against the remaining credit cards balance. By not taking home any money this way you are tackling the liability that is costing you money every month. Unless you have a great investment opportunity on that remaining $1000 or haven't created much of an emergency fund yet, I'd consider putting more of that money towards the debt. Gaining 0.01% on savings interest still means you're eating 25.99% in debt monthly. If you're able to I'd venture out to open a zero interest card and do a balance transfer over to that new card, there will be a minimal transfer fee but you may get some cash back out of it and also that zero interest for a year would help hold off more interest accruing while you're tackling the balance."}
{"id": "479351", "text": "&gt;[While Argentina has the money to pay the interest it owes, a U.S. judge\u2019s ruling bars it from passing the funds to holders before settling with the so-called holdout creditors that won an order for full repayment on defaulted debt from 2001. Argentine officials say the plaintiffs have rebuffed all offers for a deal.](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-04/argentine-default-sours-outlook-for-peso-as-talks-ordered.html)"}
{"id": "479454", "text": "If you're not insolvent, doing something like this is both a moral and legal hazard: When you are insolvent, the tax and moral hazard issues can be a non-issue. Setting up a scenario that makes you appear to be insolvent is where the fraud comes in. If you decide to go down this road, spend a few thousand dollars on competent legal advice."}
{"id": "479461", "text": "\"The S&P 500 is an index. This refers to a specific collection of securities which is held in perfect proportion. The dollar value of an index is scaled arbitrarily and is based off of an arbitrary starting price. (Side note: this is why an index never has a \"\"split\"\"). Lets look at what assumptions are included in the pricing of an index: All securities are held in perfect proportion. This means that if you invest $100 in the index you will receive 0.2746 shares of IBM, 0.000478 shares of General Motors, etc. Also, if a security is added/dropped from the list, you are immediately rebalancing the remaining money. Zero commissions are charged. When the index is calculated, they are using the current price (last trade) of the underlying securities, they are not actually purchasing them. Therefore it assumes that securities may be purchased without commission or other liquidity costs. Also closely related is the following. The current price has full liquidity. If the last quoted price is $20 for a security, the index assumes that you can purchase an arbitrary amount of the security at that price with a counterparty that is willing to trade. Dividends are distributed immediately. If you own 500 equities, and most distributed dividends quarterly, this means you will receive on average 4 dividends per day. Management is free. All equities can be purchased with zero research and administrative costs. There is no gains tax. Trading required by the assumptions above would change your holdings constantly and you are exempt from short-term or long-term capital gains taxes. Each one of these assumptions is, of course, invalid. And the fund which endeavors to track the index must make several decisions in how to closely track the index while avoiding the problems (costs) caused by the assumptions. These are shortcuts or \"\"approximations\"\". Each shortcut leads to performance which does not exactly match the index. Management fees. Fees are charged to the investor as load, annual fees and/or redemptions. Securities are purchased at real prices. If Facebook were removed from the S&P 500 overnight tonight, the fund would sell its shares at the price buyers are bidding the next market day at 09:30. This could be significantly different than the price today, which the index records. Securities are purchased in blocks. Rather than buying 0.000478 shares of General Motors each time someone invests a dollar, they wait for a few people and then buy a full share or a round lot. Securities are substituted. With lots of analysis, it may be determined that two stocks move in tandem. The fund may purchase two shares of General Motors rather than one of General Motors and Ford. This halves transaction costs. Debt is used. As part of substitution, equities may be replaced by options. Option pricing shows that ownership of options is equivalent to holding an amount of debt. Other forms of leverage may also be employed to achieve desired market exposure. See also: beta.  Dividends are bundled. VFINX, the largest S&P 500 tracking fund, pays dividends quarterly rather than immediately as earned. The dividend money which is not paid to you is either deployed to buy other securities or put into a sinking fund for payment. There are many reasons why you can't get the actual performance quoted in an index. And for other more exotic indices, like VIX the volatility index, even more so. The best you can do is work with someone that has a good reputation and measure their performance.\""}
{"id": "479593", "text": "I can see that building credit is a valid reason. I would also suggest another scenario, when you have locked up money in long-term savings, with a substantial penalty for early withdrawal. If you suddenly needed money then you might save money by borrowing against the long-term deposit rather than pay the penalties. This is especially true if you needed the money only for a short time."}
{"id": "479779", "text": "You're in a good spot: making good money with prospects for that to continue for the foreseeable future. Even if/when you quit dancing nursing pays quite well. Leaving all that money in a savings account is a mistake. At a minimum: Open an IRA account at any of the discount brokers (Schwab, Fidelity, etc). Roth is fine to start, once your taxable income goes up consider switching to a traditional IRA. Max out your IRA every year. Invest in low-fee index funds. There are frankly too many options these days, but an S&P 500 Index fund is almost never a mistake. Open a regular taxable investment account where you can invest additional money. Leave some cash/savings for emergencies. But if you do #3 you can always sell some investments in a cash emergency. Yes, it may lose money in the short term, but given your steady income, not a huge concern. I think if you read all the investment advice out there, you'll see a familiar theme along these lines. Your nest egg will grow considerably when you invest."}
{"id": "479781", "text": "\"I've found that good old fashioned \"\"Monopoly\"\" teaches children about cash flow, mortgaging properties, and paying income taxes.\""}
{"id": "480160", "text": "Dividend is a payment which is paid by the company after getting profit or interest is plus paid amount which we get on our income.we can pick up the dividend as a form of interest on our investment"}
{"id": "480238", "text": "They can go to an ATM and deposit it in to their account. The ATM does not care to read the name, and the bank does not care to verify anything if the check goes through (meaning the bank it is drawn on pays). So if nobody complains, that's it, he has your money. You would need to go to the check-writer's bank and ask for help, or look at the check-writer's cancelled check copy if you get to it. That bank can find out where it was deposited to, and then you have to go after the guy and get your money back - if it is still recoverable! - if it is a poor sod and he already blew your 5 grand, you can sue his pants off, but there are no 5 grand in them anywhere. So bad luck for you. Technically, the bank is not supposed to accept the check if the name doesn't match. At the counter, that might get a question, but as said above, there are deposit ATMs, and he could also just endorse the check to himself and sign the endorsement with some illegible scrawling, and claim that this is your signature - how would Joe the teller know? Either way, he gets the check in his account, and then he can take it out and blow it. It is legally clearly theft or fraud, and probably a federal crime, but if the guy is bankrupt, that doesn't help you much. Depending on that bank's fine-print, they might or might not cover your loss, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Better don't lose a check."}
{"id": "480512", "text": "IRS Publication 529 is the go-to document.  Without being a tax professional, I'd say if the dues and subscriptions help you in the running of your business, then they're deductible. You're on your own if you take my advice (or don't). ;)"}
{"id": "480534", "text": "It doesn't matter if the shares are owned by an institution like an asset manager or by a retail investor like you or me - it is all counted and treated the same way in terms of the corporate actions involved (cash/stock payouts)."}
{"id": "480717", "text": "Are you an established business owner or looking to start a new business? We, at Valis International possess expertise in providing online incorporation services. Through our online incorporation services, we let you form a company in just a few minutes. All you need is to just fill in the personal information and our service provider does the rest of the work. Through our services, we can get your business incorporated for a reasonable cost."}
{"id": "480773", "text": "Overall, I strongly recommend cashing out your savings and becoming debt free today, and then never borrowing again except for a house. Advantages: Disadvantages: My wife and I paid of all of my grad school debt last year, and we\u2019re paying off all of her grad school debt this year.  To pay that aggressively, we\u2019ve had to learn to live on a much tighter budget.  But when we\u2019re done, if we simply invest what we have been paying toward debt into the stock market, our nest egg will compound to over $10 million by the time we retire.  According to Dave Ramsey, when the Forbes 400 were polled, 75% of them cited becoming and staying debt-free as the single best way to build wealth: http://www.daveramsey.com/article/three-steps-to-wealth-building-for-young-adults/lifeandmoney_college/text4/"}
{"id": "480808", "text": "Let me answer by parts: When a company gives dividends, the share price drops by the dividend amount.  Not always by that exact amount for many different reasons (e.g. there are transaction costs if you reinvest, dividend taxes, etc). I have tested that empirically. Now, if all the shareholders choose to reinvest their dividends, will the share price go back up to what it was prior to the dividend? That is an interesting question. The final theoretical price of the company does not need to be that. When a company distributes dividends its liquidity diminish, there is an impact on the balance sheet of the company. If all investors go to the secondary market and reinvest the dividends in the shares, that does not restore the cash in the balance sheet of the company, hence the theoretical real value of the company is different before the dividends. Of course, in practice there is not such a thing as one theoretical value. In reality, if everybody reinvest the dividend, that will put upward pressure over the price of the company and, depending on the depth of the offers, meaning how many orders will counterbalance the upward pressure at the moment, the final price will be determined, which can be higher or lower than before, not necessarily equal. I ask because some efts like SPY automatically reinvest dividends. So what is the effect of this reinvestment on the stock price? Let us see the mechanics of these purchases. When a non distributing ETF receives cash from the dividends of the companies, it takes that cash and reinvest it in the whole basket of stocks that compose the index, not just in the companies that provided the dividends. The net effect of that is a small leverage effect. Let us say you bought one unit of SPY, and during the whole year the shares pay 2% of dividends that are reinvested. At the end of that year, it will be equivalent to having 1.02 units of SPY."}
{"id": "480815", "text": "The reason the article recommends a Roth 401k for those who have a long time until retirement is based on your salary, marginal tax rates, and effective tax rates and some assumptions. You want to contribute to Roth IRAs when your marginal tax rate now is better than your effective tax rate at the time of withdrawal.  That is most likely to be true when your salary is smaller (for you) and your salary is most likely to be smaller (compared to your future salaries) when you have more years until retirement. The article is presenting a rule of thumb.   It won't hold true for everyone in every situation."}
{"id": "480879", "text": "&gt; The only problem I see with stock options is that they expire  You're on to something: the reason why some prefer to write (sell) options instead of buying. Neutral to bullish on crude oil? Sell puts on /CL at 90-95% probability OTM. You keep your money if the underlying moves up or does nothing, within the days to expiration."}
{"id": "480917", "text": "To address the travelers checks question: waste of time and money. I did this years ago, the fees were outrageous, it was a hassle to find some place to cash them, and in the end you're carrying cash anyway. Otherwise do what orokusaki said."}
{"id": "481001", "text": "\"Everyone who's giving a definite answer is just wrong - we just don't have enough information.  It depends on what these \"\"certificates\"\" say and what OP signed.    For all we know these are partnership agreements - or any old shit that some lawyer came up with.    Without seeing what, if anything, OP signed we're simply guessing as to what OP's legal and financial liability might be.\""}
{"id": "481070", "text": "An expired option is a stand-alone event, sold at $X, with a bought at $0 on the expiration date.  The way you phrased the question is ambiguous, as 'decrease toward zero' is not quite the same as expiring worthless, you'd need to buy it at the near-zero price to then sell another covered call at a lower strike.  Edit - If you entered the covered call sale properly, you find that an in-the-money option results in a sale of the shares at expiration. When entered incorrectly, there are two possibilities, the broker buys the option back at the market close, or you wake up Sunday morning (the options 'paperwork' clears on Saturday after expiration) finding yourself owning a short position, right next to the long. A call, and perhaps a fee, are required to zero it out.  As you describe it, there are still two transactions to report, the option at $50 strike that you bought and sold, the other a stock transaction that has a sale price of the strike plus option premium collected."}
{"id": "481114", "text": "I'm guessing you're asking about the US. Please add a location tag to your question.  Unfortunately you cannot claim expenses paid for someone other than yourself or your dependents. In IRS publication 970, that deals with education credits, they give the following guidance: Expenses paid by others.   Someone other than you, your spouse, or   your dependent (such as a relative or former spouse) may make a   payment directly to an eligible educational institution to pay for an   eligible student's qualified education expenses. In this case, the   student is treated as receiving the payment from the other person and,   in turn, paying the institution. If you claim an exemption on your tax   return for the student, you are considered to have paid the expenses. Also, you should keep the gift tax in mind: your help to your friend is only exempt from gift tax if you pay the tuition directly (i.e.: you write the check to the school cashier, not to your friend). If you give the money to your friend, it is subject to gift tax (which you have to pay). In some cases, someone who is not family may in fact qualify to become your dependent. For that he must live with you (in the same household), and be supported by you and not have any significant income. If that's the case with you and your friend, you might be able to claim him as a dependent and get some significant tax benefits, including the education credits. Consult your tax adviser if its relevant to your situation."}
{"id": "481176", "text": "\"We have what we call \"\"unallocated savings\"\" that go into a fund for this purpose. We'll also take advantage of \"\"6 months no interest\"\" or similar financing promotions, and direct this savings towards the payments.\""}
{"id": "481209", "text": "Yes. Of course, you still need to take into the account the trade costs (fees paid to the broker), these are not going anywhere. Basically what it means is that you don't have to worry about long/short holding period within the IRA, they're all the same. It doesn't mean that long term trading is better or worse to have outside the scope of IRA, it just means that the concept doesn't exist inside."}
{"id": "481283", "text": "Eric is right regarding the tax, i.e. ordinary income on discount, cap gain treatment on profit whether long term or short.  I would not let the tax tail wag the investing dog. If you would be a holder of the stock, hold on, if not, sell. You are considering a 10-15% delta on the profit to make the decision.  Now. I hear you say your wife hasn't worked which potentially puts you in a lower bracket this year. I wrote Topping off your bracket with a Roth Conversion which would help your tax situation long term. Simply put, you convert enough Traditional IRA (or 401(k) money) to use up some of the current bracket you are in, but not hit the next. This may not apply to you, depending on whether you have retirement funds to do this. Note - The cited article offers numbers for a single person, but illustrates the concept. See the tax table for the marginal rates that would apply to you."}
{"id": "481296", "text": "\"One thing people are missing is that you may not be eligible to contribute to a Roth IRA based on your MAGI. There are income \"\"phaseout\"\" ranges which determine how much, if it all you can contribute.\""}
{"id": "481339", "text": "There's an odd anomaly that often occurs with shares acquired through company plans via ESPP or option purchase. The general situation is that the share value above strike price or grant price may become ordinary income, but a sale below the price at day the shares are valued is a capital loss.  e.g. in an ESPP offering, I have a $10 purchase price, but at the end of the offering, the shares are valued at $100. Unless I hold the shares for an additional year, the sale price contains ordinary W2 income. So, if I see the shares falling and sell for $50, I have a tax bill for $90 of W2 income, but a $50 capital loss. Tax is due on $90 (and for 1K shares, $90,000 which can be a $30K hit) but that $50K loss can only be applied to cap gains, or $3K/yr of income.  In the dotcom bubble, there were many people who had million dollar tax bills and the value of the money netted from the sale couldn't even cover the taxes. And $1M in losses would take 300 years at $3K/yr.  The above is one reason the lockup date expiration is why shares get sold. And one can probably profit on the bigger companies stock.  Edit - see Yelp down 3% following expiration of 180 day IPO lock-up period, for similar situation."}
{"id": "481902", "text": "In 2015 there's a $5.43M (That's million, as in 6 zeros) estate exemption. Even though it's $14K per year with no paperwork required, if you go over this, a bit of paperwork will let you tap your lifetime exemption. There's no tax consequence from this.  The Applicable Federal Rate is the minimum rate that must be charged for this to be considered a loan and not a gift. DJ's answer is correct, otherwise, and is worth knowing as there are circumstances where the strategy is applicable. If the OP were a high net worth client trying to save his estate tax exemption, this (Dj's) strategy works just fine."}
{"id": "481987", "text": "So if a country forces their savings onto another country, say the U.S., the U.S. would have to absorb those savings somehow. If there were enough productive investments available, then this would be a good thing. But if there aren't enough productive investments available but the savings are still forced upon the U.S. it would seem that it would inevitably lead to some kind of a debt bubble for the U.S."}
{"id": "481999", "text": "I'd like to add that many companies offer Divident Re-Investment Plans or DRIPs, which is basically a regular automatic stock purchase program. More info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_reinvestment_plan. While your stock broker may offer dividend reinvestment, this is not the same as a DRIP. DRIPs are offered directly by the company, rather than the stock broker. They have the added benefits that the stock purchases are almost always commission-free, and in some cases, the company even offers a discount on the stock price. It can take a little more effort to get enrolled in a DRIP, but if you are interested in holding the stock long-term, this is a good option to consider."}
{"id": "482199", "text": "A minimum purchase quantity just means that you need to round your result up to the nearest 100. In your example it comes out evenly. If we look at an example where it doesn't come out even, you'd round up: And round that up to 700 due to purchase quantities. For a slightly more complex and accurate approach, you'd then evaluate how many of the extras you had to buy due to the minimum purchase quantity would need to be sold: So you'd have to sell 694 of the 700 purchased to break even."}
{"id": "482332", "text": "\"Yes. From their TOS: \"\"By creating a Square Account, you confirm that you are either a legal resident of the United States, a United States citizen, or a business entity...\"\".\""}
{"id": "482415", "text": "Long term gov't bonds fluctuate in price with a seemingly small interest rate fluctuation because many years of cash inflows are discounted at low rates.  This phenomenon is dulled in a high interest rate environment. For example, just the principal repayment is worth ~1/3, P * 1/(1+4%)^30, what it will be in 30 years at 4% while an overnight loan paying an unrealistic 4% is worth essentially the same as the principal, P * 1/(1+4%)^(1/365). This is more profound in low interest rate economies because, taking the countries undergoing the present misfortune, one can see that their overnight interest rates are double US long term rates while their long term rates are nearly 10x as large as US long term rates.  If there were much supply at the longer maturities which have been restrained by interest rates only manageable by the highly skilled or highly risky, a 4% increase on a 30% bond is only about a 20% decline in bond price while a 4% increase on a 4% bond is a 50% decrease. The easiest long term bond to manipulate quantitatively is the perpetuity where p is the price of the bond, i is the interest payment per some arbitrary period usually 1 year, and r is the interest rate paid per some arbitrary period usually 1 year.  Since they are expressly linked, a price can be implied for a given interest rate and vice versa if the interest payment is known or assumed. At a 4% interest rate, the price is At 4.04%, the price is , a 1% increase in interest rates and a 0.8% decrease in price . Longer term bonds such as a 30 year or 20 year bond will not see as extreme price movements. The constant maturity 30 year treasury has fluctuated between 5% and 2.5% to ~3.75% now from before the Great Recession til now, so prices will have more or less doubled and then reduced because bond prices are inversely proportional to interest rates as generally shown above. At shorter maturities, this phenomenon is negligible because future cash inflows are being discounted by such a low amount.  The one month bill rarely moves in price beyond the bid/ask spread during expansion but can be expected to collapse before a recession and rebound during."}
{"id": "482903", "text": "While @BrianRogers makes some good points, there are a few things you need to consider from the FICO perspective that I want to lay out simply for you:"}
{"id": "482963", "text": "If someone owns a house that is not paid off...can someone buy it by taking another mortgage? Yes, but I'm not sure why you think the buyer would need to take another mortgage to buy it. If someone sells their home for X dollars, then the buyer needs X dollars to buy the house. How they get that money (use cash, take out a mortgage) is up to them. During the closing process, a portion of the funds generated from the sale are diverted to pay off the seller's loan and any leftover funds after closing are pocketed by the seller. What kind of offer would be most sensible? I assume that in this case the current owner of the house would want to make a profit. The amount that the house is sold for is determined by the market value of their home, not by the size of the mortgage they have left to pay off. You make the same offer whether they own their home or have a mortgage."}
{"id": "483025", "text": "\"You've laid out a strategy for deciding that the top of the market has passed and then realizing some gains before the market drops too far.  Regardless of whether this strategy is good at accomplishing its goal, it cannot by itself maximize your long-term profits unless you have a similar strategy for deciding that the bottom of the market has passed.  Even if you sell at the perfect time at the top of the market, you can still lose lots of money by buying at the wrong time at the bottom. People have been trying to time the market like this for centuries, and on average it doesn't work out all that much better than just plopping some money into the market each week and letting it sit there for 40 years. So the real question is: what is your investment time horizon?  If you need your money a year from now, well then you shouldn't be in the stock market in the first place.  But if you have to have it in the market, then your plan sounds like a good one to protect yourself from losses. If you don't need your money until 20 years from now, though, then every time you get in and out of the market you're risking sacrificing all your previous \"\"smart\"\" gains with one mistimed trade.  Sure, just leaving your money in the market can be psychologically taxing (cf. 2008-2009), but I guarantee that (a) you'll eventually make it all back (cf. 2010-2014) and (b) you won't \"\"miss the top\"\" or \"\"miss the bottom\"\", since you're not doing any trading.\""}
{"id": "483147", "text": "\"No, because you didn't lose anything. When you exercise ISO \"\"at loss\"\" you're buying stock without a discount, that's it.\""}
{"id": "483218", "text": "The generic representative of interest rates is the 10 year treasury bond rate. (USA). As an approximation most other interest rates do tend to move up and down with the treasury rate, but with more or less sensitivity.  Another prominently discussed interest rate is the short term loan rate established by the Federal Reserve for loans it makes to banks."}
{"id": "483453", "text": "\"Yea. Almost every form I fill out wants to know \"\"Employer Name\"\". They don't even bother checking \"\"Are you Self Employed\"\". Of course, I end up writing \"\"Self Employed\"\" in employer name field anyway.   In the United States, it is even harder because EVERY state has their own labor and employment laws. You are a freelancer but what if you need to travel to a client site in a different state. Bam, you gotta file taxes for that state as well even if you made like a few hundred bucks.   Too much red tape and it is really hard to change.\""}
{"id": "483644", "text": "\"You cannot recharacterize a distribution from an IRA the way you can recharacterize a contribution. It the latter case, you are in effect telling your IRA custodian to treat the contribution as having been made to a different kind of an IRA from the very first day that the contribution was originally made. As described in JoeTaxpayer's answer, you can put back the distribution into the same IRA account or establish a new IRA account (of the same type) and deposit the distribution into the new account. Note carefully you have 60 days (not two months) to complete this maneuver and that postmarks don't count: the money must be deposited into the account, not just received by the custodian. Also, the 60-day clock starts on the day that the distribution was made by the IRA custodian and not the day you received the money. If you choose to put back the money into the \"\"wrong\"\" kind of IRA as described above, you can take a distribution from the \"\"right\"\" kind of IRA, and effectively achieve a kind of \"\"recharacterization\"\" of the net distribution, but the mechanics are more complicated and the deadlines a lot tighter.\""}
{"id": "483676", "text": "No, this isn't possible, especially not when you're trading a highly liquid stock like Apple. When you put in your buy order at $210, any other traders that have open limit sell orders with the correct parameters, e.g. price and volume, will have their order(s) filled. This will occur before you can put in your own sell order and purchase your own shares because the other orders are listed on the order book first. In the US, many tax-sheltered accounts like IRA's have specific rules against self-dealing, which includes buying and selling assets with yourself, so such a transaction would be prohibited by definition. Although I'm not entirely sure if this applies to stocks, the limitation described in the first paragraph still applies regardless. If this were possible, rest assured that high-frequency traders would take advantage of this tactic to manipulate share prices. (I've heard critics say that this does occur, but I haven't researched it myself or seen any data about it)"}
{"id": "483984", "text": "I'd be surprised if this ended in a materially-damaging final settlement. It may take more than 5 years to resolve, unless a smoking gun is produced. If PWC and outside counsel really issued written opinions, it could get a lot messier. Especially when we tip over into another recession, the IRS will come under intense Congressional pressure to cut a nominal deal."}
{"id": "484009", "text": "Standard options are contracts for 100 shares. If the option is for $0.75/share and you are buying the contract for 100 shares the price would be $75 plus commission. Some brokers have mini options available which is a contract for 10 shares. I don't know if all brokers offer this option and it is not available on all stocks. The difference between the 1 week and 180 day price is based on anticipated price changes over the given time. Most people would expect more volatility over a 6 month period than a 1 week period thus the demand for a higher premium for the longer option."}
{"id": "484110", "text": "Exactly - it is as if the Vulture Funds do not get that when you invest in something, it might just go to zero.  Well, I suppose that might be for us common investors, but not for all.  Bailouts, and this sort of thing is what to expect for those on the other side of the apartheid wall."}
{"id": "484112", "text": "FTA  &gt; In late July, the San Francisco-based bank lowered the minimum credit score on these fixed-rate jumbo mortgages to 700 from 720,  For comparison with the bubble years, mortgages were being issued to those with FICO scores under 620."}
{"id": "484149", "text": "mhoran answered the headline question, but you asked - Could someone shed some light on and differentiate between a retirement account and alternative savings plans? Retirement accounts can contain nearly anything that one would consider an investment. (yes, there are exception, not the topic for today). So when one says they have an S&P fund or ETF, and some company issued Bonds, etc, these may or may not be held in a retirement account.  In the US, when we say 'retirement account,' it means a bit more than just an account earmarked for that goal. It's an account, 401(k), 403(b), IRA, etc, that has a special tax status. Money can go in pre-tax, and be withdrawn at retirement when you are in a lower tax bracket. The Roth flavor of 401(k) or IRA lets you deposit post-tax money, and 'never' pay tax on it again, if withdrawn under specific conditions.  In 2013, a single earner pays 25% federal tax on taxable earnings over $36K. But a retiree with exactly $46K in gross income (who then has $10K in standard deduction plus exemption) has a tax of $4950, less than 11% average rate on that withdrawal. This is the effect of the deductions, 10% and 15% brackets.  As with your other question, there's a lot to be said about this topic, no one can answer in one post. That said, the second benefit of the retirement account is the mental partitioning. I have retirement money, not to be touched, emergency money used for the broken down car or appliance replacement, and other funds it doesn't feel bad to tap for spending, vacations, etc. Nothing a good spreadsheet can't handle, but a good way to keep things physically separate as well.   (I answered as if you are in US, but the answer works if you rename the retirement accounts, eg, Canada has similar tax structure to the US.)"}
{"id": "484313", "text": "Why don't people switch banks?  It's honestly not that hard.  Once I switched to a local credit union, I'll never use a big bank again.  The service is amazing and there are pretty much no fees for anything."}
{"id": "484349", "text": "\"I humbly disagree with #2. the use of Roth or pre-tax IRA depends on your circumstance. With no match in the 401(k), I'd start with an IRA. If you have more than $5k to put in, then some 401(k) would be needed.  Edit - to add detail on Roth decision. I was invited to write a guest article \"\"Roth IRAs and your retirement income\"\" some time ago. In it, I discuss the large amount of pretax savings it takes to generate the income to put you in a high bracket in retirement. This analysis leads me to believe the risk of paying tax now only to find tHat you are in a lower bracket upon retiring is far greater than the opposite. I think if there were any generalization (I hate rules of thumb, they are utterly pick-apartable) to be made, it's that if you are in the 15% bracket or lower, go Roth. As your income puts you into 25%, go pretax. I believe this would apply to the bulk of investors, 80%+.\""}
{"id": "484362", "text": "I'm sorry, but your math is wrong.  You are not equally likely to make as much money by waiting for expiration. Share prices are moving constantly in both directions.  Very rarely does any stock go either straight up or straight down.  Consider a stock with a share price of $12 today.  Perhaps that stock is a bad buy, and in 1 month's time it will be down to $10.  But the market hasn't quite wised up to this yet, and over the next week it rallies up to $15. If you bought a European option (let's say an at-the-money call, expiring in 1 month, at $12 on our start date), then you lost.  Your option expired worthless. If you bought an American option, you could have exercised it when the share price was at $15 and made a nice profit. Keep in mind we are talking about exactly the same stock, with exactly the same history, over exactly the same time period.  The only difference is the option contract.  The American option could have made you money, if you exercised it at any time during the rally, but not the European option - you would have been forced to hold onto it for a month and finally let it expire worthless. (Of course that's not strictly true, since the European option itself can be sold while it is in the money - but eventually, somebody is going to end up holding the bag, nobody can exercise it until expiration.) The difference between an American and European option is the difference between getting N chances to get it right (N being the number of days 'til expiration) and getting just one chance.  It should be easy to see why you're more likely to profit with the former, even if you can't accurately predict price movement."}
{"id": "484424", "text": "Generally, the HSA is self-reported.  The bank/financial provider will allow you to withdraw/spend whatever you want from your HSA.  They report to the IRS the total that you withdrew for the year (your gross distributions) on a 1099-SA form.  At tax time, you use a form 8889 to report this number of your gross distributions, and how much of it was used for medical expenses.  Ideally, all of it was used for medical expenses.  If it was not all for medical expenses, there will be extra taxes/penalties due.   Different HSAs work differently, but for mine, which is held at a credit union, I can get money out several ways.  I have an HSA checkbook and an HSA debit card that I can use anywhere.  I can also transfer money out of my HSA into my regular checking account to reimburse myself for an expense, or even stop in at the teller window and take out cash.  The credit union doesn't need to see any receipts for any of this.  They don't care if I'm spending it at the doctor's office or the casino.  It is up to me to make sure I'm spending the money in accordance to the law and that everything is reported correctly on my tax return. Nothing is verified unless you get audited.  You definitely should keep documentation on the expenses, because if you are audited, you need to be prepared to account for every withdrawal.  Make sure you are very familiar with the rules on eligible medical expenses, so you know what is allowed and what is not.  IRS Publication 502 has all the details on what is allowed. As far as how it gets counted towards your deductible, you need to make sure that all of your medical bills get sent to your health insurance, even if you will eventually have to pay for it.  For example, let's say you go to the doctor, and the bill is $150.  Even if you know that the deductible is not met yet and you will be responsible for the entire $150, make sure the doctor's office submits the bill to your insurance.  The insurance company will inform the doctor's office that you are responsible for all of it, but they will apply the amount towards your deductible."}
{"id": "484486", "text": "why would anyone buy a long-term bond fund in a market like this one,   where interest rates are practically bottomed out? 1) You are making the assumption that interest rates has bottom out hence there is no further possibility of it  going down further , i mean who expected Lehman Brother to go bankrupt 2) Long term investors who are able to wait for the bad times of the bond market to end and in the mean time dont mind some dividend payment of 2-3%"}
{"id": "484539", "text": "On the web speedy choices are super easy to sign up for. Now you can complete an internet form, and will also be informed quickly no matter if you are qualified to get a quick words borrowing. Borrowing sums change from a couple of 100 us dollars around $1500. Traditional bank choices and also a charge card will be credit score choices which usually supply you with standard economic electrical power and also independence."}
{"id": "484683", "text": "You bring up a valid concern.  IRAs are good retirement instruments as long as the rules don't change.  History has shown that governments can change the rules regarding retirement accounts. As long as you have some of your retirement assets outside of an IRA I think IRAs are good ways to save for retirement. It's not possible to withdraw the money before retirement without penalty. Also, you will be penalized if you do not withdraw enough when you do retire."}
{"id": "484730", "text": "Sounds like you are a candidate for stock trading simulators.  Or just pick stocks and use Yahoo! or Google finance tools to track and see how you do. I wouldn't suggest you put real money into it.  You need to learn about research and timing and a bunch of other topics you can learn about here. I personally just stick to life cycle funds that are managed products that offer me a cruise control setting for investing."}
{"id": "485140", "text": "Tried that, got asked how I filed taxes by the _hiring guy_! What the fuck! How is that any of his business? He wanted to see a business license! What if I'm advertising availability and _nobody is hiring me_, how did spending money on a license help?"}
{"id": "485604", "text": "Can you estimate the approximate cost of employing one of each? Would they work as contractors, or employees? Glassdoor can be a great resource for estimating the current market for local labor costs.  If you have a sense for the amount of annual revenue each individual could theoretically produce, you can essentially treat their wages as a fixed cost up to the limit of that revenue, then model the incremental cost and margin impact of bringing on additional headcount.   Is there any additional detail you can provide that might help provide guidance on developing a model?"}
{"id": "485822", "text": "An amended return is required for situations that impact tax owed, or your tax refund. 8606 purpose is to track non-deducted IRA deposits. I'd recommend you gather all your returns to form a paper trail, and when filing your 2016 return, show a proper 8606 as if you'd tracked it all along."}
{"id": "485883", "text": "If she does take this job and not have a 401k, tell her to make sure she opens up an IRA account. It has a lower contribution limit ($5,500 a year for people under 55) and no sort of company matching, but has the same tax benefits a 401k has. It's definitely a wise investment if she doesn't have access to a 401k (still a wise investment even if she does)"}
{"id": "485898", "text": "Getting the first year right for any rental property is key. It is even more complex when you rent a room, or rent via a service like AirBnB. Get professional tax advice. For you the IRS rules are covered in Tax Topic 415 Renting Residential and Vacation Property and IRS pub 527 Residential Rental Property There is a special rule if you use a dwelling unit as a personal   residence and rent it for fewer than 15 days. In this case, do not   report any of the rental income and do not deduct any expenses as   rental expenses. If you reach that reporting threshold the IRS will now expect you to to have to report the income, and address the items such as depreciation. When you go to sell the house you will again have to address depreciation. All of this adds complexity to your tax situation. The best advice is to make sure that in a tax year you don't cross that threshold. When you have a house that is part personal residence, and part rental property some parts of the tax code become complex. You will have to divide all the expenses (mortgage, property tax, insurance) and split it between the two uses. You will also have to take that rental portion of the property and depreciation it. You will need to determine the value of the property before the split and then determine the value of the rental portion at the time of the split. From then on, you will follow the IRS regulations for depreciation of the rental portion until you either convert it back to non-rental or sell the property.  When the property is sold the portion of the sales price will be associated with the rental property, and you will need to determine if the rental property is sold for a profit or a loss. You will also have to recapture the depreciation. It is possible that one portion of the property could show a loss, and the other part of the property a gain depending on house prices over the decades. You can expect that AirBnB will collect tax info and send it to the IRS As a US company, we\u2019re required by US law to collect taxpayer   information from hosts who appear to have US-sourced income. Virginia will piggyback onto the IRS rules. Local law must be researched because they may limit what type of rentals are allowed. Local law could be state, or county/city/town. Even zoning regulations could apply. Also check any documents from your Home Owners Association, they may address running a business or renting a property.  You may need to adjust your insurance policy regarding having tenants. You may also want to look at insurance to protect you if a renter is injured."}
{"id": "486058", "text": "Disclosure: I am working for an aggregation startup business called Brokerchooser, that is matching the needs of clients to the right online broker. FxPro and similar brokers are rather CFD/FX brokers. If you want to trade stocks you have to find a broker who is registered member of an exchange like LSE. Long list: http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/traders-and-brokers/membership/member-firm-directory/member-firm-directory-search.html From the brokers we have tested at Brokerchooser.com I would suggest:"}
{"id": "486333", "text": "\"I worked for a small private tech company that was aquired by a larger publicly traded tech company.  My shares were accelerated by 18 months, as written in the contract.  I excercised those shares at a very low strike price (under $1) and was given an equal number of shares in the new company.  Made about $300,000 pre tax.  This was in 2000. (I love how the government considered us \"\"rich\"\" that year, but have never made that amount since!)\""}
{"id": "486440", "text": "\"The second part of your question is the easiest to answer, how much manual work is involved in settlement processes? Payment systems which handle low value (i.e. high volume) transactions work on the basis of net settlement. Each of the individual payments are netted across all of the participant banks, so that only one \"\"real\"\" payment is made by each bank. Some days banks will receive money, others they will pay money. This is arbitrary and depends on whether their outbound payments exceed their inbound payments for that day.   The payment system will notify each Bank how much it owes/will receive for the day. The money is then transferred between all of the banks simultaneously by the payment system to remove the risk that some pay and others don't. If you're going to make or receive a very large payment, you're going to want to make certain that its correct. This means that if there's a discrepancy, you need operations people available to find out why its wrong.   When dealing with this many payments, answering that question can be hard. Did we miss a payment? Is there a duplicate? Etc.  The vast majority of payments will process without any human involvement, but to make the process work, you always need human brains there to fix problems that occur. This brings me to your first question. On every day that settlement happens, a bank will receive (or pay) a very large sum of money. As a settlement bank you must settle that money - the guarantee that every bank will pay is one of the main reasons these systems exist. For settlement to happen, every bank has to agree to participate, and be ready to verify the data on their side and deliver the funds from their account. So there is no particular reason that this doesn't happen on weekends and holidays other than history. But for any payment system to change, it would require the support of (at least) a majority of participants to pay staff to manage the settlement process on weekends. This would increase costs for banks, but the benefits would only really be for you and me (if at all). That means it's unlikely to happen unless a government forces the issue.\""}
{"id": "486604", "text": "Apart from the reasons currently given (which have to do with personal relations), wouldn't a good reason to take the loan from the bank be to build up a credit history and/or improve your credit score?"}
{"id": "486669", "text": "In Scotland, each bank issues its own separate notes. It's not uncommon to see identical-valued \u00a310 notes, for example, from three different banks in one's wallet."}
{"id": "486964", "text": "You need to understand the business and the books as an owner do it for your parents also the manager could be the issue but it could a lot of things I\u2019d like to see the quarterlies for the last 3 Years and a few other things like monthly statements payrolls some accounts etc... to do the math. it could be a partner? The only way to know this is to follow the paper trail."}
{"id": "487052", "text": "Any investment company or online brokerage makes investing in their products easy. The hard part is choosing which fund(s) will earn you 12% and up."}
{"id": "487348", "text": "Wow, everyone tells you different investment strategies. You have all your life ahead of you. Your main focus should not be getting the best return rate, but ensuring your existence. Who cares if you get 7% if you'll lose all in the next market crash and stand on the street with no education, no job and nothing to fall back on? I would go a completely different route in your place: The best advise given above was to not consider this as an option to never work again. It's not enough money for that, unless you want to live poorly and always be afraid that the next financial crises wipes you out completely."}
{"id": "487621", "text": "So my advice for your financial situation depends on your aims. Are you aiming to: -   Completely clear your debt -   Clear one card to free up more monthly income.  -   Clear some debt to allow further controlled spending -   Clear one card and focus on just using one, having 2nd as emergency. There are other things you may wish to do but you said to pay off some / all of 2 credit card bills. If you want to contact me I can plan this more precisely. Some seem the same but other factors can come into play as well. Differing rates of interest make the options clearer. My first advice would be to call the card companies and see if you can get better rates first. SCENARIO (some figures made up for visual) Credit Card Debts    8,000       8,000 Monthly payment       100           100 APR %                              10             10 Ignoring APR this will be 80 months to repay (otherwise 140 months using my example amounts above) \u00a328,000 repaid over 11 years 8 months.  Your Suggestion As per your suggestion originally, paying off cards equally will allow smaller debt on both cards. Credit Card Debt      3,000      3,000 Monthly payment       100          100 APR %                              10            10 With a 0% APR this would be paid off in 2 years 6 months. Cards are available to get free balance transfers, need to look into this. With the 10% APR this would take 3 years 1 month. \u00a310,000 lump and \u00a37,400 repaid over 3 years 1 month (saving \u00a310,600 and 8 years 7 months) AIM: To clear debt completely. My advice here is to use the \u00a310,000 lump sum to pay off one credit card, the remaining \u00a32,000 can then come off the other card. This will free up your outgoings (was 2 x \u00a3100) by \u00a3100. But then use this \u00a3100 to pay off the card, this will result in the following: Credit Card Debt      6,000 Monthly payment       200 APR %                              10 With a 0% APR this would be paid off in 2 years 6 months. Cards are available to get free balance transfers, need to look into this. With 10% APR this would take roughly 3 years 1 month. \u00a310,000 lump and \u00a37,400 repaid over 3 years 1 month (saving \u00a310,600 and 8 years 7 months).   This option is the same as above, but you have the options on the odd tight month to reduce payments to \u00a3100.   This also will allow the 2nd card to be used interest free for an emergency purchase (to be paid off without any interest charge)   If rates are different, pay of the one with the higher APR AIM: Clear one card to free up more monthly income.  AIM: Clear one card and focus on just using one, having 2nd as emergency. Same as above, but don\u2019t increase to \u00a3200, leave monthly payment at \u00a3100. Credit Card Debt      6,000 Monthly payment       100 APR %                              10 With a 0% APR this would be paid off in 5 years. With the 10% APR this would take 88 months (7 years 4 months) \u00a310,000 lump and \u00a38,800 repaid over 7 years and 4 months (saving \u00a39,200 and 4 years 4 months).   This also allows for some extra spending (even racking back up the debt \u2013 although not advised) AIM: Clear some debt to allow further controlled spending As above apart from this will allow you to spend to get back up to full \u00a316,000 debt. NOTE My figures are theoretical, paying off \u00a3500 (\u00a3250x2) a month instead of the \u00a3100 (10%APR) would take: Lump sum 10,000, remaining 6,000 \u2013 14 months (\u00a317,000 paid) Lump sum 5,000, remaining 2 x 5,500 \u2013 26 months (\u00a318,000 paid) Lump Sum 0, remaining 2 x 8,000 \u2013 40 months (\u00a320,000 paid) Now I have finished waffling, I hope you have an idea on what you are aiming to achieve and a better idea of what to do when you receive the income \uf04a Stephen."}
{"id": "487739", "text": "\"The concept of emergency fund is a matter of opinion. I can tell you the consensus is that one should have 6-9 months worth of expenses kept as liquid cash. This is meant to cover literally all bills that you might encounter during that time.  That's a lot of money. There are levels of savings that are shy of this but still responsible. Not enough to cover too much in case of job loss, but enough to cover the busted transmission, the broken water heater, etc. this is still more than many people have saved up, but it's a worthy goal.  The doctor visit is probably the lowest level. Even without insurance, the clinic visit should be under $200, and this shouldn't cause you to have to carry that amount beyond the time the bill comes in.  The point that shouldn't be ignored is that if you owe money at 18% on a credit card, the emergency fund is costing you money, and is a bit misguided. I'd send every cent I could to the highest rate card and not have more than a few hundred $$ liquid until the cards were at zero.  Last - $5K, $10K in the emergency account is great, unless you are foregoing matched 401(k) dollars to do it. All just my opinion. Others here whom I respect might disagree with parts of my answer, and they'd be right.   Edit - Regarding the 'consensus 6-9 months' I suggest -  From Investopedia - \"\"...using the conservative recommendation to sock away eight months\u2019   worth of living expenses....\"\" The article strongly support my range for the fact that it both cites consensus, yet disagrees with it.  From Money Under 30 The more difficult you rank your ability to find a new job, the more   we suggest you save \u2014 up to a year\u2019s worth of expenses if you think   your income would be very difficult to replace. From Bank of America   I have no issue with those comfortable with less. A dual income couple who is saving 30% of their income may very well survive one person losing a job with no need to tap savings, and any 'emergency' expense can come from next month's income. That couple may just need this month's bills in their checking account.\""}
{"id": "487817", "text": "Investing $100k into physical gold (bars or coins) is the most prudent option; given the state of economic turmoil worldwide.  Take a look at the long term charts; they're pretty self explanatory.   Gold has an upward trend for 100+ years.  http://www.goldbuyguide.com/price/ A more high risk/high reward investment would be to buy $100k of physical silver.  Silver has a similar track record and inherent benefits of gold.  Yet, with a combination of factors that could make it even more bull than gold (ie- better liquidity, industrial demand).   Beyond that, you may want to look at other commodities such as oil and agriculture.  The point is, this is troubled times for worldwide economies.  Times like this you want to invest in REAL things like commodities or companies that are actually producing essential materials."}
{"id": "488113", "text": "Oh, man, you are in for a life of disappointment if you think it's this easy. Ask your dad why he didn't think of this idea years ago. Owning and maintaining a business is quite difficult, and the business owners I know are stressed out and work hard just like everyone else. (Except with the added benefit that many people hate them and say that they've only been successful due to dishonesty.)  But, if you want to start, look at your profit and loss statement (you do calculate one, right?) and determine how much additional fixed cost you can afford. Look into local employment law with your lawyer and determine how much an employee would cost. Then figure out the duties you want them to do, and check local job postings to see if someone in your local labor market will meet those needs for the compensation you can give. If so, determine the value of those contributions. If the value is greater than the costs, go ahead and hire. Rinse and repeat."}
{"id": "488207", "text": "The main reason to exercise the shares sooner rather than later is that you have to hold the shares for 1 year to gain access to the long-term capital gains rate when you sell your shares. You do not want short-term capital gains rates to apply to these shares when you sell them. If the company is unable to go public and sells privately, you may not have any choice but to sell your shares immediately. If the company goes public you will simply have to hold your shares for a year after you buy them before selling to get the lower tax rate."}
{"id": "488439", "text": "What happens to a minor if the parents are missing, or incapacitated, or deceased should be planned now, and not end up a matter for the courts to decide.  You might need to sit down with a family lawyer as well as a fee based financial planner, to make sure you have addressed all the relevant details. These details would include where they would live, money, and what the money should be used for."}
{"id": "488556", "text": "Why would somebody want an IRA if they have a 401K and a Roth 401K?"}
{"id": "488622", "text": "edit: nevermind.  i glanced and thought you meant total market mutual funds.    For fixed income - if you want to get a good analysis of the bond market/interest rates, i would suggest you read some of bill gross' letters off the pimco site - a lot of discussion about our current zero bound interest rates.    For equities - I have the view that if the economy is doing well, people are less inclined to focus on dividend yield...thereby lowering the relative multiples on dividend/fcf yielding stocks.  So total return fund may be trading slightly cheaper."}
{"id": "488820", "text": "As far as I can tell, it works like this: (Note, I am assuming you were 18 on Jan 1 2009) Contribution limits: So by the end of 2012, you will have been allowed to contribute $20,000 of new money. You say you've contributed $10,000, so you still can contribute another $10,000 of new money this year (But let's assume you do not...). Now, your original $10,000 has grown to $25,000.  You can withdraw this without penalty.  Next year, you will be given an allotment of another $5000 of new money (bringing your total lifetime limit to $25,000 - $10,000 = $15,000 new money) PLUS, you will be allowed to re-contribute up to $25,000 of OLD money. Of course, the government doesn't make a distinction between old and new money, so the net effect is (assuming a 25k withdrawal): 2012 limit: $10 000 2013 limit: $40 000 less 2012 contributions. From http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/tfsa-celi/cntrbtn-eng.html: The TFSA contribution room is made up of: From this wording, it means the 25 k you withdraw will go to the 2013 contribution room (bullet 3).  If you don't re-contribute, it will roll over into the 2014 contribution room (Under bullet 2)   For correctness, I must add that I did not include any indexing of the annual amount."}
{"id": "488861", "text": "There should be no problems with CBP; they'll take the form and may ask some questions, but it is completely legal. I would be worried to carry so much cash around though, and many places might not readily accept cash. You cannot rent a car (without a huge cash deposit), and you cannot book hotels or anything else online with the cash. If you have any way to have a credit card, prefer that. If this is not possible consider even buying a refillable card in a supermarket after arrival."}
{"id": "488954", "text": "\"The heart of the question is: why can't Bill just pay whatever he owes based on his income in that quarter? If Q2 is gang busters, he'll increase his tax payment. Then if Q3 is surprisingly slow, he'll pay less than he paid in Q2. I think what's most interesting about this question is that the other answers are geared towards how a taxpayer is supposed to estimate taxes. But that's not my objective -- nor is it Bill's objective. My [his] real objective is:  In other words, the answer to this question either needs to deal with not overpaying, or it needs to deal with mitigating the underpayment penalty. AFAICT, there are 2 solutions: Solution 1 Figure your estimated taxes based on last year's tax. You won't owe a penalty if your withholding + estimated tax payments in each quarter are 25% or more of your previous year's tax liability. Here's the section that I am basing this on: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p505/ch04.html Minimum required each period.   You will owe a penalty for any 2011 payment period for which your estimated tax payment plus your withholding for the period and overpayments for previous periods was less than the smaller of: 22.5% of your 2011 tax, or 25% of your 2010 tax. (Your 2010 tax return must cover a 12-month period.) Solution 2 Use the \"\"Annualized Income Installment Method\"\". This is not a method for calculating estimated taxes, per se. It's actually a method for reducing or eliminating your underpayment penalty. It's also intended to assist tax payers with unpredictable incomes. If you did not receive your income evenly throughout the year (for example, your income from a shop you operated at a marina was much larger in the summer than it was during the rest of the year), you may be able to lower or eliminate your penalty by figuring your underpayment using the annualized income installment method. Emphasis added. In order to take advantage of this, you'll need to send in a Schedule AI at the end of the year along with a Form 2210. The downside to this is that you're basically racking up underpayment penalties throughout the year, then at the end of the year you're asking the IRS to rescind your penalty. The other risk is that you still pay estimated taxes on your Q2 - Q4 earnings in Q1, you just pay much less than 25%. So if you have a windfall later in the year, I think you could get burned on your Q1 underpayment.\""}
{"id": "488996", "text": "You definitely should NOT do what you are doing now (#2) since this is not a reflection of what actually is going on.  (Unless you actually did transfer the equities themselves and not the cash.)    Your first option is correct solution. As noted by mpenrow you need to make sure that the target account is also tax deferred.  If that still doesn't work and there is a bug you should still do it this way anyway. If it messes up your tax planner just make sure to include a comment so that everyone knows what is really going on. When I have had issues like this in the past I always try to stick to whatever is the closest indication of what actually occurred."}
{"id": "489044", "text": "\"Is it equity, or debt? Understanding the exact nature of one's investment (equity vs. debt) is critical. When one invests money in a company (presumably incorporated or limited) by buying some or all of it \u2014 as opposed to lending money to the company \u2014 then one ends up owning equity (shares or stock) in the company. In such a situation, one is a shareholder \u2014 not a creditor. As a shareholder, one is not generally owed a money debt just by having acquired an ownership stake in the company. Shareholders with company equity generally don't get to treat money received from the company as repayment of a loan \u2014 unless they also made a loan to the company and the payment is designated by the company as a loan repayment. Rather, shareholders can receive cash from a company through one of the following sources: \"\"Loan repayment\"\" isn't one of those options; it's only an option if one made a loan in the first place. Anyway, each of those ways of receiving money based on one's shares in a company has distinct tax implications, not just for the shareholder but for the company as well. You should consult with a tax professional about the most effective way for you to repatriate money from your investment. Considering the company is established overseas, you may want to find somebody with the appropriate expertise.\""}
{"id": "489101", "text": "An option that no one has yet suggested is selling the car, paying off the loan in one lump sum (adding cash from your emergency sum, if need be), and buying an old beater in its place.  With the beater you should be able to get a few years out of it - hopefully enough to get you through your PhD and into a better income situation where you can then assess a new car purchase (or more gently-used car purchase, to avoid the drive-it-off-the-lot income loss).   Even better than buying another car that you can afford to pay for is if you can survive without that car, depending on your location and public transit options.  Living car free saves you not only this payment but gas and maintenance, though it costs you in public transit terms. Right now it looks as if this debt is hurting you more than the amount in your emergency fund is helping.  Don't wipe out your emergency fund completely, but be willing to lower it in order to wipe out this debt."}
{"id": "489103", "text": "\"Ask your trading site for their definition of \"\"ETF\"\". The term itself is overloaded/ambiguous. Consider: If \"\"ETF\"\" is interpreted liberally, then any fund that trades on a [stock] exchange is an exchange-traded fund. i.e. the most literal meaning implied by the acronym itself. Whereas, if \"\"ETF\"\" is interpreted more narrowly and in the sense that most market participants might use it, then \"\"ETF\"\" refers to those exchange-traded funds that specifically have a mechanism in place to ensure the fund's current price remains close to its net asset value. This is not the case with closed-end funds (CEFs), which often trade at either a premium or a discount to their underlying net asset value.\""}
{"id": "489174", "text": "It depends on individual preference. There is no hard and fast rule.   In general the recommendation would be not to spend much unless you have a sufficient money for a rainy day. Even after spending 10 K on a good car, the minute you have more money, you would feed tempted to upgrade before you are 25 yrs. So save and buy a cheaper / decent car and put the money away.  But then someone would also say, if you can't enjoy when you are young, you may never get this opportunity to enjoy when you are old ..."}
{"id": "489285", "text": "I think either one would allow for lower pricing tiers as a merchant. I am at 2.5 on my main account.   $0 to $3,000 2.9% + $0.30 $3.20 fee on a $100 sale  $3,000+ to $10,000 2.5% + $0.30 $2.80 fee on a $100 sale $10,000+ 2.2% + $0.30 $2.50 fee on a $100 sale $100,000+ Call 1-888-818-3928"}
{"id": "489473", "text": "If it was typical, above the board, and no profits were made, then why did it take a hotly contested bill from Congress (that was amended and watered down) to bring these transactions to light?  Why not just use the normal discount window for these overnight loans if everything was just run of the mill overnight loans?   Why were they making these standard 0% overnight loans to select private investors?"}
{"id": "489549", "text": "$600 is a good deal. If buddy can't pay $600 for IT, he doesn't have enough money to run a business and make it successful. That's one of the main reasons new companies fail, not enough capital to run the business for one year without revenue."}
{"id": "489640", "text": "First I  assume you are resident for tax purposes in the UK? 1 Put 2000 in a cash ISA  as an emergency fund.  2 Buy shares in 2 or 3 of the big generalist Investment trusts as they have low charges and long track records \u2013 unless your a higher rate tax payer don\u2019t buy the shares inside the ISA its not worth it  You could use FTSE 100 tracker  ETF's or iShares instead of Investment Trusts."}
{"id": "489706", "text": "The point of a total return index is that it already has accounted for the capital gains + coupon income. If you want to calculate it yourself you'll have to find the on-the-run 10y bond for each distinct period then string them together to calc your total return. Check XLTP if they have anything"}
{"id": "489898", "text": "\"Whenever you do paid work for a company, you will need to fill out some sort of paperwork so that the company knows how to pay you, and also how to report how much they paid you to the appropriate government agencies. You should not think of this as a \"\"hurdle\"\" and you shouldn't worry that you haven't been employed for a long time. The two most common ways a company pays an individual are via employee wages, or \"\"independent contractor\"\" payments. When you start a relationship with a company, if you are going to become an employee, then you will out a W4 form, and at the end of the year you will receive a W2 form. If you are an independent contractor, (which you would be considered in this case), you will fill out form W9 and at the end of the year you will receive a 1099. This is completely normal and you have nothing to worry about. All it means is that if you make more than a certain amount (typically $600) in a year, you will receive a 1099 in the mail or electronically. The 1099 form basically means that they are reporting that amount to the IRS, and it also helps you file your tax return by showing you all the numbers you need on one form. Please remember that when you are paid as an independent contractor, no taxes are withheld on your behalf, so you may owe some tax on the money you make. It's best to set aside some of your income so you are prepared to pay it come tax time next year.\""}
{"id": "490258", "text": "\"When I first purchased my home six years ago, I was able to get into a Bank of America First Time Homebuyer program that required no down payment and no PMI. While I hope you find a lower initial payment, the banks have tightened their requirements so that buyers have \"\"more skin in the game\"\" so to speak. Exotic loan options coupled with the subprime mortgage crisis caused the housing bubble to burst. Now banks are being very selective about who they provide a mortgage. The other things you need to look at are interest rate and terms. Do you feel you will be in the home for the next 30 years? Have you considered a 15 year mortgage? Shop around. PMI used to have a bad connotation (at least it did when I bought my home six years ago), but I feel now that it would have been worthwhile for the banks and the economy in the long run had banks required buyers to utilize PMI.\""}
{"id": "490440", "text": "You'll need to find out in what format MoneyStrands expects the data.  A .qif or an .ofx file may not be the answer."}
{"id": "490443", "text": "Why not just do an FHA loan? The minimum credit score is 580, and you can sometimes even go lower than that. Another alternative is to consider a rent-to-own agreement with his landlord, since it sounds like if he doesn't buy he'd continue renting there anyway."}
{"id": "490489", "text": "\"Before filing your first business tax return, you will need to choose a taxation method, either corporation or partnership. If you choose a partnership, then it's moot - your business income flows through to your personal taxes via form K-1. Also, regardless of your taxation method, you should consult a legal expert, since having your business pay off your personal debt would almost always be counted as income to you, and may cause you to lose the personal liability protections provided by the LLC (aka \"\"piercing the corporate veil\"\"). Having a single-member LLC with no employees, you have to be very careful how you manage the finances of the business. Any commingling of personal and business could jeopardize your protections.\""}
{"id": "490497", "text": "Back in the late 80's I had a co-worked do exactly this. In those days you could only do things quarterly: change the percentage, change the investment mix, make a withdrawal.. There were no Roth 401K accounts, but contributions could be pre-tax or post-tax. Long term employees were matched 100% up to 8%, newer employees were only matched 50% up to 8% (resulting in 4% match). Every quarter this employee put in 8%, and then pulled out the previous quarters contribution. The company match continued to grow.  Was it smart? He still ended up with 8% going into the 401K. In those pre-Enron days the law allowed companies to limit the company match to 100% company stock which meant that employees retirement was at risk. Of course by the early 2000's the stock that was purchased for $6 a share was worth $80 a share... Now what about the IRS: Since I make designated Roth contributions from after-tax income, can I make tax-free withdrawals from my designated Roth account at any   time? No, the same restrictions on withdrawals that apply to pre-tax   elective contributions also apply to designated Roth contributions. If   your plan permits distributions from accounts because of hardship, you   may choose to receive a hardship distribution from your designated   Roth account. The hardship distribution will consist of a pro-rata   share of earnings and basis and the earnings portion will be included   in gross income unless you have had the designated Roth account for 5   years and are either disabled or over age 59 \u00bd. Regarding getting just contributions: What happens if I take a distribution from my designated Roth account before the end of the 5-taxable-year period? If you take a distribution from your designated Roth account before   the end of the 5-taxable-year period, it is a nonqualified   distribution. You must include the earnings portion of the   nonqualified distribution in gross income. However, the basis (or   contributions) portion of the nonqualified distribution is not   included in gross income. The basis portion of the distribution is   determined by multiplying the amount of the nonqualified distribution   by the ratio of designated Roth contributions to the total designated   Roth account balance. For example, if a nonqualified distribution of   $5,000 is made from your designated Roth account when the account   consists of $9,400 of designated Roth contributions and $600 of   earnings, the distribution consists of $4,700 of designated Roth   contributions (that are not includible in your gross income) and $300   of earnings (that are includible in your gross income). See Q&As regarding Rollovers of Designated Roth Contributions, for   additional rules for rolling over both qualified and nonqualified   distributions from designated Roth accounts."}
{"id": "490525", "text": "Split the difference. Max it out, sell half immediately and wait a year or more for the rest. Or keep a third... whatever works for your risk tolerance. A perfectly diversified portfolio with $0 in it is still worth $0."}
{"id": "490888", "text": "\"You need to do a bit more research and as @littleadv often wisely advises, consult a professional, in this case a tax layer or CPA. You are not allowed to just pull money out of a property and write off the interest.  From Deducting Mortgage Interest FAQs If you own rental property and borrow against it to buy a home, the   interest does not qualify as mortgage interest because the loan is not   secured by the home itself. Interest paid on that loan can't be   deducted as a rental expense either, because the funds were not used   for the rental property. The interest expense is actually considered   personal interest, which is no longer deductible. This is not exactly your situation of course, but it illustrates the restriction that will apply to you.  Elsewhere in the article, it references how, if used for a business, the interest deduction still will not apply to the rental, but to the business via schedule C.  In your case, it's worse, you can never deduct interest used to fund a tax free bond, or to invest in such a tax favored product.  Putting the facts aside, I often use the line \"\"don't let the tax tail wag the investing dog.\"\" Borrowing in order to reduce taxes is rarely a wise move. If you look at the interest on the 90K vs 290K, you'll see you are paying, in effect, 5.12% on the extra 200K, due the higher rate on the entire sum. Elsewhere on this board, there are members who would say that given the choice to invest or pay off a 4% mortgage, paying it off is guaranteed, and the wiser thing to do. I think there's a fine line and might not be so quick to pay that loan off, an after-tax 3% cost of borrowing is barely higher than inflation. But to borrow at over 5% to invest in an annuity product whose terms you didn't disclose, does seem right to me. Borrow to invest in the next property? That's another story.\""}
{"id": "491052", "text": "The Government self-assessment website states you can ask HMRC to reduce your payments on account if your business profits or other income goes down, and you know your tax bill is going to be lower than last year. There are two ways to do this:"}
{"id": "491124", "text": "When I was in grad school (at an engineering school) my apartment-mates and I came up with this formula: Worked marvelously."}
{"id": "491241", "text": "I agree with everyone who has simply told you 'Dont' and 'You can't' and add a few more considerations that you don't want to deal with: What you want to do is admirable but very complicated from a financial and legal perspective.  If this is really a route that you want to go down you should give up on the 'simple' and consider hiring a lawyer."}
{"id": "491350", "text": "I am sorry for your troubles, but impressed with your problem solving skills.  Keep going, things will get better.   Your best hope is to find a place that does manual underwriting.  If they do computer generated stuff, then you will be kicked for sure.  If you can show 20% down, and have some savings, and have some history of paying bills, then you might be approved.   Here in Florida, RP Funding still does manual underwriting.  Another one that is mentioned is Church Hill mortgage.  Also you might check with local credit unions. Of course your best bet to be approved is to be open and state upfront the challenges.  You have to find someone that has the ability to think, has the ability to see passed the challenges, and has the authority to do so."}
{"id": "491472", "text": "\"Determine which fund company issues the fund. In this case, a search reveals the fund name to be Vanguard Dividend Growth Fund from Vanguard Funds. Locate information for the fund on the fund company's web site. Here is the overview page for VDIGX. In the fund information, look for information about distributions. In the case of VDIGX, the fourth tab to the right of \"\"Overview\"\" is \"\"Distributions\"\". See here. At the top: Distributions for this fund are scheduled Semi-Annually The actual distribution history should give you some clues as to when. Failing that, ask your broker or the fund company directly. On \"\"distribution\"\" vs. \"\"dividend\"\": When a mutual fund spins off periodic cash, it is generally not called a \"\"dividend\"\", but rather a \"\"distribution\"\". The terminology is different because a distribution can be made up of more than one kind of payout. Dividends are just one kind. Capital gains, interest, and return of capital are other kinds of cash that can be distributed. While cash is cash, the nature of each varies for tax purposes and so they are classified differently.\""}
{"id": "491670", "text": "Exactly; it also really rubs me the wrong way when people pitch just throwing everything in an s&amp;p 500 vanguard fund, and pretend like thats a diversified portfolio.  Bonus points if they make this pitch to someone 5 years from retirement."}
{"id": "491688", "text": "Appreciate the good back and forth. I only did equity for a brief while before I moved to emerging market debt. I can go across capital structure but we don't spend much time on retail outside of China. I think EBITDA or an adjusted NI makes a lot more sense than FCF for Amazon, and nowadays, FCF is ALL that I use for valuation in EM debt world."}
{"id": "491923", "text": "One advantage of paying down your primary residence is that you can refinance it later for 10-15 years when the balance is low. Refinancing a rental is much harder and interest rates are often higher for investors. This also assumes that you can refinance for a lower rate in the nearest future. The question is really which would you rather sell if you suddenly need the money? I have rental properties and i'd rather move myself, than sell the investments (because they are income generating unlike my own home). So in your case i'd pay off primary residence especially since the interest is already higher on it (would be a harder decision if it was lower)"}
{"id": "492250", "text": "Yep!  The education industry has finally run into the brick wall.  They have been selling snake oil for years.  Get at Bachelors Degree and you will instantly get a great paying job.  Uh, so we crank out 5,000% more communication degrees than are needed in the real world.  The university administrators get their big fat bonuses and the port college graduate gets to find a way to payback their enormous debt.   A study came out in the 80's which identified that approximately 10% of high school graduates should go onto college with about 40% graduation rate.  The education industry has cranked the acceptance to around 75% of high school graduates with a graduation rate under 30% and over 50% of those graduating can't find jobs in their field.  I met mechanical engineer, a mathematician and a social work in the past week.  They all work at Target and trying to pay off their loans."}
{"id": "492342", "text": "Hmm, let's see, I always get Credit and Debit mixed up, but I'll try: Signing of the contract: Receiving 500 deposit: When you are done Accounts Receivable will have $500 (because you are owed $500), Revenue will have $1000 (because you made $1000 on an accrual basis), and Cash will have $500 (because you have $500 in your pocket)."}
{"id": "492401", "text": "All corporate gains are taxed at the same rate as corporate income, for the corporate entity, so this actually can be WORSE than the individual capital gains tax rates. There are a lot of things you can do with trading certain asset classes, like opening you up to like-kind re-investment tax perks, but I can't think of anything that helps with stocks. Also, in the US there is now a law against doing things solely to avoid tax if they have no other economic purpose. So be conscious about that, you'll need to be able to rationalize at least a thin excuse for why you jumped through all the hoops."}
{"id": "492402", "text": "Your last sentence is key. If you have multiple accounts, it's too easy to lose track over the years. I've seen too many people pass on and the spouse has a tough time tracking the accounts, often finding a prior spouse listed as beneficiary.  In this case, your gut is right, simpler is better."}
{"id": "492456", "text": "Work under UK umbrella company.  By this you are thinking of creating a new legal entity in UK, then its not a very great idea. There will be lot of paperwork, additional taxes in UK and not much benefit.  Ask UK company to remit money to Indian savings bank account   Ask UK company to remit money to Indian business bank account Both are same from tax point of view. Opening a business bank account needs some more paper work and can be avoided.  Note as an independent contractor you are still liable to pay taxes in India. Please pay periodically and in advance and do not wait till year end. You can claim some benefits as work related expenses [for example a laptop / mobile purchase, certain other expenses] and reduce from the total income the UK company is paying"}
{"id": "493202", "text": "The buyer pays $1.99/share for the option of selling a share of AMD to the seller for $10 which is currently $1.94 higher than the price of $8.06/share.  If you bought the put and immediately exercised it, you would come out of the deal losing $.05/share."}
{"id": "493252", "text": "And holy crap the comments have a lot of assholes.  I'm happy to see Coakley going after shady bank practices.  Who owns the mortgages on houses isn't always cut and dry.  Banks don't want to deal with that but they're more than happy to foreclose."}
{"id": "493605", "text": "In the strictest sense, there are bills,notes, and bonds, named when issued based on their time to maturity. Even though it's called a bond ETF it may have a duration short enough to be made of T-bills, less than a year to maturity.  Simply put, for bonds, risk comes from the duration, time to maturity."}
{"id": "493752", "text": "The union that I used to belong to provided a similar service for $20/year. If you can make money selling such a plan, it's probably overpriced."}
{"id": "494000", "text": "Yes, you will be able to claim it as an expense on your taxes, but not all in the current year. It is split into three categories: Current Expenses - Assets purchased such as inventory would be able to be claimed in the current year.  Assets - Vehicles, Buildings, and equipment can be depreciated over time based on the value you purchased them for and the CCA class. Goodwill - In tax terms this is the value of the business purchase that is not eligible in 1 or 2 and is called Eligible Capital Property. This can be expensed over time.  From info at CRA website: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/bsnss/tpcs/lf-vnts/byng/menu-eng.html"}
{"id": "494410", "text": "From personal experience (I financed a new car from the dealer/manufacturer within weeks of graduating, still on an F1-OPT):"}
{"id": "494553", "text": "\"Why do banks charge a significantly lesser rate for a 15 yr. fixed mortgage than a 30yr. (though they know it will not earn them the same amount of money)?  A simplistic model of where banks get the money to lend to borrowers is that they \"\"borrow\"\" money from investors that want to earn a return on the money that they provide.  The actual mechanics of that process are much more complicated, but the gist is that if those investors want to tie their money up for a longer period, they expect to get a higher return, thus 30-year mortgages require a higher interest rate than 15-year mortgages.  In addition, the \"\"usual\"\" consensus in the market is that interest rates will rise in the future, so interest rates for longer-term loans are higher  While it's true that the bank gets \"\"more money\"\" overall from a higher-rate mortgage, the fact that that additional money doesn't come until several years into the loan (and that money loses value over time due to inflation) makes a lower-rate 15 year mortgage roughly equivalent to a higher-rate 30-year mortgage.\""}
{"id": "494625", "text": "Certainly sounds worthwhile to get a CPA to help you with setting up the books properly and learning to maintain them, even if you do it yourself thereafter. What's your own time worth?"}
{"id": "494653", "text": "Man who made fortune as hedge fund, active investor decries passive investment. Shocker. Even if passive investment was a bad thing, which I don't think it is, wouldn't it result in a less efficient allocation of capital, allowing for more opportunities for active investors?"}
{"id": "494727", "text": "\"Re: A trader when buying needs to buy at the ask price and when selling needs to sell   at the bid price. So how can a trade happen 'in between' the bid and ask? Saying the trade can happen \"\"in between\"\" the bid & ask is simplistic.  There is a time dimension to the market.  It's more accurate to say that an order can be placed \"\"in between\"\" the current best bid & ask (observed at time T=0), thus establishing a new level for one or the other of those quoted prices (observed at time T>0). If you enter a market order to buy (or sell), then yes, you'll generally be accepting the current best ask (or best bid) with your order, because that's what a market order says to do: Accept the current best market price being offered for your kind of transaction.  Of course, prices may move much faster than your observation of the price and the time it takes to process your order \u2013 you're far from being the only participant. Market orders aside, you are free to name your own price above or below the current best bid & ask, respectively. ... then one could say that you are placing an order \"\"in between\"\" the bid and ask at the time your order is placed.  However \u2013 and this is key \u2013 you are also moving one or the other of those quoted prices in the process of placing your above-bid buy order or your below-ask sell order. Then, only if somebody else in the market chooses to accept your new ask (or bid) does your intended transaction take place. And that transaction takes place at the new ask (or bid) price, not the old one that was current when you entered your order. Read more about bid & ask prices at this other question: (p.s. FWIW, I don't necessarily agree with the assertion from the article you quoted, i.e.: \"\"By looking for trades that take place in between the bid and ask, you can tell when a strong trend is about to come to an end.\"\"  I would say: Maybe, perhaps, but maybe not.)\""}
{"id": "494783", "text": "Typically your paychecks are direct deposited into your bank account and you receive a paycheck stub telling you how much of your money went where (taxes, insurance, 401k, etc.). Most people use debit or credit cards for purchases.  I personally only use checks to transfer money to another person (family, friend, etc.) than a business.  And even then, there's PayPal."}
{"id": "494939", "text": "TdAmeritrade offers this service for free using 3rd party company markit. From markit's site, below is their guarantee.  http://www.markit.com/product/markit-on-demand Markit On Demand delivers an average of two million alerts per day   through various technology platforms and via multiple channels,   including email, instant messages, wireless, RSS and Facebook.   Investors can subscribe to their alerts of choice, and Markit On   Demand guarantees that they will receive an alert within five minutes   of the event trigger for all price and volume alerts"}
{"id": "495011", "text": "\"For a fight this big it would be done via an escrow account and the terms would be set in advance. There would be no \"\"check\"\" for him to cash. He has no idea what he's saying and this is probably why he is in trouble with the IRS. He is using the same concepts for a $10 doctor's visit copay and applying it to a multimillion dollar contract with giant media conglomerates.\""}
{"id": "495165", "text": "\"What you're thinking of is more market making kind of activity, HFT algo's thrive on this; having information faster than anyone else. This type of activity could also likely be lumped into what is considered top-down analysis as opposed to bottom-up (which is what most mutual fund equity research involves). Again, the more important aspect is, what does the company you are applying to use!  Top-down analysis means that you are forecasting the revenue drivers for a company using macro-economic analysis. For example, let's say I'm investing in Chinese cement manufacturer's, what implications does Chinese interest rate policy have on infra-structure expansion and how does that drive revenue for this specific company. I might then look at margins, etc. to get an EPS estimate. Part of this could fall into secular  investing, too. Let's say I like LCD panel glass because of this consortium, I might take a look at 5 companies and then find the ones I think would benefit most from this. The problem with top-down is it tends not to be as much of a deep-dive, and its hard to pick individual companies because of it. Bottom-up tends to be more analytical and is what most pitches would be based around. The most important thing I'm not saying one is right or wrong, they are just different, and every investor has their own style.  Bottom-up analysis, which would be closer to what an equity research analyst would be doing on the sell-side, is analyzing what bottom-line indicators drive revenue and how are those expanding. For example, lets say I'm looking at search providers (i.e. Baidu, Google, Yahoo, etc.) I'd be looking at Cost-Per-Thousand-Clicks (CPTC) and number of clicks on the website. Multiply the two and I get revenue (very simplified version) for clicks business. I might then also forecast other revenue driving segments and try to understand how they are growing/pricing at an individual segment level (i.e. business services or mobile advertising). I'd then break down costs/margins for each segment and forecast those out. I could then get a forward EPS, get a range of multiples I believe it could trade in (i.e. I think the multiple will trade up/down), to get a target price. Also, I would likely do a DCF analysis on forward earnings to get a \"\"fair market value,\"\" and then try to triangulate a price. I would also be looking at stuff like management teams and industry trends, too, but bottom line, I'm pitching a company because I think it is undervalued and will outperform competitors **in the long run**. This type of work tends to be more research oriented and is what most (not all) mutual funds use when analyzing companies. Since mutual funds tend to have longer holding periods (2-10 years), as opposed to short-term, it's harder to justify investing in a company only because it has a short-term catalyst. Anecdotally, it's also easier to present in a written thesis because the numbers tend to be more concrete and easier to forecast than top-down (which have wider target ranges).  Your thought process that catalyst + industry context = market beating returns isn't wrong, it's just that every company thinks about investing differently, and it's important to tailor the report to that group's style.\""}
{"id": "495321", "text": "\"If you earn $160 a week for 26 weeks, are unable to claim yourself, have no other income at all, you will earn $4,160, which falls under the standard deduction, in your case a bit over $4,500; per publication 17, it is $350 above your earned income, to a maximum of $6300 as of 2016.  (H/t Hart CO for the reminder.) In that case, if you paid no taxes (at all) last year (either did not file or filed and had 0 tax paid, so got a 100% refund), you could legitimately claim \"\"exempt\"\" by writing that on line 7.   However, you would be very close to owing taxes, so if you have any unearned income (interest from bank accounts, dividends from your non-sheltered college fund, etc.), you would possibly owe taxes.  You're also going to owe taxes if you have another ~$2150 of earned income from any other source (including things like mowing lawns, tutoring, etc.). Keep all of that in mind if you have any other sources of income other than the above.\""}
{"id": "495418", "text": "Use TWIRR (aka TWRR). Time Weighted rate of return. It's sort of the opposite of XIRR. XIRR results change dramatically depending on the timing of the cashflows. It might be useful to also model returns that are unaffected by the timing. This is how funds report returns, and this number allows you to compare to funds and indices. During periods of steady deposits, XIRR will continually understate performance. And in retirement, when you have steady withdrawals, XIRR will overstate. TWRR is talked about here: http://www.dailyvest.com/PRR/prr_calcmethods.aspx#twrr I've made a simple spreadsheet that you can use as a starting point, if you like: http://moosiefinance.com/static/models/spreadsheets.html (top entry in the list)"}
{"id": "495431", "text": "\"There are services that deal specifically with these situations, boostcredit101.com is one I've personally had a good experience with though there are plenty out there. What they do is add you as an authorized user to a credit card with a high limit, low balance, and perfect payment history. This \"\"boosts\"\" for about 30 days while you remain listed as a user on that account, which allows you to qualify for your own card or other kind of loan in that time and helps you start rebuilding your credit. I've even heard of people doing this to qualify for a home loan, though the home loan industry is typically aware of this \"\"trick\"\".\""}
{"id": "495467", "text": "The IRS' primary reference Pub 519 Tax Guide for Aliens -- current year online (current and previous years downloadable in PDF from the Forms&Pubs section of the website) says NO: Students and business apprentices from India.   A special rule applies .... You can claim the standard deduction .... Use Worksheet 5-1 to figure your standard deduction. If you are married and your spouse files a return and itemizes deductions, you cannot take the standard deduction. Note the last sentence, which is clearly an exception to the 'India rule', which is already an exception to the general rule that nonresident filers never get the standard deduction. Of course this is the IRS' interpretation of the law (which is defined to include ratified treaties); if you think they are wrong, you could claim the deduction anyway and when they assess the additional tax (and demand payment) take it to US Tax Court -- but I suspect the legal fees will cost you more than the marginal tax on $6300, even under Tax Court's simplified procedures for small cases."}
{"id": "495568", "text": "Since you work there, you may have some home bias. You should treat that as any other stock. I sell my ESPP stocks periodically to reduce the over allocation of my portfolio while I keep my ESOP for longer periods."}
{"id": "495715", "text": "Means A has a much higher level of interest payments dye to either higher debt or higher cost of debt (or combination of both). MM theory suggests higher debt in a capital structure due to the tax shield but you need to consider if A's debt level is appropriate or too high and what that says about your company."}
{"id": "495864", "text": "So. You might be looking at the world of investing after tax deductions are gone. Buy index funds, or a few stable stocks of your choice. (Index funds have minimal turnover, so you won't realize as many uncontrollable tax events throughout the year). The top long-term capital gains rate is presently 15% (will it go up to 20% soon? who knows! it might. That's up to Congress and Obama, really.) If you can control when you realize it (say, in a year when you don't have a lot of other income) the tax consequences aren't toooo horrible. (It also helps if you live in a state that doesn't tax the gains themselves, e.g. not California?) Or buy real estate, if you don't own the house where you live already (and your lifestyle permits). You shouldn't expect impressive capital appreciation, but you don't have to pay tax on the imputed rent (the rent money you avoid paying by owning the place yourself)."}
{"id": "495898", "text": "\"That's definitely a good point; thanks for noting that. Leverage was definitely an issue.  Re: the ratings agencies, I just wanted to clarify that I was talking about something a bit different than the problem of \"\"ratings shopping\"\" (I assume this is what you meant what you mentioned the ratings agencies \"\"capitulating\"\").   \"\"Ratings shopping\"\" is essentially the tendency for a \"\"race to the bottom\"\" in ratings when banks pay for ratings. That has always been an issue for the ratings agencies since the 1970s (I think?) when they started having the rated entities pay for their ratings.   What I was talking about is more unique to the structured products industry in the mid-2000s -- i.e. how the ratings agencies gave banks an opportunity for essentially risk-less profit by merely repackaging MBSs into CDOs. So banks would buy up MBSs, repackage them into CDOs, sell shares of the CDOs to investors, and then hedge all of the residual risk away by writing a CDS contract with a monoline insurer like AIG. This has more to do with the relationship *between* ratings for different products, and not the absolute \"\"level\"\" of the ratings for any given product.  Sorry if that sounds nit-picky, but I think it's an extremely important detail that is generally lost upon -- as you pointed out -- economists who are pushing the \"\"ratings shopping\"\" theory. I would guess this is because moral hazard is a story they are already familiar with.\""}
{"id": "496253", "text": "\"Your question was about recharacterizing. But then you said \"\"I contributed a few thousand dollars to my 401(k) as Roth contributions\"\" which means you never converted from a 401(k) to a Roth 401(k), the deposit was always Roth.  Even if the law changes allowing the recharacterization, it would not apply to your situation.\""}
{"id": "496385", "text": "\"You are right in insisting upon a proper B2B contract in any business relationship. You wish to reduce your risk and be compensated fairly. In addition to the cost and complexity of international wire transfers, the US companies may also be considering the fact that as an international contractor in a relatively hard-to-reach jurisdiction, payments to you place the company at higher risk than payments to a domestic contractor. By insisting upon PayPal or similar transmitters, they are reducing their internal complexity and reducing their financial exposure to unfulfilled/disputed contract terms. Therefore, wire payments are \"\"hard\"\" in an internal business sense, as well as in a remittance transfer reporting sense. The internal business procedure will likely be the hardest to overcome--changing risk management is harder than filling out forms.\""}
{"id": "496395", "text": "It seems that you are misunderstanding how your taxes are calculated. You seem to be under the impression that once you pass $37,450 annual income, ALL of your income will be taxed at 25%. However, in reality, only the income you earn above that amount will be taxed at 25%. You can use this chart to determine exactly how much federal tax you will pay;  As you can see, if you earned, $37,500 in a year, you would only be charged 25% taxes on $50 (and you will pay 15% on the amount between $9226 and $37450, and 10% on the amount from $0 to $9225, which is $5126.25 when summed together)."}
{"id": "496433", "text": "I do something pretty simple when figuring 1099 income.  I keep track of my income and deductible expenses on a spreadsheet.  Then I do total income - total expenses * .25. I keep that amount in a savings account ready to pay taxes.   Given that your estimates for the quarterly payments are low then expected, that amount should be more then enough to fully fund those payments.   If you are correct, and they are low, then really what does it matter?  You will have the money, in the bank, to pay what you actually owe to the IRS."}
{"id": "496540", "text": "\"The question isn't \"\"fair\"\", it's \"\"how much do you have to give them in order to get them to trust you with the money for a year rather than doing something else with it, and does that exceed what you are willing/able to give them, and how sure are you that you can either do without the money or find it elsewhere?\"\"  This has to be negotiated. There is no standard answer, since there is no standard company or lender. Heck, even a simple bank loan is a negotiation, though that usually takes the form of shopping around for an acceptable rate and their deciding whether they'll accept you rather than going back and forth on what rate would be the best compromise.\""}
{"id": "496819", "text": "\"Let me summarize your question for you: \"\"I do not have the down payment that the lender requires for a mortgage. How can I still acquire the mortgage?\"\" Short answer: Find another lender or find more cash. Don't overly complicate the scenario. The correct answer is that the lender is free to do what they want. They deem it too risky to lend you $1.1M against this $1.8M property, unless they have $700k up front. You want their money, so you must accept their terms. If other lenders have the same outlook, consider that you cannot afford this house. Find a cheaper house.\""}
{"id": "496899", "text": "The really simple answer is that compound interest is compound not linear.  Money invested for longer earns more interest, and the sooner you start investing, the longer it has to earn interest.  These ideas come out of pension investment where 65 is the usual retirement age and what you invest in the 1st ten years of your pension (or any other compound interest fund) accounts for over 50% of what you will get out. 25 to 65 is forty years and $100 invested at 7% for 40 years is $1400.  $100 invested every year for 40 years the pot would be worth just under $20,000. At 30 years, it would be worth under $10,000, and at 20 years it would be worth only $4099.  If you double your investment amount every 10 years you would have invested $15700, and the pot would be worth $45,457. Do exactly the same but starting at 35 instead of 25 and your pot would only be worth $14,200."}
{"id": "496947", "text": "You send the proper form to the other person for the amount you gave him, and file it as your business expense on your Schedule C."}
{"id": "496959", "text": "As others have said, make sure you can and do file your taxes on a cash basis (not accrual). It sounds like it's very unlikely the company is going to issue you a 1099 for invoices they never paid you. So you just file last year's taxes based on your income, which is the money you actually received. If they do pay you later, in the new year, you'll include that income on next year's tax return, and you would expect a 1099 at that time. Side note: not getting paid is unfortunately common for consultants and contractors. Take the first unpaid invoice and sue them in small claims court. After you win (and collect!), tell them you'll sue them for each unpaid invoice in turn until they pay you in full. (You might need to break up the lawsuits like that to remain under the small claims limit.)"}
{"id": "497220", "text": "\"The short answer is that you will not be able to go back to whichever discussion you were having and say \"\"the Euro crisis was caused by bailing out private banks,\"\" if that is indeed what you were ultimately searching for here.\""}
{"id": "497301", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.aei.org/publication/warren-buffett-wins-1m-bet-made-a-decade-ago-that-the-sp-500-stock-index-would-outperform-hedge-funds/) reduced by 91%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; MP: Specifically, Buffett offered to bet that over a ten-year period from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2017, the S&amp;P 500 index would outperform a portfolio of funds of hedge funds when performance is measured on a basis net of fee.  &gt; A fund that tracks the S&amp;P 500 fund might have an expense ratio of as little as 0.02%. MP: The chart above shows the annual returns on the S&amp;P 500 index and the average annual returns on a comprehensive index of thousands of hedge funds maintained by Barclay over the period of Buffett&amp;#039;s bet: From 2008 through August of this year.  &gt; Funds of hedge funds accentuate this cost problem because their fees are superimposed on the large fees charged by the hedge funds in which the funds of funds are invested.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/71a3oo/warren_buffett_wins_1m_bet_made_a_decade_ago_that/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~213478 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **fund**^#1 **hedge**^#2 **index**^#3 **bet**^#4 **fee**^#5\""}
{"id": "497522", "text": "If the payment is sent to incorrect swift code, the receiving bank will return the payment."}
{"id": "497731", "text": "Can anyone recommend a good textbook for a first course in finance? I'm not studying it, if it's relevant--I'm just a guy who wants a better understanding of the financial sector. I don't know anything anout finance outside a few basic concepts."}
{"id": "497762", "text": "\"Like most other things, this is \"\"sometimes,\"\" but not always true. Sometimes banks will be willing to sell at a discount, sometimes they will hold out for \"\"full price.\"\" But if you want a discount, this is a good place to \"\"look.\"\"\""}
{"id": "498075", "text": "\"The response to this question will be different depending which of the investment philosophies you are using.  Value investors look at the situation the company is in and try to determine what the company is worth and what it will be worth in the future. Then they look at the current stock price and decide whether or not the stock is priced at a good deal or not. If the stock price is priced lower than they believe the company is worth, they would want to buy stock, and if the price rises above what they believe to be the true value, they would sell. These types of investors are not looking at the history or trend of what the price has done in the past, only what the current price is and where they believe the price should be in the future.  Technical analysis investors do something different. It is their belief that as stock prices go up and down, they generally follow patterns. By looking at a chart of what a stock price has been in the past, they try to predict where it is headed, and buy or sell based on that prediction.  In general, value investors are longer-term investors, and technical analysis investors are short-term investors.  The advice you are considering makes a lot of sense if you are using technical analysis. If you have a stock that is trending down, your strategy probably tells you to sell; buying more in the hopes of turning things around would be seen as a mistake. It is like the gambler in Vegas who keeps playing a game he is losing, hoping that his luck changes.  However, for the value investor, the historical price of a stock, and even the amount you currently have gained or lost in the stock, are essentially ignored. All that matters is whether or not the stock price is above or below the true value determined by the investor. For him, if the stock price falls and he believes the company still has a high value, it could be a signal to buy more. The above advice doesn't really apply for them.  Many investors don't follow either of these strategies. They believe that it is too difficult and risky to try to predict the future price of an individual stock. Instead, they invest in many companies all at once using index mutual funds, believing that the stock market as a whole always heads up over a long time frame. Those investors don't care at all if the prices of stock are going up or down. They simply keep investing each month, and hold until they have another use for the money. The above advice isn't useful for them at all.  No matter which kind of investing you are doing, the most important thing is to pick a strategy you believe in and follow the plan without emotion. Emotions can cause investors to make mistakes and start buying when their strategy tells them to sell.  Instead of trying to follow fortune cookie advice like \"\"Don't throw good money after bad,\"\" choose an investment strategy, make a plan, test it, and follow it, cautiously (after all, it may be a bad plan). For what it is worth, I am the third type of investor listed above. I don't buy individual stocks, and I don't look at the stock prices when investing more each month. Your description of your own strategy as \"\"buy and hold\"\" suggests you might prefer the same approach.\""}
{"id": "498561", "text": "While my margin is not nearly as good as yours, I sell out early.  I generally think it's a bad idea to hold any single stock, as they can vary wildly in value.  However, as you mention, it's advantageous to hold for one year.  Read more about Capital Gains Taxes here and here."}
{"id": "498604", "text": "The question is for your HR department, or administrator of the plan. How long must you hold the employee shares before you are permitted to sell? Loyalty to your company is one thing, but after a time, you will be too heavily invested in one company, and you need to diversify out. One can cite any number they wish, 5%, 10%. All I know is that when Enron blew up, it only added insult to injury that not only did these people lose their job, they lost a huge chunk of their savings as well."}
{"id": "498723", "text": "I suggest to just invest in index funds, these are low risk with high reward stocks that can survive even the worst of stock crashes but are still extremely profitable when the stock market is booming"}
{"id": "498888", "text": "\"Your bank has discretion to honor checks after 6 months, so you should talk to your bank about their specific policy. In general, banks won't accept \"\"large\"\" stale checks. The meaning of \"\"large\"\" varies -- $25,000 in NYC, as little as $2k in other places. Banks that service high-volume check issuers (like rebate companies) reject checks at 180 days. For business purposes, I think some banks will create accounts for specific mailings or other purposes as well. (i.e. 2011 refund account) The accounts close after a year.\""}
{"id": "499060", "text": "\"Some investors worry about interest rate risk because they Additional reason is margin trading which is borrowing money to invest in capital markets. Since margin trading includes minimum margin requirements and maintenance margin to protect lender \"\"such as a broker\"\"  , a decrease in the value of bonds might trigger a threat of a margin call There are other reasons why investors care about interest rate risk  such as spread trade investors who benefit from difference in short term/ long term interest rates. Such investors borrow short term loans -which enables them to pay low interest- and lend long term loans - which enables them to gain high interest-. Any disturbance between the interest rate spread between short term and long term bonds might affect investor's profit and might even lead to losses. In summary , it all depends on you investment objective and financial condition. You should consult with your financial adviser to help plan for your financial goals.\""}
{"id": "499098", "text": "I'm not asking if I should carry a balance to the end of the billing period and accrue interest Typically (I say typically because there may be some fringe outlier exception product that begins accruing interest immediately), if you're not carrying a balance already you will not be charged interest for carrying a balance during the billing period.   You accrue a balance, you're issued a statement, if you pay the statement before the due date indicated you don't pay interest; even if your statement balance is less than the current actual balance on the account.  If you carry a balance through that due date you begin to accrue interest.  Not only on the balance carried but on all new charges as well.  But as long as you consistently pay your statement balance before the statement due date you will not be charged any interest. As for a reason why you may want to take advantage of this, simply to ease the administration of your finances.  You just don't need to touch the accounts that frequently to avoid interest charges.  Sure you can let your money sit in an interest bearing account and earn a couple dollars a year but really, you just don't need to focus on your CC charges this frequently."}
{"id": "499154", "text": "\"The offering price is what the company will raise by selling the shares at that price.  However, this isn't usually what the general public sees as often there will be shows to drive up demand so that there will be buyers for the stock.  That demand is what you see on the first day when the general public can start buying the stock.  If one is an employee, relative or friend of someone that is offered, \"\"Friends and Family\"\" shares they may be able to buy at the offering price. Pricing of IPO from Wikipedia states around the idea of pricing: A company planning an IPO typically appoints a lead manager, known as   a bookrunner, to help it arrive at an appropriate price at which the   shares should be issued. There are two primary ways in which the price   of an IPO can be determined. Either the company, with the help of its   lead managers, fixes a price (\"\"fixed price method\"\"), or the price can   be determined through analysis of confidential investor demand data   compiled by the bookrunner (\"\"book building\"\"). Historically, some IPOs both globally and in the United States have   been underpriced. The effect of \"\"initial underpricing\"\" an IPO is to   generate additional interest in the stock when it first becomes   publicly traded. Flipping, or quickly selling shares for a profit, can   lead to significant gains for investors who have been allocated shares   of the IPO at the offering price. However, underpricing an IPO results   in lost potential capital for the issuer. One extreme example is   theglobe.com IPO which helped fuel the IPO \"\"mania\"\" of the late 90's   internet era. Underwritten by Bear Stearns on November 13, 1998, the   IPO was priced at $9 per share. The share price quickly increased   1000% after the opening of trading, to a high of $97. Selling pressure   from institutional flipping eventually drove the stock back down, and   it closed the day at $63. Although the company did raise about $30   million from the offering it is estimated that with the level of   demand for the offering and the volume of trading that took place the   company might have left upwards of $200 million on the table. The danger of overpricing is also an important consideration. If a   stock is offered to the public at a higher price than the market will   pay, the underwriters may have trouble meeting their commitments to   sell shares. Even if they sell all of the issued shares, the stock may   fall in value on the first day of trading. If so, the stock may lose   its marketability and hence even more of its value. This could result   in losses for investors, many of whom being the most favored clients   of the underwriters. Perhaps the best known example of this is the   Facebook IPO in 2012. Underwriters, therefore, take many factors into consideration when   pricing an IPO, and attempt to reach an offering price that is low   enough to stimulate interest in the stock, but high enough to raise an   adequate amount of capital for the company. The process of determining   an optimal price usually involves the underwriters (\"\"syndicate\"\")   arranging share purchase commitments from leading institutional   investors. Some researchers (e.g. Geoffrey C., and C. Swift, 2009) believe that   the underpricing of IPOs is less a deliberate act on the part of   issuers and/or underwriters, than the result of an over-reaction on   the part of investors (Friesen & Swift, 2009). One potential method   for determining underpricing is through the use of IPO Underpricing   Algorithms. This may be useful for seeing the difference in that \"\"theglobe.com\"\" example where the offering price is $9/share yet the stock traded much higher than that initially.\""}
{"id": "499269", "text": "Aside of the other (mostly valid) answers, share price is the most common method of valuating the company.  Here is a bogus example that will help you understand the general point: Now, suppose that Company A wants to borrow $20 Million from a bank... Not a chance. Company B? Not a problem. Same situation when trying to raise new funds for the market or when trying to sell the company or to acquire another"}
{"id": "499286", "text": "Is the Grant Date or the Vest Date used when determining the 12-month cutoff for long-term and short-term capital gains? You don't actually acquire the stock until it's vested, so that is the date and price used to determine your cost basis and short-term/long-term gain/loss.  The grant date really has no tax bearing. If you held the stock (time between vesting and sale) for more than one year you will owe long-term CG tax, if less than one year you will owe short-term CG tax."}
{"id": "499752", "text": "With all due respect to The David, the $1000 is best put against 20%+ debt, no sitting in checking as part of some emergency fund.  I'd agree with the decision to pay off the lower rate card. Why? Because we can do the math, and can see the cost in doing so. Low enough that other factors come in, namely, a freed up card. That card can function as the emergency one in the short term. Long term, once these high rate cards are paid off, you'll build your proper emergency fund, but the cost is too high right now.  The $4000 is a nice start, but the most important thing is to get your budget under control. Only you can decide how much you can cut back, and go after this debt as if it were life or death."}
{"id": "499889", "text": "I have no idea what the traditional accounting way of dealing with this might be; but does your accounts package has the concept of subaccounts within a bank account?  If so, to me it would make sense that when a cheque is written, you move money in the accounts package from the bank account to a subaccount named 'Cheques Written'; then when it is cashed, move money from that subaccount to the supplier.  Then from a reporting perspective, when you want a report that will correspond to your actual bank statement, run a report that includes the subacconut; when you want a report that tells you how much you have available to spend, rune  a report that excludes the subaccount."}
{"id": "499995", "text": "\"Gift taxes are paid by the giver, not the \"\"givee\"\". You'd have to claim the $500 on your income tax forms, though.\""}
{"id": "500034", "text": "This is something that will vary from situation to situation. What is the secured debt? What is the interest rate? Does your retirement account have a match? What are your other financial obligations? How much money do you have available after meeting all of your minimum financial obligations. All of these are very important factors in deciding what the best course of action would be."}
{"id": "500261", "text": "FICO is a financial services company, whose customers are financial services companies.  Their products are for the benefit of their customers, not consumers. The purpose of the credit score system is two-fold.  First, the credit score is intended to make it easy for lending institutions (FICO's customers) to assess the risk of loans that they make.  This is probably based on science, although the FICO studies and even the FICO score formula are proprietary secrets. The second purpose of the credit score is to incentivize consumers into borrowing money.  And they have done a great job of that.  If you think you might need a loan in the future, perhaps a mortgage or a car loan, you need a credit score.  And the only way to get a credit score is to start borrowing money now that you don't need.   Yes, someone with a good income and a long history of paying utility bills on time would be a great credit risk for a mortgage.  However, that person will have no credit score, and therefore be declared by FICO as a bad credit risk.  On the other hand, someone with a low income, who struggles, but succeeds, to make the minimum payment on their credit card, would have a better credit score.  The advice offered to the first person is start borrowing money now, even though you don't need it. I'm not anti-credit card.  I use a credit card responsibly, paying it off in full every month.  I use it for the convenience.  I don't worry at all about my credit score, but I've been told it is great.  However, there are some people that cannot use a credit card responsibly.  The temptation is too great.  Perhaps they are like problem gamblers, I don't know.  But FICO and the financial services industry have created a system that makes a credit card a necessity in many ways.  These are the people that get hurt in the current system."}
{"id": "500403", "text": "Not illegal. With respect to littleadv response, the printing of a check isn't illegal. I can order checks from cheap check printers, and they have no relationship to any bank, so long as they have my routing number and checking account number, they print.  Years ago (25+) I wrote my account details on a shirt in protest to owing the IRS money, and my bank cashed it. They charged a penalty of some nominal amount, $20 or so for 'non-standard check format' or something like that. But, in fact, stupid young person rants aside, you may write a check out by hand on a piece of paper and it should clear. The missing factor is the magnetic ink. But, I often see a regular check with a strip taped to the bottom when the mag strip fails, proving that bad ink will not prevent a check from clearing.  So long as the person trying to send you the funds isn't going to dispute the transaction (and the check is made out to you, so I suppose they couldn't even do that) this process should be simple. I see little to no risk so long as the image isn't intercepted along the way."}
{"id": "500408", "text": "I don't think that's what it's doing. The commercials have to have the same *average* volume as the shows.  An interesting side effect of this would be that if you have a longer commercial spot, you can have a louder spike in the middle. Want an ad that's twice as loud as the show? Just pay for twice as much ad time!"}
{"id": "500695", "text": "There is the opportunity cost.  Let's say it cost you $1000 to buy 0.25% discount. Over N number of years that saves you let's say $2000 thus your profit is $1000. What if you took that $1000 and invested it? Would you have more than $2000 after N number of  years? Obviously answering this question is not easy but you can make some educated guesses. For example, you can compare the return you'll likely get from investing in CD or treasury bond. A bit more risky is to invest in the stock market but an index fund should be fairly safe and you can easily find the average return over 5 - 10 year period.  For example, if your loan is $200,000 at 0.25% per year you'll get $500 in savings. Over 10 years that's $5000 - $1000 to buy the point, you end up with $4000.  Using the calculator on this site, I calculated that if you invested in the Dow Jones industrial average between 2007 and 2017  you total return would have been 111% (assuming dividends are reinvested) or you would've had a total of $2110.  I'm not sure how accurate those numbers are but it seems likely that buying points is a pretty good investment if you stay in the house for 10 years or more."}
{"id": "500708", "text": "Generally these things are unrelated. Your tax debt is to agency X, your license is (mostly) from agency Y. If your business involves agency X, then it may be a problem. For example, you cannot get a EA license (IRS Enrolled Agent) if you have unsettled tax debt or other tax compliance issues. You should check Michigan state licensing organizations if there are similar dependencies.  Also, some background checks may fail, and some state licenses require them to pass. For example, you can probably not get an active bar registration or a CPA license with an unsettled tax debt. You might have a problem with registering as a Notary Public, or other similar position. You can probably not work in law enforcement as a contractor. If you're on an approved payment plan - then your tax debt is settled unless you stop paying as agreed, and shouldn't be a problem."}
{"id": "500815", "text": "How much money do you have in your money market fund and what in your mind is the purpose of this money? If it is your six-months-of-living-expenses emergency fund, then you  might want to consider bank CDs in addition to bond funds as an alternative to  your money-market fund investment. Most (though not necessarily all, so be sure to check) bank CDs can be cashed in at any time with a penalty of three months of interest, and so unless you anticipate being laid off very soon, you might get a slightly better rate of interest, FDIC insurance (which mutual funds do not have), and with any luck you may never have to break a CD and lose the interest. Building a ladder of CDs with one maturing each month might be another way to reduce the risk of loss.  On the other hand, bond mutual funds are a risky bet now because your investment will lose value if interest rate go up, and as JohnFx points out, interest rates have nowhere to go but up.  Finally, the amount of the investment is something that you might want to consider before making changes. If you have $50K put away as your six-month fund, you are talking of $500 versus $350 per annum in changing to a riskier investment with a 1% yield from a safer investment with a 0.7% yield. Whether bragging rights at neighborhood parties are worth the trouble is something for you to decide."}
{"id": "500856", "text": "\"I've made excellent returns on XIV.    My \"\"foolproof\"\" strategy....When shit completely hits the fan and the vix is through the roof for a few days, buy, then sell a few weeks later.  XIV has been very kind to me in situations where everyone seems to overreact.\""}
{"id": "500913", "text": "The law says that you cannot make a contribution (whether tax-deductible or not) to a Traditional IRA for any year unless you (or your spouse if you are filing a joint tax return) have taxable compensation (income earned from the sweat of your brow such as wages, salary, self-employment income, commissions on sales, and also alimony or separate maintenance payments received under a divorce decree, etc) during that year, and you will not be 70.5 years old by the end of the year for which you are making the contribution. The contribution, of course, can be made up to Tax Day of the following year, and is limited to the lesser of the total compensation and $5500 ($6500 for people over 50).  Assuming that you are OK on the compensation and age issue, yes, you can make a contribution to a Traditional IRA for an year in which you take a distribution from a Roth IRA. Whether you can deduct the Traditional IRA contribution depends on other factors such as your income and whether or not you or your spouse is covered by a workplace retirement plan."}
{"id": "501372", "text": "If you get selected for exercise, your broker will liquidate the whole position for you most likely Talk to your broker."}
{"id": "501536", "text": "Picking yourself is just what all the fund managers are trying to do, and history shows that the majority of them fails the majority of the time to beat the index fund. That is the core reason of the current run after index funds. What that means is that although it doesn\u2019t sound so hard, it is not easy at all to beat an index consistently. Of course you can assume that you are better than all those high-paid specialists, but I would have some doubt. You might be luckier, but then you might be not."}
{"id": "501559", "text": "It will be similar to what you have said -- the options price will adjust accordingly following a stock split - Here's a good reference on different scenarios - Splits, Mergers, Spinoffs & Bankruptcies also if you have time to read Characteristics & Risks of Standardized Options"}
{"id": "501764", "text": "\"My feeling is that you're basically agreeing to throw away a bucket of money for a lesson that doesn't have to cost a penny. Like another commenter said, you're putting the cart before the horse.  I once asked a similar question to a seasoned investor, though I wasn't in the position to toss my hard-earned cash into the well yet. He told me that the difference between the winners and losers is that the winners don't need the money. I'm not trying to say that there's a \"\"rich keep getting richer ...\"\" component here, while schlubs like me get nada.  The real nugget of wisdom he offered was that if anyone wants to do well as investors, we must invest in a way that we're not dependent on the money we have in the market. Instead, manage risk carefully so that you don\u2019t get swept up in the emotional highs and lows.  For you, what I applaud is that you're willing to do your research first. And part of that should be anticipating how you will handle the anxiety when you put your money in at the wrong time or get out a little later than you should.  What I understand now is that you don\u2019t need to be wealthy to \u201cnot need the money.\u201d You just need to invest smartly and leave your emotions out of it.\""}
{"id": "501931", "text": "I believe this depends on the broker's policies. For example, here is Vanguard's policy (from https://personal.vanguard.com/us/whatweoffer/stocksbondscds/brokeragedividendprogram): Does selling shares affect a distribution? If you sell the entire position two days or more before the dividend-payable date, your distribution will be paid in cash. If, however, you sell an entire position within the two day time frame of the security's payable date, the dividend will be reinvested, resulting in additional shares. Selling these subsequent shares will require another sell order, which will incur additional commission charges. Dividends which would have been reinvested into less than one whole share will be automatically liquidated into cash. If you want to guarantee you receive no fractional shares, I'd call your broker and ask whether selling stock ABC on a particular date will result in the dividend being paid in shares."}
{"id": "501976", "text": "\"While I think this is generally inadvisable, there are sites and communities dedicated to \"\"points churning\"\" credit card reward programs.  In general, no there is no easy way to get cash from a credit card, and receive the spending rewards, and not pay fees well in excess of your rewards value. However, there are people who figure out ways to do this kind of thing.  Like buying prepaid Visa cards $500 at a time from drug stores on a 5% bonus rewards month.  Or buying rolls of $1 coins from the US treasury with free shipping. The issue is the source of the fees.  When you spend money on your card the merchant pays a fee.  When you get cash from an ATM not only is there no merchant remitting a fee there is an ATM operator and a network both charging fees.\""}
{"id": "502150", "text": "\"The biggest and primary question is how much money you want to live on within retirement. The lower this is, the more options you have available. You will find that while initially complex, it doesn't take much planning to take complete advantage of the tax system if you are intending to retire early. Are there any other investment accounts that are geared towards retirement or long term investing and have some perk associated with them (tax deferred, tax exempt) but do not have an age restriction when money can be withdrawn?  I'm going to answer this with some potential alternatives. The US tax system currently is great for people wanting to early retire. If you can save significant money you can optimize your taxes so much over your lifetime! If you retire early and have money invested in a Roth IRA or a traditional 401k, that money can't be touched without penalty until you're 55/59. (Let's ignore Roth contributions that can technically be withdrawn) Ok, the 401k myth. The \"\"I'm hosed if I put money into it since it's stuck\"\" perspective isn't true for a variety of reasons. If you retire early you get a long amount of time to take advantage of retirement accounts. One way is to primarily contribute to pretax 401k during working years. After retiring, begin converting this at a very low tax rate. You can convert money in a traditional IRA whenever you want to be Roth. You just pay your marginal tax rate which.... for an early retiree might be 0%. Then after 5 years - you now have a chunk of principle that has become Roth principle - and can be withdrawn whenever. Let's imagine you retire at 40 with 100k in your 401k (pretax). For 5 years, you convert $20k (assuming married). Because we get $20k between exemptions/deduction it means you pay $0 taxes every year while converting $20k of your pretax IRA to Roth. Or if you have kids, even more. After 5 years you now can withdraw that 20k/year 100% tax free since it has become principle. This is only a good idea when you are retired early because you are able to fill up all your \"\"free\"\" income for tax conversions. When you are working you would be paying your marginal rate. But your marginal rate in retirement is... 0%. Related thread on a forum you might enjoy. This is sometimes called a Roth pipeline. Basically: assuming you have no income while retired early you can fairly simply convert traditional IRA money into Roth principle. This is then accessible to you well before the 55/59 age but you get the full benefit of the pretax money. But let's pretend you don't want to do that. You need the money (and tax benefit!) now! How beneficial is it to do traditional 401ks? Imagine you live in a state/city where you are paying 25% marginal tax rate. If your expected marginal rate in your early retirement is 10-15% you are still better off putting money into your 401k and just paying the 10% penalty on an early withdrawal. In many cases, for high earners, this can actually still be a tax benefit overall. The point is this: just because you have to \"\"work\"\" to get money out of a 401k early does NOT mean you lose the tax benefits of it. In fact, current tax code really does let an early retiree have their cake and eat it too when it comes to the Roth/traditional 401k/IRA question. Are you limited to a generic taxable brokerage account? Currently, a huge perk for those with small incomes is that long term capital gains are taxed based on your current federal tax bracket. If your federal marginal rate is 15% or less you will pay nothing for long term capital gains, until this income pushes you into the 25% federal bracket.  This might change, but right now means you can capture many capital gains without paying taxes on them. This is huge for early retirees who can manipulate income. You can have significant \"\"income\"\" and not pay taxes on it. You can also stack this with before mentioned Roth conversions. Convert traditional IRA money until you would begin owing any federal taxes, then capture long term capital gains until you would pay tax on those. Combined this can represent a huge amount of money per year. So littleadv mentioned HSAs but.. for an early retiree they can be ridiculously good. What this means is you can invest the maximum into your HSA for 10 years, let it grow 100% tax free, and save all your medical receipts/etc. Then in 10 years start withdrawing that money. While it sucks healthcare costs so much in America, you might as well take advantage of the tax opportunities to make it suck slightly less. There are many online communities dedicated to learning and optimizing their lives in order to achieve early retirement. The question you are asking can be answered superficially in the above, but for a comprehensive plan you might want other resources. Some you might enjoy:\""}
{"id": "502164", "text": "I am very surprised no one mentioned the Stock Repair Option Strategy which has real benefits and is one of the mainstream Option Strategies. Quote: Who Should Consider Using the Stock Repair Strategy? In a nutshell, you are buying call options with current strike price (at-the-money) and sell call options with higher strike price (out-of-the-money), all with the same expiry dates.  The only reason to also sell call options here is to recover your premium paid for the other call options. If you are comfortable paying that premium, you just buy the call options without selling the others. In case your stock will rise moderately to a price between the two strike prices, your call option will rise together with your stock, so you will be faster to recover your money. This is the main reason it is called Repair. If you have sold any call options, as the price rises, you have to be careful when it reaches the strike price of the options sold, as from there on you will begin incurring losses. It is however exactly the lucky outcome you were hoping for, your stock is higher, and you can buy back those loss making options - then or shortly before. If you didn't sell any options and payed your premium, you don't need to worry at all at this stage. WARNING It should be noted that the Stock Repair Strategy offers no protection for your stock price further falling down. In that case all those options will expire worthless or you can sell back the ones your bought but likely not for much. In order to have the downside protection for your stock, there are other strategies, the simplest one being buying a Put Option at-the-money or slightly lower. That will effectively cut your possible losses to the Option Premium (which is the main use of that option).  Again, if you hate to pay that premium, you can offset it by selling other options that you either hope won't be exercised or take steps to protect you against those."}
{"id": "502223", "text": "You just need to average out the weekly hours and income over the year. So if his yearly income is $100,000 p.a. then this would average out to $2000 per week of which 15% would be $300 per week. It does not have to be exactly 15% per week as long as over the long run your saving your target 15%. If he gets a pay rise you can include this in the saving plan. Say he gets a 5% increase in pay you would increase the $300 per week by 5% to $315 per week."}
{"id": "502271", "text": "Thanks very much.  12b1 is a form that explains how a fund uses that .25-1% fee, right? So that's part of the puzzle im getting at.  I'm not necessarily trying to understand my net fees, but more who pays who and based off of what.   For a quick example, betterment bought me a bunch of vanguard ETFs. That's cool. But vanguard underperformed vs their blackrock and ssga etfs. I get that vanguard has lower fees, but the return was less even taking those into account.  I'm wondering, first what sort of kickback betterment got for buying those funds, inclusive of wholesale deals, education fees etc.  I'm also wondering how this food chain goes up and down the sponsor, manager tree.  I'm sure it's more than just splitting up that 1%"}
{"id": "502427", "text": "The bank doesn't have to do anything. It is your responsibility to provide the proof of insurance. It is the agent's job, which you through your HOA dues paid for, to provide that proof to you. You shouldn't be registering with icerts. They say so in the first sentence on the registration page: Unit Owners, Do Not Register Here! If you own an existing property,   and have received a letter from your lender requiring an annual   renewal/updated certificate for an association that has recently   expired, please forward that letter to info@iCerts.com to receive   instructions to place your order. If your request is a new loan of any   kind, please contact your lender and request that they either contact   us to place this order, or register below. So you can try that route (sending an email to info@icerts.com), and see if it works. It does cost money, in the range of $20-$100 (I used a different similar service at the time and they charged $75 for this). If it doesn't, you can try and work with the insurance agent. There are some ways to persuade them: California has very strong traditions of consumer protections. In this case, I suggest checking out this site. Let the insurance agent know that as the HOA member - they're working for you, and that in the next HOA meeting you will raise a request to change the insurance agency. Also, remind the agent that the CA Insurance Commission will knock on their doors to ask why they don't provide you with the proof you need. If the HOA management company doesn't help you, you can remind them that they too can be fired. This can be done, and isn't even all that hard. There's a lot of competition in the HOA management market, and it wouldn't be too hard to find a new management company. The HOA management company should have provided you the proof of coverage when they renewed the policy."}
{"id": "502482", "text": "Depending on the the requirements of the annuity you might be able to pull back to part time for  a semester, thus reducing the bill for that semester. During that semester either get a job that will allow you to save money, or get an internship related to your major. Some of these programs alternate between work semesters and schools semesters.  Many colleges have an installment plan, where the payments are due every month, they usually spread them out over a 10 month period. Most only charge a nominal fee to set up the plan. This would reduce the amount of money needed to bridge the gap to only a portion of the tuition payments for the spring semester. You could also live off campus to save money. There is no guarantee it will be cheaper, but because the costs aren't fixed and due at the start of the semester, you might be able to stretch your budget."}
{"id": "502754", "text": "No.  In a marginal tax system, only additional dollars that push you into a higher bracket are taxed at that higher rate.  If you would pay 15% on $73800, then when you earn over $73800, you will still only pay 15% of the $73800, plus 25% of the extra amount over $73800.  As far as a marginal income tax affects things, you cannot decrease your net income by increasing your salary.  (There can be other potential reasons to keep your income down besides income taxes, as asked in this question, but as the answer there suggests, these often aren't great reasons either.) As far as I know, every income tax system that has differing tax rates works this way.  That is, I'm not aware of any country with an income tax system where you can decrease your net earnings by moving into a higher bracket."}
{"id": "502875", "text": "Your calculations look correct in that they will be withholding taxes at the full year income rate even though you will only have 1/3 of that income which will put you in a lower tax bracket. There are online sites where you can fill out a return for free.  You can estimate your return by filling out a return using the numbers on your paystub (you will have to add in your last paystub manually). In regards to when you will get your refund check?  I believe it comes within a month or so of filing."}
{"id": "503047", "text": "\"Company values (and thus stock prices) rely on a much larger time frame than \"\"a weekend\"\".  First, markets are not efficient enough to know what a companies sales were over the past 2-3 days (many companies do not even know that for several weeks).  They look at performance over quarters and years to determine the \"\"value\"\" of a company.  They also look forward, not backwards to determine value.  Prior performance only gives a hint of what future performance may be.  If a company shut its doors over a weekend and did no sales, it still would have value based on its future ability to earn profits.\""}
{"id": "503052", "text": "yeah - the point is why should any foreign investor trust you with their money?  just because Bangladesh might have a hot housing market, doesn't make you a reliable or trustworthy partner.  Maybe if you were an established and reputable real estate investor this post might get traction."}
{"id": "503062", "text": "The main reason I'm aware of that very few individuals do this sort of trading is that you're not taking into account the transaction costs, which can and will be considerable for a small-time investor. Say your transaction costs you $12, that means in order to come out ahead you'll have to have a fairly large position in a given instrument to make that fee back and some money. Most smaller investors wouldn't really want to tie up 5-6 figures for a day on the chance that you'll get $100 back. The economics change for investment firms, especially market makers that get special low fees for being a market maker (ie, offering liquidity by quoting all the time)."}
{"id": "503075", "text": "To add to @Victor 's answer; if you are entering a market order, and not a limit order (where you set the price you want to buy or sell at), then the Ask price is what you can expect to pay to purchase shares of stock in a long position and the Bid price is what you can expect to receive when you sell stock you own in a long position."}
{"id": "503261", "text": "\"Are there other options I haven't thought of? Mutual funds, stocks, bonds. To buy and sell these you don't need a lawyer, a real-estate broker and a banker. Much more flexible than owning real estate. Edit: Re Option 3: With no knowledge of investing the first thing you should do is read a few books. The second thing you should do is invest in mutual funds (and/or ETFs) that track an index, such as the FTSE graph that was posted. Index funds are the safest way to invest for those with no experience. With the substantial amount that you are considering investing it would also be wise to do it gradually. Look up \"\"dollar cost averaging.\"\"\""}
{"id": "503505", "text": "Futures are immediate settlement, and your money is available as soon as you close out your position."}
{"id": "503651", "text": "You cannot deduct anything. Since you're actually moving, your tax home will move with you. You can only deduct the moving expenses (actual moving - packing, shipping, and hotels while you drive yourself there)."}
{"id": "504599", "text": "Actually, the rate of change could be more or less constant, but you might have a minimum price that represents your fixed costs.  So you might sell a milligram for $1 (which is ridiculous in terms of per-unit pricing) to cover fixed costs, and add $0.50/lb for each step in size to cover variable costs (cost of raw materials and packaging), so a 2lb bag would be $2, a 5lb bag would be $3.50, a ton would be $1,001, etc.  At the end of the day, you want the marginal revenue (the price that you charge for each additional pound) to be more than the marginal cost (the price per pound it takes to produce the bag).  Any amount over that goes towards your fixed costs - the cost you'd incur if you sold zero product (rent, utilities, overhead, etc.) It's not an exact science, and there are many variables that go into pricing."}
{"id": "504709", "text": "Draw up a budget and see where most of you expenses go to. See if you can cut any not essential expenses.  If this doesn't help much you will need to increase your income. Ways to do this without going into debt may be to get a job, ask your parents for money, sell some of your non essential things, tutor fellow students or students in earlier years, just to name a few. Basically, if you want to stay out of debt you income needs to be higher than your expenses. So you either need to reduce your expenses, increase your income, or both. Without further information from yourself it would be quite hard to direct you in the right direction."}
{"id": "504940", "text": "Are you sure the question even makes sense? In the present-day world economy, it's unlikely that someone young who just started working has the means to put away any significant amount of money as savings, and attempting to do so might actually preclude making the financial choices that actually lead to stability - things like purchasing [the right types and amounts of] insurance, buying outright rather than using credit to compensate for the fact that you committed to keep some portion of your income as savings, spending money in ways that enrich your experience and expand your professional opportunities, etc. There's also the ethical question of how viable/sustainable saving is. The mechanism by which saving ensures financial stability is by everyone hoarding enough resources to deal with some level of worst-case scenario that might happen in their future. This worked for past generations in the US because we had massive amounts (relative to the population) of (stolen) natural resources, infrastructure built on enslaved labor, etc. It doesn't scale with modern changes the world is undergoing and it inherently only works for some people when it's not working for others. From my perspective, much more valuable financial skills for the next generation are:"}
{"id": "505025", "text": "Why do people always seem to forget that plenty of people went and studied all sorts of wacky topics in university during the 1960s and 1970s ... and paid no more for tuition / housing / food / etc than a minimum wage job could support in up front cash?      The problem isn't going to study 4 years of interpretive dance. The problem is the government-induced tuition inflation that will give someone $50k in government-backed loans to go study 4 years of interpretive dance. Get the freaking government out of the tuition inflation business already! And let people go study 4 years of interpretive dance for $1k/year if they so desire.      If you don't believe that nearly 100% of tuition inflation is caused by government-backed loans. Then ask yourself - what kind of investor in their right mind would freely lend $50k in unsecured funds to someone to study 4 years of interpretive dance?"}
{"id": "505110", "text": "The amended return Form 1040x has a different calculation for the `Refund or Amount You Owe' section than the original 1040, you use the amount you owed or amount overpaid from the original return to offset the impact of the amended return. This calculation assumes the refund/payment has been made already.  So deposit your refund check, then file the amended return. I suggest filing sooner rather than later in case you owe (unlikely to be penalized unless it's significant/fraudulent), but sooner is better anyway."}
{"id": "505223", "text": "In India, in the money options get exercised automatically at the end of the day and is settled at T+1(Where T is expiry day). This means, the clearing house  takes the closing price of the underlying security while calculating the amount that needs to be credited/debited to its members. Source: - http://www.nseindia.com/products/content/derivatives/equities/settlement_mechanism.htm"}
{"id": "505238", "text": "This is a great answer.  It's worth noting that often internal charging is commonly an issue in less clear cut situations like IT departments charging for their services - there is much less of an 'real' value that they could charge for their services to the outside world (as it is an internal service not a physical product that is relatively liquid), yet their chargeable costs gets inflated and can slow down businesses by making projects seem more expensive than they are. I would describe that as one of the most common gripes.  Also I'd argue that your latter scenario where profits are shifted around to reduce tax bills IS well understood by the top of the business, and unlikely to create a situation where divisions are mistakenly regarded as unprofitable (unless the CFO / FD is missing from all the board meetings!). It's a situation that is carefully designed by the business."}
{"id": "505562", "text": "I don't know that.  I know mine has a great mobile app where I can deposit a check online.  And all the smaller banks I've seen dont build their own sites or apps, they white label generic ones from common vendors."}
{"id": "505761", "text": "Just type in the forms as they are, separately. That would be the easiest way both to enter the data without any mistakes, and ensure that everything matches properly with the IRS reports."}
{"id": "505993", "text": "Buy the minimum of one fund now. (Eg total bond market) Buy the minimum of the next fund next time you have $2500. (Eg large-cap stocks.) Continue with those until you have enough to buy the next fund (eg small-cap stocks).  Adjust as you go to balance these funds according to your planned ratios, or as close as you can reasonably get without having to actually transfer money between the funds more than once a year or so. Build up to your targets over time. If you can't easily afford to tie up that first $2500, stay with banks and CDs and maybe money market accounts until you can. And don't try to invest (except maybe through a matched 401k) before you have adequate savings both for normal life and for an emergency reserve. Note too that the 401k can be a way to buy into funds without a minimum. Check with your employer. If you haven't maxed out your 401k yet, and it has matching funds, that is usually the place to start saving for retirement; otherwise you are leaving free money on the table."}
{"id": "506298", "text": "This is just a pedestrian (my) opinion: Yes, It is wise to invest in bond funds even in a low interest environment. Check out the lazy man's portfolio on bogleheads. The reason is:"}
{"id": "506306", "text": "Put them in Cds.  Better than a savings account, you won't lose capital unlike the stock market."}
{"id": "506311", "text": "i've had a few friends who tried it out for shits a giggles with a very small amount of money (a couple hundred at most) and with enough diversification, they basically broke even, or lost a little bit. With enough free time, i had a friend look into very specific companies that were offering cheap stock, and guessed on if they thought these companies would be successful given market potential, and yeah, it really was a crap-shot on whether the'd make a damn thing...   After fees for making the trades and the crazyness of penny stocks, ultimately, they wasted time and lost a small amount of money."}
{"id": "506395", "text": "According to Intuit, you cannot claim the $50 charitable contribution, so the entire $2000 / month will be taxable instead of $1900. That's only an extra $35 if your combined tax rate is 35%. As TTT mentioned, do this for the experience, not for the money. My wife and I have been hosting international students for 10 years now. https://ttlc.intuit.com/questions/3152069-i-received-a-1099-misc-employee-compensation-for-hosting-a-foreign-exchange-student-can-i-complete-a-schedule-c-for-the-expenses"}
{"id": "507029", "text": "In general people make a few key mistakes with property: 1) Not factoring in depreciation properly. Houses are perpetually falling down, and if you are renting them perpetually being trashed by the tenants as well - particularly in bad areas. Accurate depreciation costs can often run in the 5-20% range per year depending on the property/area. Add insurance to this as well. 2) Related to 1), they take the index price of house price rises as something they can achieve, when in reality a lot of the house price 'rise' is just everyone having to spend a lot of money keeping them standing up. No investor can actually track a house price graph due to 1) so be careful to make reasonable assumptions about actual achievable future growth.  3) Failure to price in the huge transaction costs (often 5%+ per sale) and capital gains/other taxes (depends on the exact tax structure where you are). These add up very fast if you are buying and selling at all frequently. 4) Costs in either time or fees to real estate rental agents. Having to fill, check, evict, fix and maintain rental properties is a lot more work than most people realise, and you either have to pay this in your own time or someone else\u2019s. Again, has to be factored in. 5) Liquidity issues. Selling houses in down markets is very, very hard. They are not like stocks where they can be moved quickly. Houses can often sit on the market for years before sale if you are not prepared to take low prices. As the bank owns your house if you fail to pay the mortgage (rents collapse, loss of job etc) they can force you to fire sale it leaving you in a whole world of pain depending on the exact legal system (negative equity etc). These factors are generally correlated if you work in the same cities you are buying in so quite a lot of potential long tail risk if the regional economy collapses. 6) Finally, if you\u2019re young they can tie you to areas where your earnings potential is limited. Renting can be immensely beneficial early on in a career as it gives you huge freedom to up sticks and leave fast when new opportunities arise. Locking yourself into 20yr+ contracts/activities when young can be hugely inhibiting to your earnings potential \u2013 particularly in fast moving jobs like software development.  Without more details on the exact legal framework, area, house type etc it\u2019s hard to give more specific advise, but in general you need a very large margin of safety with property due to all of the above, so if the numbers you\u2019re running are coming out close, it\u2019s probably not worth it, and you\u2019re better of sticking with more hands off investments like stocks and bonds."}
{"id": "507038", "text": "December, 8, 2011 ( 01:30 pm) :-  Gold &amp; Silver good support by the investors who are keep maintaining their buy position in MCX &amp; Comex.  But spot traders has sold 1000 kg Silver on Wednesday. Apart from this Silver maintaining their support above $ 32 &amp; but also facing some resistance at $ 33.20.  If today $ 33.20, Silver able to trade above that level than we can fore see their prices up to $ 34 - 35 in short term but if all problems are sowed after the today meet.  Gold trend today totally bullish, If they trade above $ 1740 &amp; Rs 29250 in MCX, We can for see Gold prices up to $ 1760 - $ 1780 in Comex &amp; Rs 29500 - Rs 29700 in MCX."}
{"id": "507077", "text": "\"If you don't withhold enough you'll pay penalties. The best would be to withhold just enough not to have any additional liabilities or refunds at the end of the year. IRS gives you some space to play in case you miscalculate and withhold a little bit less (they'll \"\"look the other way\"\" if you end up withholding up to as low as 90% of your tax liability). Anything below that triggers penalties, interests and fees. IRS pub 505 for details.\""}
{"id": "507284", "text": "Very likely this refers to trading/speculating on leverage, not investing. Of course, as soon as you put leverage into the equation this perfectly makes sense.  2007-2009 for example, if one bought the $SPX at its highs in 2007 at ~$1560.00 - to the lows from 2009 at ~$683.00 - implicating that with only 2:1 leverage a $1560.00 account would have received a margin call. At least here in Europe I can trade index CFD's and other leveraged products. If i trade lets say >50:1 leverage it doesn\u2019t take much to get a margin call and/or position closed by the broker. No doubt, depending on which investments you choose there\u2019s always risk, but currency is a position too. TO answer the question, I find it very unlikely that >90% of investors (referring to stocks) lose money / purchasing power. Anyway, I would not deny that where speculators (not investors) use leverage or try to trade swings, news etc. have a very high risk of losing money (purchasing power)."}
{"id": "507520", "text": "This is because short term debt needs to be rolled over to finance the long term project and so, when interest rates rise they will be refinanced at a higher interest rate. This means that it will end up costing more than if the company had taken out a long term loan at the lower rate. A long term project implies that the beneficial (incoming) cashflows will be long term but with short term financing the debt will come payable sooner which is why it needs rolling over; any beneficial cashflows are not  enough to cover the debt."}
{"id": "507567", "text": "&gt; They follow the coldly rational, impersonally merciless path of greatest profit in the most immediate term, without the slightest concern for your humanity or needs.  Watch out, your heart is bleeding on the floor.  Banks are a business, not a charity. They lend you money to make a profit. If you're not comfortable with that, don't take their money *and falsely promise to pay it back.*"}
{"id": "507806", "text": "\"Interestingly enough, \"\"strategic default\"\" seems to be more common than one might think in California and there is actually a lot of information available on it, to include a calculator that breaks down the numbers for you (although affiliated with a law office). Speaking from a purely financial standpoint, walking away only makes sense if it puts you in a better financial position than you were before while you had the mortgage. If you look at the downsides of walking away: The issues with the credit rating are will known but you need to take into account any open lines of credit you currently have as well as any need you might have to open a line of credit in the future. If you currently have credit cards, will the rates go up after the hit? On the housing side of things, you mortgage payment is currently a known quantity that will not change for the duration of the mortgage unless you do something to change it. However, it is fairly rare for rents to not change between years and if you want an apartment or house similar to what you currently have, you might find that the rent will fluctuate quite a bit between years and in the long run the rent might run higher than your current mortgage payment. Likewise, in the shorter term, if the landlord runs a credit check they might adjust what the rent is (or deny you the apartment) on the basis of the black mark on your history for reasons that other have mentioned. Another item to take into account is if you need to get a job in the future. Depending upon what you do for a living this might be a non-issue; however, if you are in a position of trust, walking away from a mortgage payment will reflect negatively upon your character unless you have a very good reason for it. This can lead to a loss of employment opportunities. Next, if you walk away from the mortgage you are walking away from the current value of the home and any future value that the home might have. If you like where you are living and aren't planning on moving to another part of the country, you are gambling that the market will not recover or that you would reach parity with what you owe by the time you need to sell the house. If you do plan on staying where you are and the house is in good repair, then in the long run you might be giving up quite a bit of money by walking away. These are a lot of factors to take into account though so its really hard to say one way or another if a strategic default is a good idea. In the long run you might come out ahead but knowing when that date is can be difficult to calculate. Likewise, in the long run it might adversely affect you and you might come to regret the decision.  If the payments themselves are a bit too high, perhaps you can refinance or negotiate with the bank for a lower payment? If you get a better rate but keep your monthly payments the same then you might reach parity with the mortgage much faster which would also be to your advantage.\""}
{"id": "507813", "text": "Your best bet is to refinance the car in your own name only. Hopefully a year of making the payments has improved your credit score enough. If not, you can approach a loan officer at a credit union and make your case (that you haven't missed any payments, etc.). A new title should be sent to the new lien holder, and  in that process, if your ex needs to sign any paperwork, it can be done while refinancing."}
{"id": "507828", "text": "\"I'm adding to @Dilip's basic answer, to cover the additional points in your question.  I'll assume you are referring to publicly traded stock options, such as those found on the CBOE, and not an option contract entered into privately between two specific counterparties (e.g. as in an employer stock option plan). Since you are not obligated to exercise a call option you purchased on the market, you don't need to maintain funds on account for possible exercising.  You could instead let the option expire, or resell the option, neither of which requires funds available for purchase of the underlying shares. However, should you actually choose to exercise the call option (and usually this is done close to expiration, if at all), you will be required to fund your account much like if you bought the underlying shares in the first place.  Call your broker to determine the exact rules and timing for when they need the money for a call-option exercise. And to expand on the idea of \"\"cancelling\"\" an option you purchased: No, you cannot \"\"cancel\"\" an option contract, per se.  But, you are permitted to sell the call option to somebody else willing to buy, via the market.  When you sell your call option, you'll either make or lose money on the sale \u2013 depending on the price of the underlying shares at the time (are they in- or out- of the money?), volatility in the market, and remaining time value.  Once you sell, you're back to \"\"no position\"\".  That's not the same as \"\"cancelled\"\", but you are out of the trade, whether at profit or loss. Furthermore, the option writer (i.e. the seller who \"\"sold to open\"\" a position, in writing the call in the first place) is also not permitted to cancel the option he wrote.  However, the option writer is permitted to close out the original short position by simply buying back a matching call option on the market.  Again, this would occur at either profit or loss based on market prices at the time.  This second kind of buy order \u2013 i.e. made by someone who initially wrote a call option \u2013 is called a \"\"buy to close\"\", meaning the purchase of an offsetting position.  (The other kind of buy is the \"\"buy to open\"\".) Then, consider: Since an option buyer is free to re-sell the option purchased, and since an option writer (who \"\"sold to open\"\" the new contract) is also free to buy back an offsetting option, a process known as clearing is required to match remaining buyers exercising the call options held with the remaining option writers having open short positions for the contract.  For CBOE options, this clearing is performed by the Options Clearing Corporation.  Here's how it works (see here): What is the OCC? The Options Clearing Corporation is the sole issuer of all securities   options listed at the CBOE, four other U.S. stock exchanges and the   National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD), and is the   entity through which all CBOE option transactions are ultimately   cleared. As the issuer of all options, OCC essentially takes the   opposite side of every option traded. Because OCC basically becomes   the buyer for every seller and the seller for every buyer, it allows   options traders to buy and sell in a secondary market without having   to find the original opposite party.   [...] \u00a0 [emphasis above is mine] When a call option writer must deliver shares to a call option buyer exercising a call, it's called assignment.  (I have been assigned before, and it isn't pleasant to see a position called away that otherwise would have been very profitable if the call weren't written in the first place!) Also, re: \"\"I know my counter party cannot sell his shares\"\" ... that's not strictly true.  You are thinking of a covered call.  But, an option writer doesn't necessarily need to own the underlying shares.  Look up Naked call (Wikipedia).  Naked calls aren't frequently undertaken because a naked call \"\"is one of the riskiest options strategies because it carries unlimited risk\"\".  The average individual trader isn't usually permitted by their broker to enter such an order, but there are market participants who can do such a trade. Finally, you can learn more about options at The Options Industry Council (OIC).\""}
{"id": "507841", "text": "Thanks for that, it did help.   I think my issue is I don't work in finance itself, I'm a lawyer, and 'capital' generally has a very specific meaning in English company law, where it refers exclusively to shareholder capital.   I realise capital in finance terms includes both debt and equity investment."}
{"id": "508185", "text": "The other issue you could run into is that each deferred account is going to be subject to its own RMD's (Required Minimum Distributions) when you've retired or hit 70.5 years of age.  Roth's don't generally care about RMD's at first, but are still subject to them once the person that created the Roth has passed.  Having fewer accounts will simplify the RMD stuff, but that's really only a factor in terms of being forced to sell 'something' in each account in order to make the RMD.   Other than that, it's just a matter of remembering to check each account if you come to a decision that it's time to liquidate holdings in a given security, lest you sell some but forget about the rest of it in another account.  (and perhaps as Chris pointed out, maybe having to pay fee's on each account for the sale)  Where this really can come into play is if you choose to load up each individual account with a given kind of investment, instead of spreading them across the accounts.  In that case RMD's could force you into selling something that is currently 'down' when you want to hold onto it, because that is your only choice in order to meet RMD's for account X.  So if you have multiple accounts, it's a good idea to not 'silo' particular vehicles into a single account, but spread similar ivestments across multiple accounts, so you always have the choice in each account of what to sell in order to meet an RMD. If you have fewer accounts, it's thus a lot easier to avoid the siloing effect"}
{"id": "508338", "text": "\"Let's do some simple math: you front 1500, they leverage you 10:1.  You now have 15K. 3$/15000. Basically you are going to be paying to say buy 100 SPY's @ 133 ($13300 total) 3$. I pay 1$ for the same trade.  How many trades a day are you going to have to make on that to make money? as 10 points on SPY = 1$ per share (and this is if you're good).  Your average win on trades might be 0.2c * 100 = 20$ If you can make \"\"5\"\" good trades that would set you back 3*2*5=30$  From your potential 100$ take in this case you would walk home with 70$ but wait theres more!, you only get 80% of this and they get 20%. So you get 56$ and they get 14.  They have made a total of 44$ in this case,you've made 56$.  How far are they gonna leverage you and what kinda sizes can you trade up to on 3$ transaction cost?\""}
{"id": "508489", "text": "You guys seem to have forgotten the most important part of this equation ... i work for a bank and I can tell u this as a painful fact ... every business is governed by its paperwork ... articles bylaws operating agreements amendments and minutes .. if a companys paperwork says that the 51% owner can fire everyone and move to Alaska and that paperwork is proper (signed and binding) it is with minimal excavation law... case in point every company is different .. and it is formed and governed by its paperwork."}
{"id": "508501", "text": "This is perfect for the ELI5 posts that always come up on this topic.  Great article.  I'd be interested in seeing a little more on the regulatory aspects of derivative contracts.  Derivatives are complex because the associated risks are complex.  When banks, insurers, and other entities large enough to have a Chief Risk Officer enter into these contracts, the assumption is that they know what they're doing, so to my knowledge, they're generally lightly regulated.  Additionally, those that understand derivatives enough to regulate them are unlikely to work for the comparatively low wages that they'd get in government. That said, I'd be interested in seeing something discussing the challenges in regulating something like this.  Even before 2008, there were some pretty big failures involving derivatives where risk was not adequately managed that probably wouldn't have been avoided with stronger regulation."}
{"id": "508534", "text": "John's answer is great, the question, however, is complex enough that one can write a book on the topic.  So, I'll take the liberty to add two observations. The matched 401(k) should be the priority, even before paying off one's credit cards if any. A dollar for dollar match combined with the extra years of compounding is worth a bit longer on the debt pay off. To a younger person, the Roth (either Roth 401(k) or IRA) is a good choice while you are in a lower tax bracket. I recommend you look at the page at Fairmark to understand the tax brackets. It's easy to see how many people straddle that 15% line (at $68K taxable) and with a bit of planning, using Roth while in the 15% bracket and deductible accounts as you go above, you can tax-manage your affairs to avoid the higher rates."}
{"id": "508610", "text": "I'm in a remarkably similar situation as yourself.  I keep roughly 80% of my portfolio in low-cost ETFs (16% bond, 16% commodities, 48% stock), with about 20% in 6-8 individual stocks.  Individual stocks are often overlooked by investors.  The benefits of individual stock ownership are that you can avoid paying any holding or management fee (unlike ETFs and mutual funds). As long as you assess the fundamentals (P/B, P/E, PEG etc.) of the company you are buying, and don't over-trade, you can do quite well. I recommend semi-annual re-balancing among asset classes, and an individual stock check up.  I've found over the years that my individual stocks outperform the S&P500 the vast majority of the time, although it often accompanied by an increase in volatility.  Since you're limiting your stake to only 20%, the volatility is not really an issue."}
{"id": "508700", "text": "Here is a quick quote from an article on Netflix, Uber, and Telsa the biggest cash burners in the business today. &gt;Investing today for profits tomorrow is what capitalism is all about. Amazon lost $4bn in 2012-14 while building an empire that now makes money. Nonetheless, it is rare for big companies to sustain heavy losses just to expand fast. If you examine the members of the Russell 1000 index [a stock market index] of large American firms, only 25 of them, or 3.3%, lost over $1bn of free cashflow in 2016 (all figures exclude financial firms and are based on Bloomberg data). In 2007 the share was 1.4% and in 1997, under 1%. Most billion-dollar losers today are energy firms temporarily in the doldrums as they adjust to a recent plunge in oil prices. Their losses are an accident."}
{"id": "508764", "text": "Mutual funds don't work like stocks in that way. The price of a mutual fund is set at the end of each day and doesn't fluctuate during the day. So no matter when you put in your order, it will be filled at the end of the day at whatever the closing price is for that day. Here is some good information on that There is no continuous pricing of fund shares throughout the trading   day. When an investor places an order to buy or sell a fund's shares,   the order is executed based on the NAV calculated at the end of that   trading day, regardless of what time during the day the order was   placed. On the other hand, if the investor were to check the price of   his or her fund shares halfway through the business day, the price   quoted would be the previous day's NAV because that was the last time   the fund calculated and reported the value. -http://www.finweb.com/investing/how-mutual-funds-are-priced.html"}
{"id": "508826", "text": "Question:  So basically the money created in this globalized digital world where capital is free to roam,  it is referring to digital money and not actual physical cash.  So the goldbugs that talk about america becoming weimar republic is delusional, since there isn't enough physical cash in relations to how big the economy is.    And it is actually the debt lending that acts as a derivative of cash money that goes around posing as the money supply or the blood supply of an economy, and that feels like inflation, but when the debt is defaulted on or destroyed, underwritten or even paid back closing the circuit then it's deflationary?   But does defaulting on ones debt create inflation since that money is still in the system and not being paid off?  You know, when debts are paid off they are taken out of the system."}
{"id": "509081", "text": "looks like the US tax system needs an overhaul. You cant charge yourself arbitrary amounts to even out your bottom line.  Wel you and I cant, but apparently we just need to make more money to do so....thanks BK for showing me the way!!"}
{"id": "509108", "text": "\"One trick is to make all purchases end in a particular number of your choosing, say \"\"3\"\". From now on, all restaurant meals,gas purchases, and anything in your control, end them in 3. When you glance at the bill, you can skip these charges, and look carefully at the rest. It's not 100%, as you couldn't easily impact supermarket charges and many others, but it's half of my routine charges.\""}
{"id": "509274", "text": "Bankers, home builders, and real estate people made a lot of money selling more houses than they should have.  To sell that many houses, they had to lie and let people without good jobs buy houses that cost too much. Then the jobs went away and the people lost their way of paying for their house.  Now there are still all those houses and still no jobs.  It is called a bubble because it was planned.  It was no accident. Even the part about jobs going away.  The rich people knew what was happening, the jobs began to go away in the early 1970's.  The plan, in part, was to make as much money as they could before too many people lost their jobs.  No jobs means no customers and no more easy money."}
{"id": "509617", "text": "Scanned or electronic copies of invoices should be sufficient as long as they are accurate and you can deliver them during an audit. Also, if you have an accountant prepare your taxes you would either need to provide them a copy of the invoices or a summary of them with the corresponding amounts to be claimed. Personally I prefer to print out a paper copy and file that away with that quarter's and year's other tax documents. I do my own taxes and find paper copies handy as I can go through each invoice/receipt and make sure I have entered its information by ticking it. I find that when handling a large number of documents that paper copies are more easy to handle than electronic ones. In the end you will need to use a system that you feel comfortable with and are able to use effectively."}
{"id": "509650", "text": "\"While I agree with Ben a lot I feel like his answer is really poor here. You do not call a number to give your credit card information out for a refund.  That is ridiculous.  Just from his answer - he has had 5 cases of fraud lately - you should know that you shouldn't follow this advice. I personally don't ever give my credit card number over the phone, unless it is the very very very last resort.  It is not just about money and safety but it is about time.  Every time that you give your number out over the phone there is a chance that the employee on the other end (by either scam or legitimate business) will use or sell your info.  So you need to determine if the time saved by doing a transaction over the phone is worth hours/days of your time if your card has a fraud issue.  And note that fraud sometimes is easily negated, but if done smartly can be hard to prove via a quick call or email to card company. What should you do? Tell company that you will simply get the refund through your credit card company. And if we go back to time element...  You fill out form on card website.  Card company goes back to vendor and says - \"\"Why are you asking for card numbers via email?\"\"  Card company either cancels vendor contract or more likely helps them understand the technology available so they don't have to do this.  Therefore that quick form that you filled out will now keep this company from bugging you again.  By going through their archaic \"\"systems\"\" you are enabling their behavior.\""}
{"id": "509837", "text": "You need to look at all your investment as a whole. The 401K, IRA, and any taxable account need to be a part of the diversification and re-balancing. The fact you have regular deposits into the 401K needs to also be a part of your strategy.  Regardless of how much specific investments have gone up this year, you need to first determine how you want to be invested in large cap stock, small cap stock, bond, international, emerging markets... Then you need to see where you are today compared to those investment percentages. You then move the money in the retirement accounts to get to your desired percentage. And set the 401K deposits to be consistent with your goals. Many times the deposits are allocated the same way the balances are, but that is more complex if one of the sectors you are investing in exists completely outside the 401K.  When you re-balance in the future you will be selling sectors that grew the most and buying those that grew the least compared to their planned percentages. If all the moves are within the 401K and IRA then capital gains are not a concern. Don't think of the different accounts as separate baskets, but think of them as a whole investment strategy."}
{"id": "509862", "text": "Ethically, you and your landlord should always report both income and expense as there technically exists a service and a rent. So it is subject to taxation. On the other hand, it can be considered an exchange of a simple favour and if it doesn't involve a money exchange or any profits (I am assuming that you are not selling what you or your landlord produce on the market) no value can be calculated thus no taxation can be applied. This changes though if a contract is involved, as a legal value can be estimated. Caution: These subjects can vary on an extreme level of specificity, of what can and cannot be claimed as income and expense, which can vary per country, state, province and even per judge, as well as the nature and sector of the work. Also, if you intend to formalize this relationship, the type of contract and reporting forms do vary per state as well. So it might be best to confirm it with a local legal advisor to avoid unfortunate surprises."}
{"id": "510144", "text": "\"I'm assuming that you're in the US.  In that case, the answer is that it depends on how your company set up its reimbursement plan.  The IRS recognizes \"\"accountable\"\" and \"\"nonaccountable\"\" plans.  Accountable plans have to meet certain requirements.  Anything else is nonaccountable.  If you are reimbursed according to an accountable plan, this is not income and should not be reported to the IRS at all.  If you are reimbursed under a nonaccountable plan, then this is income but you might be able to get a deduction on your tax return if you itemize. Most established companies have accountable plans for normal business expenses. More detail from IRS: http://www.tax.gov/TaxabilityCertainFringeBenefits/pdf/Accountable_v_Nonaccountable_Plans_Methods_of_Reimbursing_Employees_for_Expense.pdf\""}
{"id": "510167", "text": "~~LLPs are for licensed professionals like doctors and lawyers. He'll need to incorporate as an LLC if that's the route he goes.~~  He really should talk to a lawyer and an accountant before doing anything. There are probably no advantages to an LLC if the property isn't actually owned by the corporation."}
{"id": "510271", "text": "Use a compound interest calculator to project the difference with ETFs in the S&amp;P 500 (or the asset mix of your choosing), and subtract the expected pension amount. If the difference is positive, or around around even, I would do it to avoid the risk of company failure."}
{"id": "510328", "text": "\"Liquidity is highly correlated to efficiency primarily because if an asset's price is not sampled during the time of a trade, it's price is unknown therefore inefficient.  Past prices can be referenced, but they are not the price of the present.  Prices of substitutes are even worse. SPY is extremely efficient for an equity.  If permitted, it could easily trade with much lower ticks and still have potential for a locked market. Ideal exchange An ideal exchange has no public restrictions on trade.  This is not to say that private restrictions would need to be put in place for various reasons, but one would only do that if it were responsible for its own survival instead of being too big to fail. In this market, trades would be approximately continuous for the largest securities and almost always locked because of continuous exchange fee competition with ever dropping minimum ticks. A market that can provide continuous locked orders with infinite precision is perfectly efficient from the point of view of the investor because the value of one's holdings are always known. EMH In terms of the theory the Efficient Market Hypothesis this is irrelevant to the rational investor. The rational investor will invest in the market at large of a given asset class, only increasing risk as wealth increases thus moving to more volatile asset classes when the volatility can be absorbed by excess wealth. Here, liquidity is also helpful, the \"\"two heads are better than one\"\" way of thinking.  The more invested in an asset class, the lower the class's variance and vice versa.  Bonds, the least variant, dwarf equities which dwarf options, all in order of the least variance.  Believe it or not, there was a day when bonds were almost as risky as equities. For those concerned with EMH, liquidity is also believed to increase efficiency in some forms because liquidity is proportional to the number of individuals invested thus reducing the likelihood of an insufficient number of participants. External inefficiency In the case of ETFs that do not perfectly track their underlying index less costs at all times between index changes, this is because they are forbidden from directly trading in the market on their own behalf. If they were allowed and honest, the price would always be perfect and much more liquid than it otherwise should be since the combined frequency of all index members is much higher than any one alone. If one was dishonest, it would try to defraud with higher or lower numbers; however, if insider trading were permitted, both would fail due to the prisoner's dilemma that there is no honor among thieves.  Here, the market would detect the problem much sooner because the insiders would arbitrage the false price away.   Indirect internal efficiency Taking emerging market ETFs as an example, the markets that those are invested into are heavily restricted, so their ETF to underlying price inefficiencies are more pronounced even though the ETFs are actually working to make those underlying markets more efficient because a price for them altogether is known.\""}
{"id": "510345", "text": "Some things to keep in mind:  \u2022Having multiple cards can help, just make sure not to borrow more than you need.  \u2022The amount of time you have had your credit cards is important.  \u2022Make sure you're not getting a lot of hard inquiries on your credit.  Hopefully these will help!"}
{"id": "510373", "text": "When getting a mortgage it always depends on the bank and each bank may be more or less strict. With that being said there are rules and general guidelines which can help you understand how you fit in the world of mortgage approvals. If you can provide the same paper work as an employee of your company that you would normally provide from any other company then a bank may just accept that alone. However to me it seems like you will be looking at a new variation of what was known as a Self-certification mortgage A self-certification mortgage is basically a mortgage for those who   cannot prove their income. As a result of the housing collapse, the rules on a traditional self-cert mortgages have changed. As someone who is self employed, it is more difficult today to get a mortgage but is still possible. This article provides some good information: Can the self employed still get a mortgage? I advise doing some research on this topic and speaking with a professional mortgage broker.  Some Resources: Compare Self Cert Mortgages How to beat the mortgage famine in 2012 Can the self employed still get a mortgage?"}
{"id": "510409", "text": "No, even businesses pay taxes quarterly.  So if you formed Nathan, LLC, or otherwise became self employed, you'd still have to file quarterly estimates and make tax payments.  This would cause taxes to be a much more high touch part of your life. However, you should ensure that you're claiming the proper exemptions etc to avoid excessive withholding."}
{"id": "510441", "text": "The only possibility that I've seen in the past is if some of the income is for deferred services which are to be delivered in the following tax year, a portion of the income can be deferred.  Also, agree that you should be an S-corp and talk to another CPA if yours hasn't told you that yet."}
{"id": "510640", "text": "\"In Second Opinion's opinion, they say \"\"Do not initiate new position.\"\"  This means do not buy the stock if you do not already own it.   Since they also say to hold if you do own it, this is a very \"\"who knows what it will do\"\" neutral position (IMO).\""}
{"id": "510736", "text": "If your savings account linked to the mortgage account is an 100% offset account then you don't need to put extra funds into the mortgage account apart from the minimum payments which is done automatically. Any funds you have in an 100% offset acount reduces the amount of interest you have to pay on the mortgage.  So if your mortgage is $100,000 and you have $10,000 in the offset account then you only pay interest on $90,000 within the mortgage. Also the funds in the offset account are at call any time as it is simply a savings account. You can have all your pay go into it and have direct debits set up for all your bills. This way you will benefit from maximising the amounts in your offset account and reducing the amount of interest you pay on your mortgage. If your current linked savings account is not an 100% offset account ask your bank if you can change it over to one that is. If they don't have offset accounts for that particular mortgage account ask them if they have a different mortgage account with offset accounts. If they can't help you then shop arround for a bank or lender that does. I am currently with ANZ and they have a product with 100% offset account and about 0.7% below the standard variable rate, and there are plenty more similar products out there."}
{"id": "510805", "text": "\"A short-sale seems like an extreme and unethical course to take.  You should read your mortgage documents or work with your attorney to read the mortgage and determine whether it is an \"\"assumable\"\" mortgage. If so, you might be able to get the former owner to take over the mortgage.\""}
{"id": "510989", "text": "As long as you can be trusted with a Credit Card i find that if you have a setup that uses three accounts: 1. your Credit Card, 2. 2. a high interest internet account (most of these accounts don\u2019t have fees), 3. a savings account.  The Method that works for me is: 1st i calculate my fixed monthly bills i.e Rent and utilities and then transfer it into my high interest account.  for the month whenever i make a purchase i transfer the money into the high interest account ( this way I can keep a running balance of what money I have left to spend in the month. Then when the Credit Card bill comes I transfer the money out of the high interest account across to pay off the Credit Card ( this way you generate interest on the money which you would have spent throughout the month and still maintain $0 of interest from the Credit Card) over a year you can generate at least enough money in interest to go out for dinner on one of free flights!"}
{"id": "511122", "text": "3% in a year. 3% a month would be an enormously high interest rate."}
{"id": "511240", "text": "Probably not. If you were at a small company and asked such a question, you'd get advice and links to erisa or other case law, etc.  it's safe to say that a Fortune 500 company such as IBM is going to have their facts in order, and not going to run afoul of the rules in these cases (vesting rules and takeover of other company).  I was in a company that cancelled its pension program. Those of us with the required years got the option of a lump sum payout, those with less than 5 years had no vested value and got nothing. One month longer employment, in the case of a particular coworker, would have given him a lump sum worth nearly 6 months pay."}
{"id": "511241", "text": "You're talking about floating rate loans. It's so that the bond is marked back to market every 90 days. Any more often would be a hassle to deal with for everyone involved, any less often and they would be significant variance from LIBOR vs. the loan's specific rate."}
{"id": "511480", "text": "**Social Security number**  In the United States, a Social Security number (SSN) is a nine-digit number issued to U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and temporary (working) residents under section 205(c)(2) of the Social Security Act, codified as 42 U.S.C. \u00a7 405(c)(2). The number is issued to an individual by the Social Security Administration, an independent agency of the United States government. Although its primary purpose is to track individuals for Social Security purposes, the Social Security number has become a de facto national identification number for taxation and other purposes.  A Social Security number may be obtained by applying on Form SS-5, Application for A Social Security Number Card.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&amp;message=Excludeme&amp;subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/business/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.27"}
{"id": "511506", "text": "\"Don't mind the percentages. They are highly misleading. First, \"\"saving\"\" is making available for future use. It might be \"\"hoarding\"\", \"\"investing\"\" or a combination thereof. It might be for a specific use (a car, a college education, retirement, etc.), or for a non-specific use (for an emergency, for when you decide to spend some of those savings, or just for lack of a compelling use as of the moment). In first case, whatever you save should be available by the date you intend to use it. In second case, it might be prudent to have savings (and investments, see below) of various liquidity (cash you have at hand, bank account you can draw next day, mutual fund account you can draw in a month, maybe something you can only cash in a year etc.). You will see that the actual percentages you \"\"save\"\" fluctuate enormously throughout your life, varying with the progress of your career, changes of marital status and family cmposition, etc., etc. What you should really do is to come up with a rough plan of how you expect, from right now and to the end of your life at whatever age, have enough money for whatever level of comfort you plan for each period of your life, allowing for some specified level of perturbations. Then you just execute that plan or change it as you go.\""}
{"id": "511528", "text": "You're asking whether the shares you sold while being a US tax resident are taxable in the US. The answer is yes, they are. How you acquired them or what were the circumstances of the sale is irrelevant. When you acquired them is relevant to the determination of the tax treatment - short or long term capital gains. You report this transaction on your Schedule D, follow the instructions. Make sure you can substantiate the cost basis properly based on how much you paid for the shares you sold (the taxable income recognized to you at vest)."}
{"id": "511651", "text": "Possible alternative: In my case, the part-time locksmithing is a small enough portion of my I come that I just submit it as hobby income, rather than trying to track it as a separate entity."}
{"id": "511664", "text": "I'd recommend investing in a mutual fund that diversifies your purchase across a number of stocks (and bonds, depending on the fund). Vanguard has some of the lowest fees around, and have a large number of funds to choose from. Take a look at their offerings for a data point if nothing else."}
{"id": "511678", "text": "I think people in general tend to unnecessarily over-complicate this issue.  Here's what I think you should do in any situation like this: First and foremost, put all tax considerations aside and decide whether it makes sense to sell the stock now or hold on to it for the long term based on its merits as an investment.  Tax considerations have absolutely nothing to do with whether the stock is a good investment.  If you consider all non-tax factors and decide to hold on to it for the long term, then you can use the tax considerations as a very minor input to how long you should hold it - in other words, don't set your time horizon to 17.5 months if waiting another 2 weeks gives you better tax treatment. You're going to pay taxes on your gains no matter what.  The only difference is whether you pay capital gains tax or income tax.  Granted, the income tax rate is higher, but wouldn't it suck if you pay a LOT less tax only because you have a LOT less value in your stock? So to answer your question - I would say, absolutely not, tax consequences do not make it worthwhile to hold on to your ESPP shares.  If you decide to hold on to your ESPP for other reasons (and they better be good ones to put that much free profit at risk), only then should you look at the tax consequences to help fine-tune your strategy."}
{"id": "511704", "text": "\"Can you give the context? A bond usually only has one \"\"tenor,\"\" so weighted average tenor could apply to all the bonds that a single firm owes? Or an industry or the market or a specific bond rating or whatever. But we usually use duration as it's more useful\""}
{"id": "511945", "text": "You asked some direct questions, here are some direct answers: 10% of your salary is a popular rule of thumb. An IRA account is something to consider, you can open one with any of the major discount brokers and select an S&P 500 index fund for your investment. You can let it sit. That's the beauty of an index fund, it simply matches the market and you don't have to worry about trying to beat the market because you ARE the market! The average annual return for the S&P 500 Index has been around 10% (since inception). That's no guarantee, and some years are more or less and up or down. Over the long run, it goes up."}
{"id": "511960", "text": "Looks like you need marketing. How many others (competitors) are in the area? Hospitals? Determine your total market by figuring your revenue and that of your competitors. This is your potential.  Now, how to get business from your competition. Yes, website is the cheapest most effective first step.   But WHO is your TARGET market or your customers? Where do they get their information? Are they watching local TV or listening to local radio and you need to take out some ad space?  Are they even on social media? Decide what promotion would be effective for your target (coupons?)  Check out a used marketing textbook or continue to research on Google to get a feel for what I am talking about."}
{"id": "512590", "text": "\"Technically filing fee is probably a \"\"startup cost\"\", but yes - its a kind of an expense. The yearly recurring fee is an expense.\""}
{"id": "512663", "text": "would you earn $600 or $1600?  You would have $1600, and your earnings would be $600. That's the only answer it could be, since if you start with $1000 from your savings, then it's impossible for you to have also earned that money in the stock market. When you sell, do you keep your original capital, ($1000)? If you own a car which you bought for $1000, and then sell it for $1600, do you keep the original $1000?"}
{"id": "512669", "text": "\"Just looking at the practicality: Because the total value of outstanding mortgages in the US is about $10 trillion, and the government can't afford it without printing enough money to cause hyperinflation. The cost of saving the banks was actually much less than the \"\"hundreds of billions of dollars\"\" that is quoted, because most of it was loans that have been or will be repaid, not cash payments.\""}
{"id": "512694", "text": "This may only apply to Canada, but I would ask if the mortgages they lend are non-transferable. Meaning if you decide in year 2 of your 5 year term that you want to sell and move you pay a penalty, rather than be able to transfer the mortgage to a new house."}
{"id": "512699", "text": "The definitive answer is: It Depends. What are your goals? First and foremost, you need to have at least 3 months expenses in cash or equivalent. (i.e. an investment that you can withdraw from quickly, and without penalty).  The good news is that you don't have to come up with it instantly.  Set a time frame - one year - for creating this safety net, and pay towards that goal.  This is the single most important piece of financial advice you will receive. Now determine what you need to do.  For example, you may need a car.  Compare interest rates on your student loan and the car loan.  Put your cash towards whichever is higher. If you don't need a car or other big ticket item, then you may consider sticking your surplus into the student loans.  50k at $1650 a month will be paid down in about 3 years, which might be a bit long to live the monastic lifestyle. I'd look at paying down the smallest loan first (assuming relatively similar rates), and freeing up that payment for yourself.  So if you can pay off 1650 a month, and free up $100 of that in six months, then you can reward yourself with half that surplus, and apply the other half to the next loan.   (This is different than some would suggest because you're talking about entering severe spartan mode, which is not sustainable.)   Remember that life happens.  You'll meet someone.  You'll have an accident, your brother will get sick and you'll give him some money to help out.  You've got to be prepared for these events, and for these reasons, I don't recommend living that close to the edge.  Remember, you're not in default, and you do have the option of continuing to pay the minimum for a long time."}
{"id": "512827", "text": "As with most strategies there are pros and cons associated with this approach: Advantages of using LEAPS: Disadvantages of using LEAPS: Read more about it in great detail on my blog: http://www.thebluecollarinvestor.com/leaps-and-covered-call-writing-2/"}
{"id": "512984", "text": "For margin, it is correct that these rules do not apply.  The real problem becomes day trading funding when one is just starting out, broker specific minimums. Options settle in T+1. One thing to note: if Canada is anything like the US, US options may not be available within Canadian borders.  Foreign derivatives are usually not traded in the US because of registration costs.  However, there may be an exception for US-Canadian trade because one can trade Canadian equities directly within US borders."}
{"id": "513256", "text": "One of the other things you could do to improve your score would be along the lines of what Pete said in his answer, but using the current financial climate to your advantage. I'm not sure what interest rates are available to you in the UK, but I currently have 4 lines of credit aside from my house. One is a credit card I use for every day purchases and like you pay off immediately with every statement. The other three are technically credit cards, however all three were used to make purchases with 0% financing. The one was for a TV I bought that even gave me 5% off if I pay it off within 6 months. That cash has been sitting in my savings since the day I bought it. I'm making regular payments on all three, but not having to pay any interest. My credit score dropped 25 points with the one as it was an elective medical expense (Visian eye surgery), so for the time the balance is near my credit limit. However, that will bounce back up as the balance lowers. My score was also able to take that hit and still be very high. If you don't have 0% (or very close) available, your better bet would be to follow the other suggestions about saving for a sizable down payment, or other every day expenses like a cell phone."}
{"id": "513362", "text": "Yes, the business can count that as an expense but you will need to count that as income because a computer = money."}
{"id": "513376", "text": "As more people earn it, the value will dilute to some degree. However, I think for *some* parts of finance, the charter will retain usefulness. I mean, college degrees are *extremely* diluted, but they're still seen as a necessary requirement.  I see that happening for PM type of roles. Clearly anywhere it isn't useful now won't see appreciation in that later."}
{"id": "513658", "text": "\"Check out Professor Damodaran's website: http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/ . Tons of good stuff there to get you started. If you want more depth, he's written what is widely considered the bible on the subject of valuation: \"\"Investment Valuation\"\". DCF is very well suited to stock analysis. One doesn't need to know, or forecast the future stock price to use it. In fact, it's the opposite. Business fundamentals are forecasted to estimate the sum total of future cash flows from the company, discounted back to the present. Divide that by shares outstanding, and you have the value of the stock. The key is to remember that DCF calculations are very sensitive to inputs. Be conservative in your estimates of future revenue growth, earnings margins, and capital investment. I usually develop three forecasts: pessimistic, neutral, optimistic. This delivers a range of value instead of a false-precision single number. This may seem odd: I find the DCF invaluable, but for the process, not so much the result. The input sensitivity requires careful work, and while a range of value is useful, the real benefit comes from being required to answer the questions to build the forecast. It provides a framework to analyze a business. You're just trying to properly fill in the boxes, estimate the unguessable. To do so, you pore through the financials. Skimming, reading with a purpose. In the end you come away with a fairly deep understanding of the business, how they make money, why they'll continue to make money, etc.\""}
{"id": "513899", "text": "\"Normally I avoid any links pointing to guardian or telegraph or such sites but just was curios to what exactly the content of such a \"\"paper\"\" would be.   As expected, it has the seeds of a world war and is a lab factory for future terrorism. How does one expect value without work. US atleast produces some value here and there, but the other countries are just decline stage. Seriously UK? It seems some people can just not let go off their easy life ride or \"\"way of life\"\" as it is often referred to - basically create a system highly stacked in one's own favor and then blatantly call out others as conspiracy theorists or some such noun to get them on the defensive. Elimination of public debt should not be allowed for these countries.   There is so much cunningness, guile, cheating, lying in sneaky fashion and so much negativity hiding behind that theory - it is sometimes depressing how world operates and then people complain about it when there is real chance to put checks and balances to stop such disgusting things from taking form.\""}
{"id": "513973", "text": "There are some good answers in general, and I have a slightly different solution, which won't fit as a comment to one of the other answers. I am of course not a lawyer and this is not legal advice."}
{"id": "513986", "text": "\"Here are the risks involved with student loans: So - what happens if you decide (or are forced) not to finish school (50% of students don't)?  You have no degree to boost income, but still have the debt.   What happens when you graduate and want to use that saved cash buy a house, car, etc., and treat the student loans as a monthly bill?  The next thing you know you're loan-poor and are struggling to make your monthly payments just like most other \"\"normal\"\" people. You aren't going to earn significant interest on your cash while you're in college (and it will not outpace inflation), and there's significant risk of your college savings losing money if they're not in risk-free investments, so it would NOT be wise to take out student loans when you have the means to cash-flow it. Also, student loans generally charge a roughly 1% fee, so that actually negates the interest you earn in your savings account. Plus you already have money in a 529 plan that is meant for college expenses (and cannot be used to pay student loans) - use that money for what it's for.\""}
{"id": "514171", "text": "take a look at this graph here: http://mortgagevista.com/#m=1&a=40000&b=4&c=30y&B&oa&ob&oc&od It shows how much it costs to borrow $40k for 30 years. You did not post your mortgage rate or loan term, so I used 4% over 30 years (you can easily update this with your actual details). While this does not show the costs of your total mortgage, it does help you get an idea of just how much the 40k$ in question is costing you in interest. If you hover over the month one year from now you will see that you will have paid around $1587 in interest over the course of the year. If you were to put the full 40k$ toward your mortgage right now, you would avoid having to pay this interest over the next year.  The next question I think you would have to ask yourself is if there is anything else you could do with that money that is worth more than the $1587 to you.  Is it worth $1587 to keep those funds liquid/available in case you need to use them for something else? Could you find other investments you feel comfortable with that could earn you more than $1587?  Is it worth the hassle/risk of investing the funds somewhere else with a better return? If you can't come up with anything better to do with the money then yes, you should probably use the funds (or at least part of them) towards the mortgage."}
{"id": "514834", "text": "Okay so we are assuming that you can sustain 6% or more return on your investments.   Personally I would compare that rate to what lines of credit are going for and do what ever is least expensive.   Either way your risk is the same.  Your net worth is the same.  Your assets will be the same. Your liabilities will be the same. Its just a matter of who you owe it to and what the rate is. Don't be afraid of having a second mortgage.  If the stocks go down either way you have to sell what's left and pay your debt. Or what I should maybe say is don't be more afraid of a line of credit more than margin in your investment account."}
{"id": "514922", "text": "You are NOT responsible for liquidating the position.  You will either end up retaining your 100 sh. after expiration, or they will be called away automatically. You don't have to do anything.  Extending profitability can mean different things, but a major consideration is whether or not you want to hold the stock or not.  If so, you can buy back the in-the-money call and sell another one at-the-money, or further out. There are lots of options."}
{"id": "514952", "text": "There is no country tag, so I will answer the question generally. Is it possible...? Yes, it's possible and common. Is it wise? Ask Barings Bank whether it's a good idea to allow speculative investing."}
{"id": "514970", "text": "You didn't mention a country, and precise rules will be different from country to country. The usual rules are:  Shares that you didn't sell don't count. If you buy shares, there is no taxable gain until you sell them.  When you sell shares, it is assumed that the shares you are selling are the last ones that you bought.  In many places, if you sell shares, and buy the same shares back very quickly, the tax office may have rules to pretend you never sold the shares. For example in the UK, where a good amount of profit per year is tax free, you can't just sell enough shares to stay below your tax limit and then buy them back to take profits out of the shares you own.  In your case, you made $30 profit on every share you sold, and that is what you will be taxed for in most countries. According to the rules of your country."}
{"id": "515063", "text": "There isn't a general reason why you should not be able to do this, but it is hard to answer without knowing the specifics of your variable annuity.   I would start by calling Hartford and asking them how to go about rolling your money to a different IRA and what fees would be assessed."}
{"id": "515534", "text": "&gt; Ideas have no inherit value, so they can't be cheap or expensive  I really don't know where you get this idea. This comment shows some ignorance of how business works, and doesn't give me much confidence in the value of your upcoming suggestions."}
{"id": "515615", "text": "If your credit card's interest rates are not more than your 35% (25% for your tax bracket and 10% penalty), there is no way I would consider this. If you boil it down to the numbers, you are asking whether you should borrow money at a 35% interest to pay off your credit cards. I would say Absolutely Not! $20K of auto loans which equal $1100 a month in payments. Also we purchased a car for me a year ago which is 375 a month. Probably shouldn't have done it but the car I was driving was on it's last leg. Where is the $805 difference going? You've got to make sacrifices, and right now you are leaning towards sacrificing your future for your present. It would take years of Large Contributions to make up for the money lost in early withdraw penalties and taxes, not to mention the loss in growth these accounts would have been earning if left alone. This plan is similar to saying you want to spend $60k to pay off $40k. Don't do it! If it was me, I'd get a couple $3,000 cars. That should free up at least $600 a month and reduces your debt by $14k. I'd also pull my child out of private school unless there is really no public option, which based upon your refusal to consider selling your house, I image there's a decent public school near your neighborhood. That's an extra $500 a month. Next, I'd sell anything that I could through craigslist or garage sales. I'd get on a written budget and the envelope system, to make sure you are really as 'tight' as you are presenting in your question. Hating Debt is a great motivator, but you shouldn't let it lead you to make even bigger financial mistakes. I think you started doing well and got promotions and did what almost everyone else does; you increased your standard of living. No matter what you choose to do, you will never build your retirement or have financial stability without living on a budget and spending less than you make.  Maybe attacking this debt the old-fashioned way will give you the tools you need to gain financial stability long-term. Updated to address calculations Assuming 18% CC interest and 10% IRA Growth. And always spending at least $1500 on CC debt until it's gone, then $1,500 back into retirement after that. If you continued paying $1,500 a month the credit cards would take about 71 months to pay off. In that time, you'd spend a total of $106,500 on the debt.  Your plan would spend $60k upfront to reduce the debt by $40k. The new balance of $25k would be paid off in 20 months and would cost $30k total. Total cost on your plan would be $90k. Your plan pays $16.5k less in total, and it would be 51 months quicker. However, you would have no retirement at age 40.  If you then saved $1500 a month in retirement, you would catch up to the $70k loss in your IRA at age 49 (I'm including growth in both accounts to calculate this). If you had instead just left the IRA alone, you'd be done with the CCs at age 44. If after age 44, you put in $1500 month into retirement your plan would never catch up to this plan. It seems to me that cashing out your IRA is a 5 year detour."}
{"id": "516066", "text": "This would be better posted in /r/personalfinance. But since I'm here, you need to seriously consider selling anything you can possibly part with and pick up a second and/or third job. I hope you didn't charge that whiteboard purchase."}
{"id": "516790", "text": "\"Figured it out.  Vertical spreads significantly reduce the amount of \"\"buying power\"\" on the account needed vs. buying / selling pure calls / puts.  So even though the transaction fees may more double in some instances, it may be worth it in order to operate with pricier underlying instruments. Spreads are also considered \"\"defined risk\"\" trades where both the profit and loss are capped per how the spreads are setup.  This is compared to single calls / puts where either the upside or the downside can be unlimited.  So for times when the expected move is not as pronounced, a spread may be a better fit depending on environment and other factors.\""}
{"id": "516794", "text": "We provide the best offers his expertise and many years of business valuation, ownership experience to assist in the heavy task of automotive dealer succession planning. The company is proud of our long-standing commitment to the automotive dealer planning. For over half a century, we\u2019ve been a leading source of financial support for dealerships of all sizes throughout the United States. We operate nine loan production offices in key automotive markets across the country. You can count on our automotive recall expert witness to provide a full range of additional financial services."}
{"id": "516817", "text": "\"Yes, you must file North Carolina AND South Carolina income tax. If you live in one state and work in another, the income is potentially taxed twice. Most states give a credit for taxes paid to the other state. Often you pay the tax in the state where you worked, and then if the tax rate in the state where you live is higher, you pay the difference. But the details depend on the tax laws of the two states involved. I'm not an expert on either Carolina's tax laws. Start by getting the forms and instructions from both states and see what they say. Or if you're using tax software, see if it handles this case. If someone else on here knows the specifics of the tax laws for the Carolinas, I gladly yield. :-) Many states establish \"\"reciprocity agreements\"\" with other states, usually the neighboring states, that generally say that if the state you live in and the state you work in are both party to the agreement, then you only pay tax in the state you live in. This simplifies things a lot. Unfortunately, neither North Carolina nor South Carolina have such agreements with each other or with any other state.\""}
{"id": "517083", "text": "\"It does depend, but in the effort to be efficient we usually just add back Depreciation, Amortization, and Stock Based Comp.  [Although adding back SBC is hotly debated](https://www.wallstreetprep.com/blog/stock-based-compensation-treatment-dcf-almost-always-wrong/), we usually still add it back at my firm.  Keep in mind I'm in M&amp;A, so we don't really concern ourselves with creating the \"\"purest\"\" valuation...  * EBIAT * Add Depreciation * Add Amort * Add SBC * Subtract Capex * Add the decrease in NWC * Subtract the increase in NWC * = FCFF\""}
{"id": "517356", "text": "If you ever own a home (which sounds doubtful), or your parents sell their home after 20 years of ownership,  you will appreciate those capital gains taxes.   They don't just apply to the rich.     Now go,  shoo, scram.... back to your dorm room, you filthy college freshman."}
{"id": "517361", "text": "I see some merit in the other answers, which are all based on the snowball method. However, I would like to present an alternative approach which would be the optimal way in case you have perfect self-control. (Given your amount of debt, most likely you currently do not have perfect self-control, but we will come to that.) The first step is to think about what the minimum amount of emergency funds are that you need and to compare this number with your credit card limit. If your limits are such that your credit cards can still cover potential emergency expenses, use all of the 4000$ to repay the debt on the loan with the higher interest rate. Some answer wrote that Others may disagree as it is more efficient to pay down the 26%er. However, if you pay it all of within the year the difference only comes to $260. This is bad advice because you will probably not pay back the loan within one year. Where would you miraculously obtain 20 000$ for that? Thus, paying back the higher interest loan will save you more money than just 260$. Next, follow @Chris 's advice and refinance your debt under a lower rate. This is much more impactful than choosing the right loan to repay. Make sure to consult with different banks to get the best rate. Reducing your interest rate has utmost priority! From your accumulated debt we can probably infer that you do not have perfect self-control and will be able to minimize your spending/maximize your debt repayments. Thus, you need to incentivize yourself to follow such behavior. A powerful way to do this is to have a family member or very close friend monitor your purchase and saving behavior. If you cannot control yourself, someone else must. It should rather be a a person you trust than the banks you owe money."}
{"id": "517391", "text": "Why would it not make more sense to invest in a handful of these   heavyweights instead of also having to carry the weight of the other   450 (some of which are mostly just baggage)? First, a cap-weighted index fund will invest more heavily in larger cap companies, so the 'baggage' you speak of does take up a smaller percentage of the portfolio's value (not that cap always equates to better performance). There are also equal-weighted index funds where each company in the index is given equal weight in the portfolio. If you could accurately pick winners and losers, then of course you could beat index funds, but on average they've performed well enough that there's little incentive for the average investor to look elsewhere.  A handful of stocks opens you up to more risk, an Enron in your handful would be pretty devastating if it comprised a large percentage of your portfolio. Additionally, since you pay a fee on each transaction ($5 in your example), you have to out-perform a low-fee index fund significantly, or be investing a very large amount of money to come out ahead. You get diversification and low-fees with an index fund."}
{"id": "517468", "text": "This refers to the shape of the yield curve. The greater the spread, the steeper the yield curve (difference between short term rates and long term rates).   The shape of the yield curve has huge impacts on bank earnings, as they borrow short term (deposits) and lend long term (loans). The greater the spread the bigger their margins."}
{"id": "517516", "text": "I am not required to hold any company stock. I also have an ESOP plan carrying a similar number of shares in company stock.  So if it were to be sold, what would the recommendation be to replace it? I can move the shares into any option shown, and have quite a few others.  Not dealing with any huge amounts, just a 4.5% contribution over three years (so far)."}
{"id": "517577", "text": "You sold all shares? The potential wash sale effect goes away after 30 days from the dividend date. Selling all shares of a stock where a wash existed effectively negates the wash and you can take the loss."}
{"id": "517639", "text": "\"CDS spreads have little to do with the already issued debt itself. CDS spreads broadcast \"\"riskiness\"\" for current and future market participants.  Since existing debt is constantly bought and sold, higher CDS spreads mean the existing debt becomes ever more illiquid. It means that those who do hold that debt cannot price it accurately as a result of said illiquidity and cannot sell it without taking a haircut.  It also means that new debt cannot be issued without the existing debt taking a haircut or being defaulted on because at least part of the new debt would ostensibly be used to pay off the old debt.   If shares are used to securitize debt than a fall in those shares puts into question the ability to fully service that debt. The collateral is the balance sheet of the debtor.   MF global doesn't issue their own currency. They cannot devalue their debt.\""}
{"id": "517743", "text": "\"The point is that government controlled institutions could do the lending instead. Right now banks are able to lend and create money out of \"\"thin air\"\" by loaning more than they have. These banks make lots of money doing this. What if that money was used to lower taxes instead of line the pockets of old banking families?  It is not totally ludicrous\""}
{"id": "517961", "text": "\"To understand the Twist, you need to understand what the Yield Curve is.  You must also understand that the price of debt is inverse to the interest rate. So when the price of bonds (or notes or bills) rises, that means the current price goes up, and the yield to maturity has gone down.  Currently (Early 2012) the short term rate is low, close to zero. The tools the fed uses, setting short term rates for one, is exhausted, as their current target is basically zero for this debt. But, my mortgage is based on 10yr rates, not 1 yr, or 30 day money. The next step in the fed's effort is to try to pull longer term rates down. By buying back 10 year notes in this quantity, the fed impacts the yield at that point on the curve. Buying (remember supply/demand) pushes the price up, and for debt, a higher price equates to lower yield. To raise the money to do this, they will sell short term debt. These two transactions effectively try to \"\"twist\"\" the curve to pull long term rates lower and push the economy.\""}
{"id": "518079", "text": "\"Many years ago, I worked on software that had to print the date, payee, and amounts on pre-printed checks.  Other than the MICR line (which had a particular placement with respect to the bottom edge and required a particular font in a particular point size), most aspects of the check layout and format were up to the particular check provider. Then there was a desire to start using optical character recognition to further automate check handling.  A standard came out, that most checks I see now seem to follow.  The standard dictated the exact dollar sign glyph to be printed to the left of the amount box.  This glyph was used by the OCR to locate the amount.  There were specific tolerances for where you could print/write the amount relative to that dollar sign.  There were also some requirements for the box containing the amount to have some clearance from the noisy backgrounds pre-printed on many checks.  But what font you used inside the amount box was, as far as I could tell, unspecified.  After all, customers could always hand-write the amount. Interestingly, the part of the check where you spell out the amount is known as the \"\"legal amount.\"\"  If the amount in numerals and the amount in words don't match, the spelled version takes precedence, legally.  (The theory being that it's easier to doctor the numerals to change the apparent value of the check than it is to change the words.)  I always found it ironic that the layout standard to enable OCR standard was focused on reading the numerals rather than the legal amount.  OCR has come a long way since then, so I wouldn't be surprised if, nowadays, both amounts are read, even on hand-written checks. A little search shows that current (voluntary) standards are put out by the ANSI X9 group.\""}
{"id": "518088", "text": "Since the 2 existing answers addressed the question as asked. Let me offer a warning. You have 10,000 options at $1. You've worked four years and the options are vested. The stock is worth $101 when you get a job offer (at another company) which you accept. So you put up $10k and buy the shares. At this moment, you put up $10K for stock worth $1.01M, a $1M profit and ordinary income.  You got out of the company just in time. For whatever reason, the stock drops to $21 and at tax time you realize the $1M gain was ordinary income, but now the $800k loss is a capital loss, limited to $3000/yr above capital gains. In other words you have $210k worth of stock but a tax bill on $1M.  This is not a contrived story, but a common one from the dotcon bubble. It's a warning that 'buy and hold' has the potential to blow up in your face, even if the shares you buy retain some value."}
{"id": "518310", "text": "Long term gains are taxed at 15% maximum.  Losses, up to the $3K/yr you cited, can offset ordinary income, so 25% or higher, depending on your income. Better to take the loss that way. With my usual disclaimer: Do not let the tax tail wag the investing dog."}
{"id": "518393", "text": "Your dividend should show up in one of a few methods: (1) Cash in your trading account (2) A check mailed to you (3) A deposit to a linked bank account (4) As additional new shares in the stock, as the result of a DRIP setup."}
{"id": "518932", "text": "Edit3: Regarding the usefulness of the bare number itself, it is not useful unless, for example, an employer uses that average in the computation of how many options the employer grants to the employee as part of the compensation paid. One of my employers used just such an average. What is far more common is to use two or more moving averages, of different periods, plotted on a chart.  My original response continues below... Assuming there are 252 trading days a year, the following chart does what you have done but with a moving average: AAPL on Stockcharts.com  Edit: BTW, I looked up the number of Federal holidays, there are 9. The average year has 365.2422 days. 365.2422 \u00d7 5/7 = 260.8873. Subtract 9 and you get 251.8873 trading days in the average year. So 252 is a better number for the SMA than 250 if you want to average a year.  Edit2: Here is the same chart with more than one average included: AAPL chart w/indicators"}
{"id": "519129", "text": "\"Your confusion is that that answerer is not comparing a $5500 Roth IRA contribution to a $5500 Traditional IRA contribution. Rather, they were comparing a $3600 Roth IRA contribution to a $5000 Traditional IRA contribution. It is fairer to do such a comparison because (assuming that this person's marginal tax rate is 28%) both of them start with the same amount of pre-tax money ($5000 of pre-tax money is equivalent to $3600 of post-tax money in 28% tax bracket). As a result, both a $5000 Traditional IRA contribution and a $3600 Roth IRA contribution will leave you with the same amount of cash in your bank account at the end (after taxes are filed). That's why it's a fair comparison. And when you do such a comparison, it will mathematically indeed always turn out to the same result for Traditional and Roth if the contribution and withdrawal are at the same tax rate. On the other hand, if you were to compare a $5000 Roth IRA contribution to a $5000 Traditional IRA contribution, even though it's the same nominal dollar figure, you would be comparing apples and oranges because in one case it's a post-tax dollar amount and in the other case a pre-tax dollar amount. The Roth IRA contribution actually leaves you with less in your bank account at the end (after taxes are filed) than the same nominal dollar amount of Traditional IRA contribution. So you are comparing an (effectively) \"\"larger\"\" Roth IRA contribution to a \"\"smaller\"\" Traditional IRA contribution. Of course the \"\"larger\"\" contribution gets more tax advantages over time, and so the result looks better. Note that since Traditional IRA contribution and Roth IRA contributions share the same nominal dollar amount annual limit, but we know that $1 of Roth IRA contributions is effectively larger than $1 of Traditional IRA contributions, that means that Roth IRA contributions has an effectively \"\"higher\"\" annual limit than Traditional IRA contributions. For example, a $5500 Traditional IRA contribution is equivalent to a $3960 Roth IRA contribution for someone in the 28% bracket; whereas a $5500 Roth IRA contribution would be equivalent to a $7638.89 Traditional IRA contribution, which you can't do. So it's not possible to do a fair comparison when you go near the limit. If it is important to you to tax-advantage the \"\"largest\"\" amount of money, then that is a reason to go for Roth IRA, since it has an effectively higher annual limit. You cannot replicate the tax advantage of a $5500 Roth IRA contribution with a Traditional IRA contribution, because that money in pre-tax dollars is beyond the limit of a Traditional IRA contribution.\""}
{"id": "519148", "text": "In many ESPP programs (i.e. every one I've had the opportunity to be a part of in my career), your purchase is at a discount from the lower of the stock prices at the start and end of the period. So a before-tax 5% return is the minimum you should expect; if the price of the stock appreciates between July 1 and December 31, you benefit from that gain as well. More concretely: Stock closes at $10/share on July 1, and $11/share on December 31. The plan buys for you at $9.50/share. If you sell immediately, you clear $1.50/share in profit, or a nearly 16% pre-tax gain. If the price declines instead of increases, though, you still see that 5% guaranteed profit. Combine that with the fact that you're contributing every paycheck, not all at once at the start, and your implied annual rate of return starts to look pretty good. So if it was me, I'd pay the minimum on the student loan and put the excess into the ESPP."}
{"id": "519167", "text": "\"If it's an active stock, the Yahoo message boards are inhabited by some clueful people. But the signal-to-noise ratio is relatively low, and there are a lot of \"\"interesting\"\" characters who inhabit the boards as well.\""}
{"id": "519321", "text": "Are you being paid through a limited company or an umbrella company ? Are you self employed If not what they are doing is illegal. If you are being paid a salary, then the employer has to contribute their part of National Insurance. I believe they are treating you as self employed, hence asking you to generate invoices. Check your contract wordings properly. Or get help from Citizens Advice. Call them or visit their local office. Or else do call up HMRC.  But if you are invoicing them, I would assume you are self employed and you have to do your self assessment. Get in contact with HMRC and ask them to generate your Unique Taxpayer Reference (UTR). THey will send you the UTR and using this you can fill your tax returns.  It looks like cumbersome now, but it isn't so. You can do it yourself, I do mine. Or at the end of the financial year, get an accountant to do the returns for you, probably should charge you \u00a3100-\u00a3150. Keep all your invoices, bills, bank statements safely. This is some help from HMRC website"}
{"id": "519418", "text": "Because it makes money for all parties, and because the general public is reluctant to any change. Who should have an interest to change that? People. And they have no say in it. You can actually do a lot without paper checks nowadays (I only use one per year for car taxes, as they do not accept anything else), but many people shake their heads about even online banking and would never trust it."}
{"id": "519470", "text": "Is your question academic curiosity or are you thinking of buying bonds?  Be aware that bond interest rates are near all-time lows, and if interest rates were to rise, the prices of bonds could fall.  Those buying bonds today are taking unusually large risk of capital loss."}
{"id": "519644", "text": "Wrong sub. You're looking for /r/personalfinance   &gt;will freezing just that credit report hurt them in any way?  No, but it will help prevent an identity thief from wrecking your credit.   &gt;Can I still get a loan with only one of the three frozen?  Depends, but yes. You should freeze your credit at all 5 credit bureaus for personal financial protections."}
{"id": "519781", "text": "\"When the buyout happens, the $30 strike is worth $10, as it's in the money, you get $10 ($1000 per contract). Yes, the $40 strike is pretty worthless, it actually dropped in value today. Some deals are worded as an offer or intention, so a new offer can come in. This appears to be a done deal. From Chapter 8 of CHARACTERISTICS AND RISKS OF STANDARDIZED OPTIONS - FEB 1994 with supplemental updates 1997 through 2012; \"\"In certain unusual circumstances, it might not be possible for uncovered call writers of physical delivery stock and stock index options to obtain the underlying equity securities in order to meet their settlement obligations following exercise. This could happen, for example, in the event of a successful tender offer for all or substantially all of the outstanding shares of an underlying security or if trading in an underlying security were enjoined or suspended. In situations of that type, OCC may impose special exercise settlement procedures. These special procedures, applicable only to calls and only when an assigned writer is unable to obtain the underlying security, may involve the suspension of the settlement obligations of the holder and writer and/or the fixing of cash settlement prices in lieu of delivery of the underlying security. In such circumstances, OCC might also prohibit the exercise of puts by holders who would be unable to deliver the underlying security on the exercise settlement date. When special exercise settlement procedures are imposed, OCC will announce to its Clearing Members how settlements are to be handled. Investors may obtain that information from their brokerage firms.\"\" I believe this confirms my observation. Happy to discuss if a reader feels otherwise.\""}
{"id": "519798", "text": "\"Not at all. The Millionaire Next Door offers a book full of anecdotes on couples that earned money and saved their way to being millionaires. I believe about 1/3 or so had businesses, but the rest were employed and simply saved wisely.  $3860/yr saved for 40 years at 8% will return $1M. Adjust the numbers to hit a million sooner or reach a higher goal.  The Author might be accused of survey bias. This is the phenomenon of studying the final results without looking at the pool of people years prior. Little Adv' is correct that while 1/3 of millionaires may have gotten that way by starting a business, that says nothing about how many businesses need to start to find the one millionaire that resulted.  I view the book more as a lesson of \"\"spend beneath your means\"\" and focus on his anecdotes of the dual income couples who saved their way to this status. If you are in no rush, get this book from your library and spend the few hours to read it. In response to my Friend Dilip's comment, MoneyChimp offers a good look at compound growth (for the S&P) over time. The 40 years ending 2012, which obviously include the 'lost decade,' returned a CAGR of 9.78%. Not to be confused with the average 11.43%. When I pull the numbers for each year's return and apply an annual $3860 deposit, the 40 years ends with $2.2M. A 1% fee, or 1% lower return resulted in $1.6M.  If 8% isn't conservative, of course you can run the numbers you wish. The 40 years contained both a lost decade and two great ones. Will the 3 decades post-lost average to get the Quad-Decade period to 8%+? I don't know.\""}
{"id": "519967", "text": "No. You will be penalized for taking your 25k out so you will only get like 18k out. Plus you can slowly pay back the credit cards but you can't build up the 401k as fast. You can also try a service that can negotiate the amount down for you (so you would only pay 16k or something).   Protect the 401k."}
{"id": "520026", "text": "You could do a voluntary repossession. While a repossession never looks good on your credit a voluntary repossession is slightly better. A good friend of mine had a situation like this about 11 years ago.  She was in an accident didn't have replacement coverage insurance and was left with a large chunk of debt on a wrecked vehicle that she then rolled into a new car. In the end it came down to the simple fact that she could not afford a car loan on a vehicle that never was worth as much as she owed.  Since the car was worth less than the loan she really couldn't sell it to fix the problem. She called and arranged a voluntary repossession.  She stopped making payments, and parked the car till they came and picked it up.  (Took about 4 months and 20 phone calls from her for them to come get it.)  In the mean time, I purchased her a much older used but decent car for a couple thousand and she paid me back over the next year.  The total she paid me back was less than the money she would have paid in the 4 months it took them to come get the car.  In fact by the time they picked up the car she had paid back over half on the car I bought her. Yes the repossession did stay on her credit for seven years but during that time she was approved for a mortgage, cellphone plans, and credit cards etc.  Therefore I don't know that it did that much damage to her credit. When her car was sold at auction by the repo company it sold for much less than the loan amount. Technically she was on the hook for the remaining amount. The outstanding balance on the loan was then sold several times to several different collection agencies. Over the years since then she has gotten letters every now and then demanding she pay the amount off, she ignores these.  Most of these letters even included very favorable terms (full forgiveness for 20% of the amount)  At this point the statute time has run out on the debt so there is no recourse for anyone to collect from her. The statute time limit varies from state to state.  Some states it is as long as 10 years in others it is as short as 3 years. What this means is that counting from the date of the repossession, incurrance of debt, last payment, or agreement to pay whichever is later if the statute period has elapsed and the lender/collector has not filed a suit against you by the end of the period then they have effectively abandoned the debt and cannot collect.   Find out what that period of time is in your state.  If you can avoid the collection agencies till that period runs out you are scott free. You just have to make sure that you do not ever send them any money, or agree to pay them anything as this resets the calendar. If you do not want to wait for the calendar to run out if you wait long enough you will probably be offered favorable terms to pay only a fraction of the remaining amount, you just have to wait it out. Note, I normally would not endorse anyone not paying off their debts.  However sometimes it is necessary and it is for this type of situation that we have things like this and bankruptcy."}
{"id": "520114", "text": "I believe it.  I'm in IT in a company that I've been trying desperately to push to go 100% digital.  We're being cockblocked by several board members and one of our accreditation firms is saying it's a no-go.  The accreditation firm still makes us respond to letters by filling them in with a typewriter.  It's not on special paper or even any sort of letterhead.  It doesn't make any sense.  Our HR director that was fired several months ago was solely advertising job openings in newspapers.  They were hiring people that don't even know how to copy and paste or add two cells in excel.  Then they wonder why important billing gets fucked up after these people handle those documents."}
{"id": "520217", "text": "Let's break this into two parts, the future value of the initial deposit, and the future value of the payments: D(1 + i)n For the future value of the payments A((1+i)n-1) / i) Adding those two formulas together will give you the amount of money that should be in your account at the end.  Remember to make the appropriate adjustments to interest rate and the number of payments.  Divide the interest rate by the number of periods in a year (four for quarterly, twelve for monthly), and multiply the number of periods (p) by the same number.  Of course the monthly deposit amount will need to be in the same terms. See also: Annuity (finance theory) - Wikipedia"}
{"id": "520386", "text": "Your best approach is to assess rent levels in your local area for offices of a similar size. You need to take into account all the usuals - amenities, parking, etc, just as if your home-office was provided by a third-party. Get your $/sq ft and work out the monthly amount. With this figure, you need to then work out what % of it you can charge. If the space is used exclusively for the business, charge 100%. If it's used about half the time, charge 50%, etc. I would strongly advise you to do two things - 1. make sure your accountant and your attorney help you get this squared away. 2. document everything about how you arrived at the cost. Nothing fancy, but dates, realtors, addresses, $/sq foot. A simple table will do. By doing these two things, if the IRS should come around to chat, you should be covered."}
{"id": "520597", "text": "Lets assume you put the max of 5000 per year in a Roth IRA.  You have your home and all other debt paid off, and your investment earns 10%, a few points below the market average.  You will have $822,470 at 65, 1005K at 67 that you can draw on tax free.  It is a fairly tidy sum and should keep you from working as the greeter in WalMart. This kind of return should be expected from most mutual funds, and you could invest some time in reading about how to pick good returning funds.  An index fund, which shadows a market index, should have that kind of return.  And yes that is 10% per year.  In investing it is about momentum. I too write software for a living, and would suggest you should be able to contribute about double that amount and still be comfortable.  That would set you up for a pretty comfortable post-work life style. You understand the value of building passive income.  Traditionally that is accomplished through dividends of reliable companies, but are now accomplished a variety of ways.  Keep in mind the way you are asking this question opens you to many scams."}
{"id": "520922", "text": "You actually don't need an accountant. They'll be expensive and at this early a stage unnecessary - what you need is a good bookkeeper who can keep track of what comes in and what goes out. You'll need that to know if you're making money or not and to show the government at the end of the year. Get a copy of QuickBooks and pick up Bookkeeping for Dummies to at least get a sense for what's going on.  Have you registered as a sole proprietorship? Make sure you have a vendor's permit so you can legally sell your services in Ontario. You may need to collect HST, in which case you'll need to register for an HST # and submit it on a quarterly basis.   Whatever you do, don't fuck with the government - they can freeze your bank accounts to get money they're owed. You need to keep money on hand to pay for any taxes you might owe on the business, ESPECIALLY if it's a sole proprietorship where you'll be tempted to treat profit as income. You don't want to end up with nothing in the bank at the end of the year and $40k owing to the CRA.  Get a separate bank account - don't mix personal and business, it's messy.  Expense everything you reasonably can."}
{"id": "520963", "text": "\"Your bank's fund is not an index fund.  From your link: To provide a balanced portfolio of primarily Canadian securities that produce income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in Canadian money market instruments, debt securities and common and preferred shares. This is a very broad actively managed fund.  Compare this to the investment objective listed for Vanguard's VOO: Invests in stocks in the S&P 500 Index, representing 500 of the largest U.S. companies. There are loads of market indices with varying formulas that are supposed to track the performance of a market or market segment that they intend to track.  The Russel 2000, The Wilshire 1000, The S&P 500, the Dow Industrial Average, there is even the SSGA Gender Diversity Index.  Some body comes up with a market index.  An \"\"Index Fund\"\" is simply a Mutual Fund or Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) that uses a market index formula to make it's investment decisions enabling an investor to track the performance of the index without having to buy and sell the constituent securities on their own.  These \"\"index funds\"\" are able to charge lower fees because they spend $0 on research, and only make investment decisions in order to track the holdings of the index. I think 1.2% is too high, but I'm coming from the US investing world it might not be that high compared to Canadian offerings.  Additionally, comparing this fund's expense ratio to the Vanguard 500 or Total Market index fund is nonsensical. Similarly, comparing the investment returns is nonsensical because one tracks the S&P 500 and one does not, nor does it seek to (as an example the #5 largest holding of the CIBC fund is a Government of Canada 2045 3.5% bond). Everyone should diversify their holdings and adjust their investment allocations as they age.  As you age you should be reallocating away from highly volatile common stock and in to assets classes that are historically more stable/less volatile like national government debt and high grade corporate/local government debt.  This fund is already diversified in to some debt instruments, depending on your age and other asset allocations this might not be the best place to put your money regardless of the fees. Personally, I handle my own asset allocations and I'm split between Large, Mid and Small cap low-fee index funds, and the lowest cost high grade debt funds available to me.\""}
{"id": "521014", "text": "If you do not need the money in the 401k right away and are interested in avoiding penalties on the amounts accumulated, roll over the 401k monies into a Roth IRA (your contributions and growth thereof) and a Traditional IRA (company match a d growth thereof). You can choose to take out money from the Traditional IRA not as a lump sum (penalties in addition to lots of income tax in the year of taking the distribution) but as series of equal payments over your life expectancy (no penalty but US income tax is still due each year). Be aware that he who rides a tiger cannot dismount: if you opt for this method, you must take a distribution every year whether you need the money or not, and the amount of the distribution must match what the IRS wants you to take exactly; excess withdrawals lead to penalties etc.  Publication 590 says Annuity. You can receive distributions from your traditional IRA that are part of a series of substantially equal payments over your life (or your life expectancy), or over the lives (or the joint life expectancies) of you and your beneficiary, without having to pay the 10% additional tax, even if you receive such distributions before you are age 59.5. You must use an IRS-approved distribution method and you must take at least one distribution annually for this exception to apply. The \u201crequired minimum distribution method,\u201d when used for this purpose, results in the exact amount required to be distributed, not the minimum amount. Be aware that, depending on your country of residence/citizenship, you may be required to close all foreign accounts within x months of return, and if so, this stratagem will not work."}
{"id": "521095", "text": "\"The major pros tend to be: The major cons tend to be: Being in California, you've got state income tax to worry about as well.  It might be worth using some of that extra cash to hire someone who knows what they're doing to handle your taxes the first year, at least.  I've always maxed mine out, because it's always seemed like a solid way to make a few extra dollars.  If you can live without the money in your regular paycheck, it's always seemed that the rewards outweighed the risks.   I've also always immediately sold the stock, since I usually feel like being employed at the company is enough \"\"eggs in that basket\"\" without holding investments in the same company. (NB: I've participated in several of these ESPP programs at large international US-based software companies, so this is from my personal experience.  You should carefully review the terms of your ESPP before signing up, and I'm a software engineer and not a financial advisor.)\""}
{"id": "521478", "text": "Obviously, we're assuming the company can pay it back, which is why you may only have five to twenty policies via the most renowned five to twenty companies at one time.  *edit: Besides, an immediate boost in purchasing power is pretty advantageous (from my last post)-- *(if someone invests $500 of capital at a 5% interest rate for a one year bond, they immediately get back a note with the purchasing power of $525, which they can spend right away if they wish (if inflation is going to happen anyway, why not beat it to the punch?)).*"}
{"id": "521657", "text": "You can get audited for anything Business owners are more likely to get audited than people filing 1040-EZ's for their simplistic income tax obligation. According to HR Block I hope you enjoy the process where you explain the source of your earnings"}
{"id": "521688", "text": "In most cases, the brand on the card, eg Visa or MasterCard, is a middleman. The company processes the transaction, transferring $xx from the bank to the seller, and telling the bank to debit the buyer's account. The bank is at risk, not the company transacting the purchase. What's interesting is that American Express started as both. My first Amex card, issued in 1979 (long expired, but in my box of memorabilia) had no bank. American Express offered a card that offered no extended credit, it was pay in full each month. Since then, Amex started offering extended credit, i.e. with annual interest, and minimum payments, and more recently, offering transaction processing for banks which take on the credit risk, essentially becoming very similar to MasterCard and Visa."}
{"id": "521844", "text": "\"You need to negotiate with your broker to allow you to do more exotic order types.  One in particular I recommend is a \"\"hidden\"\" aka iceberg order.  You enter two numbers.  The first is the number of shares for your entire order, the second is the amount that will be displayed in the book (this is the tip of the iceberg, the remaining shares are hidden below the surface). The maker/taker rule applies as follows: The amount displayed will receive the rebate for providing liquidity.  The amount hidden will be charged the fee for taking liquidity. Example: You want to sell 10,000 shares total.  You enter a hidden order for 10,000 shares with 1,000 displayed.  On the level 2 screen traders will see 1,000 shares, and those shares will stay displayed there until the entire order is filled.  You receive a rebate for 1,000 shares, you pay the brokerage fee for 9,000 shares. Also, like one of the previous posters mentioned, only trade high liquidity stocks.  Large market cap companies with high volume.  This is why day traders love Tesla, Amazon, Netflix, etc. Large market cap, high volume, and high volatility.  Easy to catch $10+ moves in price. Hope this helps Happy trading\""}
{"id": "521987", "text": "Congratulations on seeing your situation clearly! That's half the battle. To prevent yourself from going back into debt, you should get rid of any credit cards you have and close the accounts. Just use your debit card. Your post indicates you're not the type to splurge and get stuff just because you want it, so saving for a larger purchase and paying cash for it is probably something you're willing to do. Contrary to popular belief, you can live just fine without a credit card and without a credit score. If you're never going back into debt, you don't need a credit score. Buying a house is possible without one, but is admittedly more work for you and for the underwriters because they can't just ask the FICO god to bless you -- they have to actually see your finances, and you have to actually have some. (I realize many folks will hate this advice, but I am actually living it, and life is pretty good.) If you're in school, look at how much you spend on food while on campus. $5-$10/day for lunch adds up to $100-$200 over a month (M-F, four weeks). Buy groceries and pack a lunch if you can. If your expenses cannot be reduced anymore, you're going to have to get a job. There is nothing wrong with slowing down your studies and working a job to get your income up above your expenses. It stinks being a poor student, but it stinks even more to be a poor student with a mountain of debt. You'll find that working a job doesn't slow you down all that much. Tons of students work their way through school and graduate in plenty of time to get a good job.  Good luck to you! You can do it."}
{"id": "521996", "text": "\"Good for you! At your age, you should definitely consider investing some of your hard-earned and un-needed money in stocks with the long-term goal of having your retirement funded. The time horizon that you'd have would be vastly superior to that of millions of others, who will wait until their thirties or even forties to begin investing in stocks, giving your compound interest prospects the extra time anyone needs for a spectacular vertical incline in your later years. Make sure to sign up to automatically re-invest the dividend payouts of your stocks, please. (If you don't already know how being young and investing well in your early years is more powerful than starting out ten to twenty years later, do a little research on \"\"Compound Interest\"\"). Make sure you monitor your investments. Being young means you have time to correct your investments (sell and buy other assets) if the businesses you initially selected are no longer good investments.\""}
{"id": "522007", "text": "The partition is more or less ok, the specific products are questionable. Partition. It's usually advised to keep 2-3 monthly income liquid. In your case, 40-45 kEUR is ca. 24-27 kEUR netto, i.e. 2000-2250 a month, thus, the range is 4-7 kEUR, as you are strongly risk-averse then 7k is still ok. Then they propose you to invest 60% in low-risk, but illiquid and  15% in middle or high risk which is also ok. However, it doesn't have to be real estate, but could be. Specifics. Be aware that a lot (most?) of the banks (including local banks, they are, however, less aggressive) often sell the products that promise high commissions to them (often with a part flowing directly to your client advisor). Especially now, when the interest rates are low, they stand under extra pressure. You should rather switch to passively managed funds with low fees. If you stick up to the actively managed funds with their fees, you should choose them yourself."}
{"id": "522040", "text": "\"The company was paying \"\"only\"\" $1 a share in dividends, compared to $10 a share in earnings. That is a so-called payout ratio of 10%, which is low. A more normal payout ratio would be 40%, something like $4 a share. If a $13 stock had a $4 dividend, the dividend yield would be about 30%, which would be \"\"too high,\"\" meaning that the price would go up to drive down the resulting yield. Even $1 a share on a $13 stock is a high dividend of about 7%, allowing for appreciation to say, the $20-$25 range. Graham was a great believer in the theory that management should pay out \"\"most\"\" of its earnings in dividends. He believed that by holding dividends so far below earnings, the company was either being \"\"stingy,\"\" or signalling that the $10 a share of earnings was unsustainable. Either of these would be bad for the stock. For instance, if $1 a share in dividends actually represented a 40% payout ratio, it would signal management's belief that they could normally earn only $2.50 a year instead of $10.\""}
{"id": "522319", "text": "Firstly 795 is not even. Secondly - generally you would pay tax on the sale of the 122 shares, whether you buy them back or not, even one minute later, has nothing to do with it. The only reason this would not create a capital gains event is if your country (which you haven't specified) has some odd rules or laws about this that I, and most others, have never heard of before."}
{"id": "522442", "text": "Shhh...  I have an idea.  Hey let's you and me - the only owners of the public gold mines we don't mine fully to keep prices high - appear to make more gold available by making a swap agreement tied with pricing deals designed to have the affect of keeping prices high.  Then maybe the government won't demand the public gold mines back that they only sold to us with the caveat we actually mine them fully."}
{"id": "523058", "text": "\"I am not a Financial Advisor, but I an tell you what I did in exactly this situation - which is pretty much what you are proposing.  I put money into the offset savings account until I had only a small amount of mortgage \"\"balance\"\" left (less than a year's worth of mortgage payments), then I set it up so that each month I did the transfer from the offset savings pot into the mortgage itself. This depleted the offset savings in line with the mortgage debt, and the interest on the two balanced out almost to zero. This was self-sustaining and meant that I kept the same margin owing over time (i.e. if I was in this situation for 5 years, for the whole 5 years I would effectively have 1 year remaining on the mortgage). Meanwhile, since I now didn't have any mortgage outgoings from my regular income, I put any spare money into ISA savings. No need to withdraw money from the mortgage to move to the ISA. The benefits of this (as opposed to just paying off the damn mortgage already) were that I kept the full liquidity of the mortgage amount - I could withdraw all the offset savings pot if I wanted to, although I would then have to have funded the mortgage payments differently, and as that liquidity went down over time I was building up other savings in parallel. It worked well for me. It almost doesn't matter what the offset mortgage rate is since you are effectively paying it off by keeping the offset savings pot so high.\""}
{"id": "523094", "text": "Not seeing Marginal Revenue = Marginal Cost, nor the components of GDP.   Marginal thinking is one of the cornerstones of economics and just calculating.   And calculating GDP is more important I would say than just a mention of interest rates, monetary policy or fiscal policy."}
{"id": "523318", "text": "Actually the Fidelity hypothetical example (with same marginal tax rates) is super misleading.  They are putting the money saved up front from the traditional 401k in to at taxable account. Why? If you put the actual money used for the Roth that would be saved into traditional 401k they look the same no matter the timeline (with a hypothetical unchanging tax rate). Check this out.  So there are only two things to consider when choosing traditional vs roth."}
{"id": "523431", "text": "\"If you're a US citizen, money earned while in the US is sourced to the US. So you can't apply FTC/FEIE to the amounts attributable to the periods of your work while in the US even if it is a short business trip. Tax treaties may affect this. Most tax treaties have explicit provisions to exclude short trips from the sourcing rules, however due to the \"\"saving clause\"\" these would probably not apply to you if you're a US citizen - you'll need to read the relevant treaty. Your home country should allow credit for the US taxes paid on the US-sourced income, and the double-taxation avoidance provision should apply in this case. The technicalities depend on your specific country. You would probably not just remove it from the taxable income, there probably is a form similar to the US form 1116 to calculate the available credit.\""}
{"id": "523481", "text": "For the record, now that 2011 is here we know that the capital gains tax rate didn't change. Congress extended it for two more years. This shows the uncertainty in trying to maximize earnings based on future changes to the tax code."}
{"id": "523810", "text": "Why is that? With all the successful investors (including myself on a not-infrequent basis) going for individual companies directly, wouldn't it make more sense to suggest that new investors learn how to analyse companies and then make their best guess after taking into account those factors? I have a different perspective here than the other answers.  I recently started investing in a Roth IRA for retirement. I do not have interest in micromanaging individual company research (I don't find this enjoyable at all) but I know I want to save for retirement. Could I learn all the details? Probably, as an engineer/software person I suspect I could. But I really don't want to. But here's the thing: For anyone else in a similar situation to me, the net return on investing into a mutual fund type arrangement (even if it returns only 4%) is still likely considerably higher than the return on trying to invest in stocks (which likely results in $0 invested, and a return of 0%). I suspect the overwhelming majority of people in the world are more similar to me than you - in that they have minimal interest in spending hours managing their money. For us, mutual funds or ETFs are perfect for this."}
{"id": "523913", "text": "I think an IOPT is a Dutch warrant.  Someone else might understand what this is."}
{"id": "523952", "text": "If you have the expired check in hand and take it back to the bank that issued it to you, I'd think they could do something for you.  (I'd hope they would, anyway.) But automatically?  I don't think so."}
{"id": "524034", "text": "If it were me, I would get a new checking account at potentially a new bank, but certainly with a new account number. As Nathan said, there is no need for you to cross her name off the check, but potentially, she could use those checks, or have new checks printed to use.  Having her name on the check makes it seem like she is a legitimate signer on the account. In the end you can fight and possibly win with your bank that they should not have accepted a check signed by her as payment, but why bother?  Also you will potentially alienate any merchant that accepts a check by her.  It is a total mess that can be relatively easily solved with very little money ($25-$40 for check reprinting) proactively.   Close the account, shred any existing checks, and move on.   Heck you can actually make money by doing this and receiving a bonus.  Check Nerd Wallet for current bank promotions."}
{"id": "524254", "text": "&gt; Fourth, even if they ever did go bankrupt, since you already used up your share of their bonds, the other firms can't blame you for that, because you honestly went about using them with no knowledge that the firm would go bankrupt ever.   What if you had knowledge it would, and did this as a scam?  The mere possibility of the above would limit the third-hand user's willingness to accept bonds from unknown companies. It's that simple."}
{"id": "524536", "text": "Amazing. I applaud your clear an concise way of explaining such a complex matter. I personally have been baffled by many financial matters and you sir have made it all the more clearer. I am sincerely grateful that you have spent the time to write this, thank you."}
{"id": "524612", "text": "ETFs are a type of investment, not a specific choice. In other words, there are good ETFs and bad. What you see is the general statement that ETFs are preferable to most mutual funds, if only for the fact that they are low cost. An index ETF such as SPY (which reflects the S&P 500 index) has a .09% annual expense, vs a mutual fund which average a full percent or more.  sheegaon isn't wrong, I just have a different spin to offer you. Given a long term return of say even 8% (note - this question is not a debate of the long term return, and I purposely chose a low number compared to the long term average, closer to 10%) and the current CD rate of <1%, a 1% hit for the commission on the buy side doesn't bother me. The sell won't occur for a long time, and $8 on a $10K sale is no big deal. I'd not expect you to save $1K/yr in cash/CDs for the years it would take to make that $8 fee look tiny. Not when over time the growth will overshaddow this.  One day you will be in a position where the swings in the market will produce the random increase or decrease to your net worth in the $10s of thousands. Do you know why you won't lose a night's sleep over this? Because when you invested your first $1K, and started to pay attention to the market, you saw how some days had swings of 3 or 4%, and you built up an immunity to the day to day noise. You stayed invested and as you gained wealth, you stuck to the right rebalancing each year, so a market crash which took others down by 30%, only impacted you by 15-20, and you were ready for the next move to the upside. And you also saw that since mutual funds with their 1% fees never beat the index over time, you were happy to say you lagged the S&P by .09%, or 1% over 11 year's time vs those whose funds had some great years, but lost it all in the bad years.  And by the way, right until you are in the 25% bracket, Roth is the way to go. When you are at 25%, that's the time to use pre-tax accounts to get just below the cuttoff.  Last, welcome to SE.    Edit - see sheegaon's answer below. I agree, I missed the cost of the bid/ask spread. Going with the lowest cost (index) funds may make better sense for you.  To clarify, Sheehan points out that ETFs trade like a stock, a commission, and a bid/ask, both add to transaction cost. So, agreeing this is the case, an indexed-based mutual fund can provide the best of possible options. Reflecting the S&P (for example) less a small anual expense, .1% or less."}
{"id": "524615", "text": "The 1.09% is per year, not per month, so you will be getting about 1K per year just for sitting around on your backside. Some important things. It is almost certain that you can earn a better interest rate elsewhere, if you are prepared to leave your 100K untouched. For example, even in Natwest you can earn 3.2% over the next year if you buy a fixed rate bond. For 100K that is certainly worth looking at. Or maybe put 90K in a fixed rate bond and leave 10K in an instant access account. Taxes should not be a problem since you can earn around 7K before you start paying taxes. However be aware that in the UK most bank accounts deduct tax at source. That means they send the tax they think you should have paid to the government, and you then have to claim it back from them. Accounts for young people may work differently. Ask your bank."}
{"id": "524846", "text": "\"Here, check out my updated reply above - I added an example that might clarify some of your questions?  Also, to answer the \"\"to whom\"\" question, you're signaling those things to the market. By trading at what you believe to be fair value, you're helping the market price all of those \"\"events\"\" contained in a futures contract.\""}
{"id": "524912", "text": "\"What percent of my salary should I save? is tightly coupled with its companion, What size \u201cnest egg\u201d should my husband and I have, and by what age? Interestingly, Mr.Christer's answer, 10%, is the number that plugs into the equation that I reference. Jay's 25X rule is part of this. We start with the assumption that one's required income at retirement will be 80% of their pre-retirement income. That's high by some observations, low by others. A quick look at the expenses that go away in retirement - The above can total 35-40% It would be great if it ended there, but there are costs that go up. The above extra spending is tough to nail down, after all, you knew what you spent, and what's going away, but the new items? Crapshoot. (For non-native speakers - this refers to a game with dice, meaning a random event) Again, referencing Mr Christer's answer \"\"financial planners whom you could pay to give you a very accurate number,\"\" I'm going to disagree with that soundbyte. Consider, when retirement is 30 years away, you don't know much If I can offer an analogy. I once had the pleasure of hearing Jim Lovell (The astronaut played by Tom Hanks in Apollo 13) give a speech. He said that for the first 99% of the trip to the moon, they simply aimed ahead of their target, never directly at the moon. In this manner, I suggest that with so many variables, accuracy is impossible, it's a moving target. Start young, take the 10% MrC offered, and keep saving. Every few years, stop and see if you are on target, if not, bump the number a bit.  Better to turn 50 and find that after a good decade you've reached your number and can drop your savings to a minimum, perhaps just to capture a 401(k) match, than to turn 50 and realize you've undersaved and need to bump to an unsustainable level. Imagine planning ahead in 1999. You've seen 2 great decades of returns, and even realizing that 18%/yr couldn't continue, you plan for a below average 7%, this would double your 1999 balance in 10 years. Instead you saw zero return. For a decade. In sum, when each variable has an accuracy of +/-50% you are not going to combine them all and get a number with even 10% accuracy (as if MrC were wrong, but the pro would tell you 11% is right for you?). This is as absurd as packaging up a bunch of C rated debt, and thinking that enough of this paper would yield a final product that was AAA.\""}
{"id": "524949", "text": "If you buy a stock and it goes up, you can sell it and make money. But if you buy a stock and it goes down, you can lose money."}
{"id": "525149", "text": "I'm assuming you are in the US here. From a tax perspective you don't need to take any action to start a business and deduct expenses.  If you have earned income coming from a source other than a W2 paying job, then you have a business.  On your taxes, this means you file a schedule C (which is where you will deduct business expenses) and schedule SE (which computes how much FICA tax you will owe on your business income).  When we talk about starting a business, we usually are talking about creating a corporation or LLC.  No particular tax advantage to that in your case, but there could be liability advantages, if you are concerned about that. If you file losses consistently year after year, the IRS might try and classify your business as a hobby.  That's what you should worry about.  I suppose incorporating might reduce the probability of that, but it might not.  Keep good records in case you need to argue with the IRS.  If you do have to argue with them, they will want to ensure that you only used the laptop and internet for your business.  That's a big if, but it's a potentially scary one. IRS Guidelines on hobby vs. business income Note: besides deducting expenses, another advantage of self-employment is opening a solo-401(k) or SEP or SIMPLE IRA.  These potentially allow you to set aside a lot more money than the typical IRA and 401(k) arrangement.  Thing is, you have to have a lot more earned income to really take advantage of them, but let's hope your app gets you there."}
{"id": "525231", "text": "\"There are two distinct questions that may be of interest to you. Both questions are relevant for funds that need to buy or sell large orders that you are talking about. The answer depends on your order type and the current market state such as the level 2 order book. Suppose there are no iceberg or hidden orders and the order book (image courtesy of this question) currently is:  An unlimited (\"\"at market\"\") buy order for 12,000 shares gets filled immediately: it gets 1,100 shares at 180.03 (1,100@180.03), 9,700 at 180.04 and 1,200 at 180.05. After this order, the lowest ask price becomes 180.05 and the highest bid is obviously still 180.02 (because the previous order was a 'market order'). A limited buy order for 12,000 shares with a price limit of 180.04 gets the first two fills just like the market order: 1,100 shares at 180.03 and 9,700 at 180.04. However, the remainder of the order will establish a new bid price level for 1,200 shares at 180.04. It is possible to enter an unlimited buy order that exhausts the book. However, such a trade would often be considered a mis-trade and either (i) be cancelled by the broker, (ii) be cancelled or undone by the exchange, or (iii) hit the maximum price move a stock is allowed per day (\"\"limit up\"\"). Funds and banks often have to buy or sell large quantities, just like you have described. However they usually do not punch through order book levels as I described before. Instead they would spread out the order over time and buy a smaller quantity several times throughout the day. Simple algorithms attempt to get a price close to the time-weighted average price (TWAP) or volume-weighted average price (VWAP) and would buy a smaller amount every N minutes. Despite splitting the order into smaller pieces the price usually moves against the trader for many reasons. There are many models to estimate the market impact of an order before executing it and many brokers have their own model, for example Deutsche Bank. There is considerable research on \"\"market impact\"\" if you are interested. I understand the general principal that when significant buy orders   comes in relative to the sell orders price goes up and when a   significant sell order comes in relative to buy orders it goes down. I consider this statement wrong or at least misleading. First, stocks can jump in price without or with very little volume. Consider a company that releases a negative earnings surprise over night. On the next day the stock may open 20% lower without any orders having matched for any price in between. The price moved because the perception of the stocks value changed, not because of buy or sell pressure. Second, buy and sell pressure have an effect on the price because of the underlying reason, and not necessarily/only because of the mechanics of the market. Assume you were prepared to sell HyperNanoTech stock, but suddenly there's a lot of buzz and your colleagues are talking about buying it. Would you still sell it for the same price? I wouldn't. I would try to find out how much they are prepared to buy it for. In other words, buy pressure can be the consequence of successful marketing of the stock and the marketing buzz is what changes the price.\""}
{"id": "525247", "text": "The answer is generally yes.  Depending on your circumstances and where you live, you may be able to   get help through a federal, state, or lender program that:"}
{"id": "525322", "text": "\"The same author wrote in that article \u201cthey have a trillion? Really?\u201d But that\u2019s what happens when ten   million dollars compounds at 2% over 200 years. Really? 2% compounded over 200 years produces a return of 52.5X, multiply that by 10M and you have $525 million. The author is off by a factor of nearly 2000 fold. Let's skip this minor math error.  The article is not about 401(k)s. His next line is \"\"The whole myth of savings is gone.\"\" And the article itself, \"\"10 Reasons You Have To Quit Your Job In 2014\"\" is really a manifesto about why working for the man is not the way to succeed long term. And in that regard, he certainly makes good points. I've read this author over the years, and respect his views. 9 of the 10 points he lists are clear and valuable. This one point is a bit ambiguous and falls into the overgeneraluzation \"\"Our 401(k) have failed us.\"\" But keep in mind, even the self employed need to save, and in fact, have similar options to those working for others. I have a Solo 401(k) for my self employment income.  To be clear, there are good 401(k) accounts and bad. The 401(k) with fees above 1%/yr, and no matching, awful. The 401(k) I have from my job before I retired has an S&P index with .02%/yr cost. (That's $200/$million invested per year.) The 401(k) is not dead.\""}
{"id": "525645", "text": "HCE is defined as being above 120k$ or in the top 20 % of the company. The exact cutoff point might be different for each company. Typically, only the base salary is considered for that, but it's the company's (and 401(k)-plan's) decision. The IRS does not require HCE treatment; the IRS requires that 401(k) plans have a 'fair' distribution of usage between all employees. Very often, employees with lower income save (over-proportionally) less in their 401(k), and there is a line where the 401(k) plan is no longer acceptable to the IRS. HCE is a way for companies to ensure this forced balance; by limiting the amount of 401(k) savings for HCE, the companies ensure that the share of all contributions by below-HCE is appropriate. They will calculate/define the HCE cutoff point so that the required distribution is surely achieved. One of the consequences is that when you move over the HCE cutoff point, you can suddenly save a lot less in your 401(k). Nothing can be done about that. See this IRS page: https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/plan-participant-employee/definitions Highly Compensated Employee - An individual who: Owned more than 5% of   the interest in the business at any time during the year or the   preceding year, regardless of how much compensation that person earned   or received, or For the preceding year, received compensation from the   business of more than $115,000 (if the preceding year is 2014;   $120,000 if the preceding year is 2015 or 2016), and, if the employer   so chooses, was in the top 20% of employees when ranked by   compensation."}
{"id": "525685", "text": "\"Everything I have read here sounds good except for one small detail.  My bank does indeed identify ATM rebates as taxable income.  They, in fact, seemed to have begun this practice several years ago but somehow forgot to send 1099's to their own customers despite sending them to the IRS.  This ended up costing me nearly $2,000 in back taxes to cover 2012, 2013 and 2014.  My bank sent a letter of apology and will cover any penalties and interest accrued \"\"due to their error\"\". No one from the bank ever told me that these rebates could be taxable when I signed on for this special checking account for which I pay a fee each month to continue.  So what is the truth, is it taxable income or not?  I have now paid for the 2012 and 2013 tax years for something I still say is not income.  I am about to pay the 2014 tax bill and will have to pay another $850 or so due to this ruling by my bank.  How can this be right??\""}
{"id": "526106", "text": "\"It is called \"\"Credit card installments\"\" or \"\"Equal pay installments\"\", and I am not aware of them being widely used in the USA. While in other countries they are supported by banks directly (right?), in US you may find this option only in some big stores like home improvement stores, car dealerships, cell phone operators (so that you can buy a new phone) etc. Some stores allow 0% financing for, say, 12 months which is not exactly the same as installments but close, if you have discipline to pay $250 each month and not wait for 12 months to end. Splitting the big payment in parts means that the seller gets money in parts as well, and it adds risks of customer default, introduces debt collection possibility etc. That's why it's usually up to the merchants to support it - bank does not care in this case, from the bank point of view the store just charges the same card another $250 every month. In other countries banks support this option directly, I think, taking over or dividing the risk with the merchants. This has not happened in US. There is a company SplitIt which automates installments if stores want to support it but again, it means stores need to agree to it. Here is a simple article describing how credit cards work: https://www.usbank.com/credit-cards/how-credit-cards-work.html In general, if you move to US, you are unlikely to be able to get a regular credit card because you will not have any \"\"credit history\"\" which is a system designed to track each customer ability to get & pay off debt. The easiest way to build the history - request \"\"secured credit card\"\", which means you have to give the bank money up front and then they will give you a credit card with a credit limit equal to that amount. It's like a \"\"practice credit card\"\". You use it for 6-12 months and the bank will report your usage to credit bureaus, establishing your \"\"credit score\"\". After that you should be able to get your money back and convert your secured card into a regular credit card. Credit history can be also built by paying rent and utilities but that requires companies who collect money to report the payments to credit bureaus and very few do that. As anything else in US, there are some businesses which help to solve this problem for extra money.\""}
{"id": "526115", "text": "The mathematical answer is for you to have a diversified portfolio in your ISA.  But that's easier said than done."}
{"id": "526235", "text": "\"Always use limit orders never market orders. Period. Do that and you will always pay what you said you would when the transaction goes through. Whichever broker you use is not going to \"\"negotiate\"\" for the best price on your trade if you choose a market order.  Their job is to fill that order so they will always buy it for more than market and sell it for less to ensure the order goes through. It is not even a factor when choosing between TradeKing and Scottrade. I use Trade King and my friend uses ScottTrade.  Besides the transaction fee (TK is a few $$ cheaper), the only other things to consider are the tools and research (and customer service if you need it) that each site offers. I went with TK and the lower transaction fee since tools and research can be had from other sources. I basically only use it when I want to make a trade since I don't find the tools particularly useful and I never take an analyst's opinion of a stock at face value anyway since everybody always has their own agenda.\""}
{"id": "526270", "text": "&gt;And a lot of people that have communist party wealth are afraid that there will be an uprising against them so they are preparing escape plans.  My guess would be more along these lines (albeit maybe a bit less dramatic).  There were a lot of dubious things that Party members did over the past hundred years to stash away cash for themselves.  Siphoning off public resources, investing with them, and as long as the investments made money, keeping the results, for example, played a significant role in some of the complaints that farmers had about local officials.  If they keep money in China, and there's some sort of fallout or charges that go through, my guess is that it's a lot easier to seize a corrupt official's resources.  On the other hand, if you just bought a bunch of land in the US...that's a lot less easily-seizable and harder to immediately get ahold of for Chinese officials.  There's also the more legit possibility that China quite arguably has a real estate bubble in investable real estate, and the result is that if you want to invest in land and reduce your risk to a bubble deflating, you want to do so overseas."}
{"id": "526346", "text": "One thing to be aware of when choosing mutual funds and index ETFs is the total fees and costs. The TD Ameritrade site almost certainly had links that would let you see the total fees (as an annual percentage) for each of the funds. Within a category, the lowest fees percentage is best, since that is directly subtracted from your performance. As an aside, your allocation seems overly conservative to me for someone that is 25 years old. You will likely work for 40 or so years and the average stock market cycle is about 7 years. So you will likely see 5 or so complete cycles. Worrying about stability of principal too young will really cut into your returns. My daughter is your age and I have advised her to be 100% in equities and then to start dialing that back in about 25 years or so."}
{"id": "526499", "text": "The rental income is indeed taxable income, but you reduce the taxable portion of it by deducting expenses (including mortgage interest, maintenance, insurance, HOA, real estate tax, and of course depreciation). Due to the depreciation, you may end up breaking even, or having very little taxable income. Note that when you sell the property, your basis is reduced by the depreciation you were allowed to deduct (even if you haven't deducted it for whatever reason), and also the personal residence exclusion might no longer be applicable - i.e.: you'll have to pay capital gains tax. You will not be able to deduct a loss though if you sell now, so it may be better to depreciate it as a rental, rather then sell at a loss that won't affect your taxes. Also, consider the fact that the basis for the depreciation is not the basis you currently have in the property (because you're under water). You have to remember that when calculating the taxes. This is not a tax advice, and you should seek a professional help."}
{"id": "526520", "text": "Even if you're paying a lot of taxes now, you're talking marginal dollars when you look at current contribution, and average tax rate when making withdrawals.  IE, if you currently pay 28% on your last dollar (and assuming your contribution is entirely in your marginal rate), then you're paying 28% on all of the Roth contributions, but probably paying a lower average tax rate, due to the lower tax rates on the first many dollars.   Look at the overall average tax rate of your expected retirement income - if you're expecting to pull out $100k a year, you're probably paying less than 20% in average taxes, because the first third or so is taxed at a very low rate (0 or 15%), assuming things don't change in our tax code.  Comparing that to your 28% and you have a net gain of 8% by paying the taxes later - nothing to shake a stick at. At minimum, have enough in your traditional IRA to max out the zero tax bucket (at least $12k).  Realistically you probably should have enough to max out the 15% bucket, as you presumably are well above that bucket now.  Any Roth savings will be more than eliminated by this difference: 28% tax now, 15% tax later?  Yes please. A diversified combination is usually best for those expecting to have a lot of retirement savings - enough in Traditional to get at least $35k or so a year out, say, and then enough in Roth to keep your comfortable lifestyle after that. The one caveat here is in the case when you max out your contribution levels, you may gain by using money that is not in your IRA to pay the taxes on the conversion.  Talk to your tax professional or accountant to verify this will be helpful in your particular instance."}
{"id": "526714", "text": "An update for anyone looking this up, I am still working through all the details but I can answer the question as far as Stack Exchange will go. In this situation the answer and processes involved greatly differs based on the personal circumstances of the person asking the question. Best to seek qualified tax advice than relying only on a forum as they are able to be more accurate and descriptive than any reply that you might receive."}
{"id": "526817", "text": "You mentioned depositing the check and then sending a personal check. Be sure to account for time, since any deposit over $10,000 the money will be made available in increments, so it may take 10-14 days to get the full amount in your account before you could send a personal check. I would not recommend this option regardless, but if you do, just a heads up."}
{"id": "526822", "text": "okay, I was thinking of an investment advisor. I believe in not doing it alone too. But i don't believe in just one more person. Investing advisors, tax advisors, business and law. I don't go to an advisor bc I can't balance my monthly budget and also want to save, you know. Questions more like, highest growth sectors, diversified strategies, etc.  And right, they wouldn't get fired bc their client is still happy, (even though their losing money during a record bull market). Guy must be a good sales man. I'd just want to know that my advisors performance is decent relative to the market. But again, I'm not handing over checks to people, only speaking with them.  edit: Yes, the average person should worry about making their kids soccer games and shit, not necessarily the markets and what their investment is worth in 30yrs"}
{"id": "526882", "text": "Principal has probably distributed your money to a company that holds dormant retirement plan account balances. I work for a third-party administrator and we usually use a company called Penchecks. They receive dormant accounts and try to locate the people they belong to. They don't do this for free though, so the sooner you find your account the better. Principal would have to keep a record of where they sent your money, although I don't know for how long they are required to keep that record. For example, doctors are only required to keep records for 7 years. The PBGC will help you find your lost balance. They are a gov't agency that protects retirement plan participants. They have a search engine for this kind of thing: http://search.pbgc.gov/mp/ Also https://www.unclaimedretirementbenefits.com/ is a registry of unclaimed retirement plan benefits."}
{"id": "527105", "text": "I would echo @Victor's comments. One book and 1000 web pages doesnt make you a good investor/trader. There are some basic things you should be aware of and read up on There are a few books that I would recommend I have been trading for over 10 years, my dad for over 30 years and we are both continually learning new things. Don't read one book and assume you know it all. Bear in mind that there are always new indicators being thought up and new ways of using and interpreting the same information, so keep reading and educating yourself."}
{"id": "527231", "text": "I suspect that the payments were originally due near the end of each quarter (March 15, June 15, September 15, and December 15) but then the December payment was extended to January 15 to allow for end-of-year totals to be calculated, and then the March payment was extended to April 15 to coincide with Income Tax Return filing."}
{"id": "527713", "text": "Unless you spend a lot of money on the TD Gold Elite Visa, and are interested in the Deluxe TD Auto Club, the $99 annual fee is probably not worth it. Instead, the Citi Enrich MasterCard provides the same 1% cash back on all purchases without an annual fee. There's also an unadvertised Platinum version of the card, which includes other perks like car rental insurance, etc. From what I calculated a while back, The PC Financial MasterCard PC Points system works out to a 1% return as well. Unless there are extra deals like 5x point sales that I'm not aware of, cold hard cash would be a better option. Also check out the RFD Credit Card Head to Head article for way more options."}
{"id": "527776", "text": "For tax purposes you will need to file as an employee (T4 slips and tax withheld automatically), but also as an entrepreneur. I had the same situation myself last year. Employee and self-employed is a publication from Revenue Canada that will help you. You need to fill out the statement of business activity form and keep detailed records of all your deductible expenses. Make photocopies and keep them 7 years. May I suggest you take an accountant to file your income tax form. More expensive but makes you less susceptible to receive Revenue Canada inspectors for a check-in.  If you can read french, you can use this simple spreadsheet for your expenses. Your accountant will be happy."}
{"id": "527894", "text": "The Sharpe ratio is, perhaps, the method you are looking for.  That said, not really sure beta is a meaningful metric, as there are plenty of safe bets to be made on volatile stocks (and, conversely, unsafe bets to be made on non-volatile ones)."}
{"id": "528032", "text": "\"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.marketwatch.com/story/one-third-of-american-households-cant-afford-food-shelter-or-medical-care-2017-09-27) reduced by 63%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Nearly half of Americans have a tough time paying their bills, and over one-third have faced hardships such as running out of food, not being able to afford a place to live, or not having enough money to pay for medical treatment.  &gt; The State of the American Wallet shows how Americans are saddled with mounting car loan and credit card debt and not saving enough money - even enough to cover emergency expenses.  &gt; The survey included questions on whether respondents could &amp;quot;Enjoy life&amp;quot; because of the way they managed their money, and how often respondents had money left over at the end of the month.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/75tq9p/onethird_of_american_households_cant_afford_food/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ \"\"Version 1.65, ~226611 tl;drs so far.\"\") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr \"\"PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.\"\") | *Top* *keywords*: **survey**^#1 **American**^#2 **respondent**^#3 **money**^#4 **how**^#5\""}
{"id": "528157", "text": "Your answer looks correct.  It's the buyer of the option that's long, not the seller (you). If you're doing a lot of trading, you might get hit with wash-sale rules and you could be taxed at the short-term capital gains rate, which is higher than for long-term gains.  But those aren't direct fees."}
{"id": "528184", "text": "In India there is a new trend is running  for Building a home or office by using new concepts or new design. But it's not possible for everyone because no one has that much of the time so that we contact to the Building Contractors in Delhi that will build all that on the basis of our demands"}
{"id": "528494", "text": "1. Rebate  2. Bid-Ask spread  3. Tactically increasing/decreasing inventory based on their view of the market  4. Picking off idiot traders (OTC markets, basically not passing orders on to the market when the counterparty has a low performance history)."}
{"id": "528553", "text": "As others have suggested, if you're considering taking a 50% discount on a revenue stream you feel is low risk because you're having cash flow issues paying those property taxes - I'd recommend you seriously separating these two unrelated concerns and deal with each in most financially astute manner individually. You'll keep more of your hard earned cash You don't have the hassle factor and uncertainty of trying to become proficient in an esoteric field of financial knowledge by Christmas!"}
{"id": "528827", "text": "I would not hold any company stock for the company that provides your income.   This is a too many eggs in one basket kind of problem. With a discounted stock purchase plan, I would buy the shares at a 10% discount and immediately resell for a profit.   If the company prevents you from immediately reselling, I  don't know if I would invest. The risk is too great that you'll see your job lost and your 401k/investments emptied due to a single cause."}
{"id": "529032", "text": "Adding to webdevduck's answer: Before you calculate your profits, you can pay money tax-free into a pension fund for the company director (that is you). Then if you pay yourself dividends, if you made lots of profit you don't have to pay it all as dividends. You can take some where the taxes are low, and then pay more money in later years.   What you must NOT do is just take the money. The company may be yours, but the money isn't. It has to be paid as salary or dividend. (You can give the company director a loan, but that loan has to be repaid. Especially if a limited company goes bankrupt, the creditors would insist that loans from the company are repaid).  After a bit more checking, here's the optimal approach, perfectly legal, expected and ethical:  You pay yourself a salary of \u00a3676 per month. That's the point where you get all the advantages of national insurance without having to pay; above that you would have to pay 13.8% employers NI contributions and 12% employee's NI contributions, so for \u00a3100 salary the company has to pay \u00a3113.80 and you receive \u00a388.00. Below \u00a3676 you pay nothing.  You deduct the salary from your revenue, then you deduct all the deductible business costs (be wise in what you try to deduct), then you pay whatever you want into a pension fund. Well, up to I think \u00a325,000 per year.  The rest is profit. The company pays 19% corporation tax on profits. Then you pay yourself dividends. Any dividends until your income is \u00a311,500 per year are tax free. Then the next \u00a35,000 per year are tax free. Then any dividends until income + dividends = \u00a345,000 per year is taxed at 7.5%. It's illegal to pay so much in dividends that the company can't pay its bills.  Above \u00a345,000 you decide if you want your money now and pay more tax, or wait and get it tax free. Every pound of dividend above \u00a345,000 a year you pay 32.5% tax, but there is nobody forcing you to take the money. You can wait until business is bad, or you want a loooong holiday, or you retire. So at that time you will stay below \u00a345,000 per year and pay only 7.5% tax."}
{"id": "529142", "text": "From your own [post in this discussion thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/business/comments/6yfcxu/the_debt_trap_how_the_student_loan_industry/dmnfcfs/)  &gt;In any case, an educated populace is crucial to avoid things like our current political climate, where people fall for propaganda and think satire websites are true news."}
{"id": "529528", "text": "According to TurboTax, it is perfectly legal to final as an individual with zero income. But, alas, according to Entities, by the IRS, you must file as a partnership or a corporation even if you have zero income.  As for my two cents, I can only see it being advantageous for filing on expense purposes, but as you have no income, the point is mute. Hope it all goes over well as the forms are due March 15."}
{"id": "529626", "text": "Probably more like ELI10.  Bob gets 10$ a week in lunch money from his parents.  Jim's dad works as a travelling salesman and makes a fixed salary plus a weekly commission, jim gets 5$ in allowance + whatever extra his dad makes, some weeks 20$ some 5$ some 7.  So Jim wants to make his allowance a bit more constant and bob wants a piece of the commission.  Mathematically: Bob's allowance = 10$/week  Jim's allowance = 5$ + C / week  C is unknown.   So they make a deal. Jim will receive 5$ from Bob every week. In return Jim will pay bob the  extra allowance every week.  The new deal is  Bob = 5$ + C  Jim = 10$   How they get to this arrangement is every week they sit at the lunch table. Bob takes out 5$, jim takes out his extra commission. They net the amount and pay whomever profits."}
{"id": "529678", "text": "Carrying $5k debt would cost you $400 per year at an 8% interest rate. At 19%, that would be $950 per year. Pay off your cc debt, put the other 2k on your student loans, and the money you save in interest on your cc debt goes toward your student loans too. When all your debts are paid off, you have an emergency fund saved up (usually 3 months' living expenses), you've met all your other goals (car, house, college fund for the kids, retirement fund), and you still have some money to spend, then go to Vegas and enjoy yourself while probably losing it all."}
{"id": "529784", "text": "A person name Matthew Drury or a similar name owes money on their loan, and it has gone to collections. The collections company is trying to match the account to a real person with money. They sent a letter to somebody (your grandmother) with the same last name. The debtor may have even lived in that town at sometime.  The reason you received the letter is because your grandmother forward it on. Because the rest of your info (SSN and birth date) don't match the loan it is unlikely they can attach the debt to you. Unless you provided your address to the company you could in the future receive a letter from them. But I doubt they are going to send letters to everybody with the same name. I would not worry about it unless they actually send a letter or call you directly."}
{"id": "529879", "text": "It would be better to use a bank account and have the refund deposited directly to it. But you said you never had a bank account, so that may be a problem. Another option is to have the refund check mailed to you, and you deposit it in your local bank, converting to your home currency (or not, depending on local laws). Generally, for another person to cash a check made out to you - you need to endorse it first. Physically, on the back of the check. That means you have to see the check. Specifically with tax refund checks there's much more scrutiny since there's a lot of fraud going on with regards to tax refunds. Thus, I doubt a bank would allow a third party cash a check made out to you, without you actually being present there."}
{"id": "530410", "text": "For the employee, this is an identical tax situation to an at-the-money option purchase. They're buying an asset with a specific cost basis. For the company, you are just issuing shares from treasury as authorized... debit cash, credit additional paid-in-capital and equity. There is no tax consequence for this money received."}
{"id": "530548", "text": "Consider inflation. If you invest $10,000 today, you need to make a few hundred dollars interest just to make up for inflation - if there is 3% inflation then a change from $10,000 to $10,300 means you didn't actually make any money."}
{"id": "530690", "text": "It's simple, really: Practice. Fiscal responsibility is not a trick you can learn look up on Google, or a service you can buy from your accountant.  Being responsible with your money is a skill that is learned over a lifetime.  The only way to get better at it is to practice, and not get discouraged when you make mistakes."}
{"id": "530692", "text": "I didn't mean as a legal maximum, but rather how many hours they choose to work &amp; get scheduled for. Some youth are lucky, and their parents pay their bills.   I didn't have as expensive bills as you. Only cell phone, and my bus pass in high school. But I did have to pay for all of my graduation costs myself and post-secondary application fees. So keeping a savings amount really helps. (I also had 4 jobs simultaneously in high school. )"}
{"id": "530908", "text": "This doesn't look particularly unreasonable, but a few notes: It's a little misleading to say that 45% of his paycheck is gone. Roughly 6% of his gross pay went to his 401(k). That money is still his; he's just chosen to save it in a particular way. Depending on the choices he's made for his retirement savings, he'll also reduce his tax bill right now and/or during retirement by making these contributions. Some of the other costs also go to social programs that may pay you back (granted, they may not always be as good as those in Europe, but it's not that you'd get nothing in return): In any case, $130K/year is certainly a lot on a global scale, but San Francisco is a very expensive city, and housing costs in SF have risen a lot lately. You've nicely summed up why a lot of families unfortunately leave the city."}
{"id": "530938", "text": "The company that runs the fund (Vanguard) on their website has the information on the general breakdown of their investments of that fund. They tell you that as of July 31st 2016 it is 8.7% emerging markets. They even specifically list the 7000+ companies they have purchased stocks in. Of course the actual investment and percentages could [change every day]. Vanguard may publish on this Site, in the fund's holdings on the   webpages, a detailed list of the securities (aggregated by issuer for   money market funds) held in a Vanguard fund (portfolio holdings) as of   the most recent calendar-quarter-end, 30 days after the end of the   calendar quarter, except for Vanguard Market Neutral Fund (60 calendar   days after the end of the calendar quarter), Vanguard index funds (15   calendar days after the end of the month), and Vanguard Money Market   Funds (within five [5] business days after the last business day of   the preceding month). Except with respect to Vanguard Money Market   Funds, Vanguard may exclude any portion of these portfolio holdings   from publication on this Site when deemed in the best interest of the   fund."}
{"id": "530951", "text": "With InteractiveBrokers there is no minimum trade amount, they also offer Australian Equities."}
{"id": "531051", "text": "I completely agree with Pete that a 401(k) loan is not the answer, but I have an alternate proposal: Reduce your 401(k) contribution down to the 4% that you get a match on.  If you are cash poor now and have debts to be cleaned up, those need to be addressed before retirement savings.  You'll have plenty of time to make up the lost savings after you get the debts paid off.   If your company matches 50% (meaning you have to contribute 8% to get the 4% match), then consider temporarily stopping your 401(k) altogether. A 100% match is very hard to give up, but a 50% match is less difficult.  You have plenty of years left ahead of you to make up the lost match.  Plus, the pain of knowing you're leaving money on the table will incentivize you to get the loans paid as quickly as possible.  It seems to me that I would be reducing middle to high interest debt while also saving myself $150 per month.  No, you'd be deferring $150 per month for an additional two years, and not reducing debt at all, just moving it to a different lender. Interest rate is not your problem.  Right now you're paying less than $30 per month in interest on these 3 loans and about $270 in principal, and at the current rate should have them paid off in about 2 years.  You're wanting to extend these loans to 4 years by borrowing from your retirement savings.   I would buckle down, reduce expenses wherever possible (cable? cell phone? coffee? movies? restaurants?) until you get these debts paid off.  You make $70,000 per year, or almost $6,000 per month.  I bet if you try hard enough you can come up with $1,100 fairly quickly. Then the next $1,200 should come twice as fast. Then attack the next $4,000. (You can argue whether the $1,200 should come first because of the interest rate, but in the end it doesn't matter - either one should be paid off very quickly, so the interest saved is negligible) Maybe you can get one of them paid off, get yourself some breathing room, then loosen up a little bit, but extending the pain for an additional two years is not wise. Some more drastic measures:"}
{"id": "531066", "text": "\"This page from simplestockinvesting.com gives details of total returns for the S&P500 for each decade over the last 60 years, including total returns for the entire 60 year period. It is important to understand that, from an investors point of view, the total return includes both the change in index value (capital gain) plus dividends received.  This total then needs to be adjusted for inflation to give the \"\"total real return\"\". As noted in the analysis provided, 44% of the total return from the S&P500 over the last 80 years comes from dividends.  For the DowJones30, this site provides a calculator for total returns and inflation adjusted total returns for user selected periods. Finding comparable analysis for the NASDAQ market is more difficult.  The NASDAQ market site provides gross values for total returns over fixed periods, but you will then need to do the arithmetic to calculate the equivalent average annual total returns.  No inflation adjusted values for \"\"real\"\" returns are provided, so again you will need to combine inflation data from elsewhere and do the arithmetic.\""}
{"id": "531137", "text": "\"I was I a similar position as you, and sometimes credit bureaus might be difficult to deal with, especially when high amounts of money are involved. To make the long story short, someone opened a store credit card under my name and made a charge of around 3k. After reporting this to the bureaus, they did not want to remove the account from my credit report citing that the claim was \"\"frivolous\"\". After filing a police report, the police officer gave me the phone number for the fraud department of this store credit card, and after they investigated, they removed the account from my credit. I would suggest to do the following: Communicating with Creditors and Debt Collectors You have the right to:  Stop creditors and debt collectors from   reporting fraudulent accounts. After you give them a copy of a valid   identity theft report, they may not report fraudulent accounts to the   credit reporting companies. Get copies of documents related to the   theft of your identity, like transaction records or applications for   new accounts. Write to the company that has the documents, and include   a copy of your identity theft report. You also can tell the company to   give the documents to a specific law enforcement agency. Stop a debt   collector from contacting you. In most cases, debt collectors must   stop contacting you after you send them a letter telling them to stop.   Get written information from a debt collector about a debt, including   the name of the creditor and the amount you supposedly owe. If a debt   collector contacts you about a debt, request this information in   writing. I know that you said that the main problem was that your credit account was combined with another. But there might be a chance that identity theft was involved. If this is the case, and you can prove it, then you might have access to more tools to help you. For example, you can file a report with the FTC, and along with a police report, this can be a powerful tool in stopping these charges. Feel free to go to the identitytheft.gov website for more information.\""}
{"id": "531192", "text": "\"The account you are looking for is called a \"\"Positive Pay\"\" account.  It generally is only for business accounts, you provide a list of check numbers and amounts, and they are cross-referenced for clearing. It normally has a hefty monthly fee due to the extra labor involved.\""}
{"id": "531299", "text": "I would second the advice to not do this. Real estate ownership is complex to begin with, involving a constant stream of maintenance, financing, and other decisions.  It is difficult enough to do for a single individual or a family as a unit (a couple), but at least spouses are forced to compromise. Friends are not, and you can end up with long-running conflicts and impasses. Financial transactions of any kind impose tensions on relationships, and friendships are no exception. If you want your friendship to survivie, do not sacrifice it to the financial arrangement which seems like a good idea at the moment. My advice would be to steer clear, no matter how attractive on the surface the deal might look. Focus on your own individual finances and use discipline and patience to save the amount needed for acquiring a separate investment property. But it will be 100% yours, and will save tons of headache. Since you are still considering this deal, it's a great time to politely change your mind and walk away - believe me, a few minutes of inconvenience will save you years of frustration. Good luck!"}
{"id": "531499", "text": "\"That $200 extra that your employer withheld may already have been sent on to the IRS. Depending on the size of the employer, withholdings from payroll taxes (plus employer's share of Social Security and Medicare taxes) might be deposited in the US Treasury within days of being withheld. So, asking the employer to reimburse you, \"\"out of petty cash\"\" so to speak, might not work at all.  As JoeTaxpayer says, you could ask that $200 less be withheld as income tax from your pay for the next pay period (is your Federal income tax withholding at least $200 per pay period?), and one way of \"\"forcing\"\" the employer to withhold less is to file a  new W-4 form with Human Resources/Payroll, increasing the number of  exemptions to more than you are entitled to, and then filing a new W-4 changing your exemptions back to what they are right now once when you have had $200 less withheld. But be careful. Claims for more exemptions than you are entitled to can be problematic, and the IRS might come looking if you suddenly \"\"discover\"\" several extra children for whom you are entitled to claim exemptions.\""}
{"id": "531689", "text": "\"Since you're an idiot, here is a quote [\"\"The Bank of England (formally the Governor and Company of the Bank of England) is the central bank of the United Kingdom and the model on which most modern central banks have been based. Established in 1694, it is the second oldest central bank in the world \"\"](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_England).  Note that this bank, **founded in 1694**, is the model on which most modern central banks have been based.  Now a quote from you:  &gt;The UK did NOT sell debt and simultaneously purchase its own debt in the past (until modern times).   Owned, fool.  And another quote to rub it in \"\"The lenders would give the government cash (bullion) and also issue notes against the government bonds, which can be lent again.\"\"  You still have not listed an empire that did not purchase it's own debt.\""}
{"id": "531787", "text": "\"There's an expression, \"\"stock prices have no memory.\"\" Apple trades at about $115. Why would I carry my shares at anything but $115 even though I paid say $75 a share, while you just bought it at $115?  The only difference, perhaps, is that if I hold them in a non retirement account, I might track the net I'd have, post tax.\""}
{"id": "531841", "text": "That really depends on the lender, and in the current climate this is extremely unlikely. In the past it was possible to get a loan which is higher than the value of the house (deposit considered), usually on the basis that the buyer is going to improve the property (extend, renovate, etc.) and this increase the value of the property. Responsible lenders required some evidence of the plans to do this, but less responsible ones simply seem to have given the money. Here in the UK this was often based on the assumption that property value tends to rise relatively quickly anyway so a seemingly-reasonable addition to the loan on top of the current value of the property will quickly be covered. That meant that indeed some people have been able to get a loan which is higher than the cost of the purchase, even without concrete plans to actively increase the value of the property. Today the situation is quite different, lenders are a lot more careful and I can't see this happening. All that aside - had it been possible, is it a good idea? I find it difficult to come up with a blanket rule, it really depends on many factors -  On the one hand  mortgage interest rates tend to be significantly lower than shorter term interest rates and from that point of view, it makes sense, right?! However - they are usually very long term, often with limited ability to overpay, which means the interest will be paid over a longer period of time."}
{"id": "531918", "text": "There are some people that still get an old-fashioned paycheck but for the most part if you are an employee at a company you get a paystub while the money is direct deposited into your accounts.  Paying for stuff at a store with a check is not very common.  Most people use credit cards for that purpose.  A significant percentage of the population still use checks for paying there regular bills through the mail.  Although the more internet savvy people will most likely use online bill pay from their bank so they don't have to mail checks.  Personally I have only written about 15 checks in 5 years.  Mostly to people and not to businesses setup for receiving bill payments electronically."}
{"id": "531965", "text": "First, as Dheer mentioned above, there is no right answer as investment avenues for a person is dicteted by many subjective considerations. Given that below a few of my thoughts (strictly thoughts): 1) Have a plan for how much money you would need in next 5-7 years, one hint is, do you plan you buy a house, car, get married ... Try to project this requirement 2) Related to the above, if you have some idea on point 1, then it would be possible for you to determine how much you need to save now to achieve the above (possibly with a loan thrown in). It will also give you some indication as to where and how much of your current cash holding that you should invest now 3) From an investment perspective there are many instruments, some more risky some less. The exact mix of instruments that you should consider is based on many things, one among them is your risk apetite and fund requirement projections 4) Usually (not as a rule of thumb) the % of savings corresponding to your age should go into low risk investments and 100-the % into higher risk investment 5) You could talk to some professional invetment planners, all banks offer the service Hope this helps, I reiterate as Dheer did, there is truely no right answer for your question all the answers would be rather contextual."}
{"id": "532260", "text": "Yes, there's a difference. If you've borrowed $100, then under inflation your salary will (presumably) increase, and tomorrow your debt will only be worth $99. But under demurrage, you'll still owe $100."}
{"id": "532515", "text": "Interest payments You can make loans to people and collect interest."}
{"id": "532582", "text": "The restaurant business in particular is very difficult; a whole bunch of them fail in the first year. And it tends to be expensive to get into; I saw $250K as an average to get a space up and open."}
{"id": "532787", "text": "\"If you want to be really \"\"financially smart,\"\" buy a used good condition Corolla with cash (if you want to talk about a car that holds re-sale value), quit renting and buy a detached house close to the city a for about $4,000/month (to build equity. It's NYC the house will appreciate in value). Last but not the least, DO NOT get married. Retire at 50, sell the house (now paid after 25-years). Or LEASE a nice brand new car every year and have a good time! You're 25 and single!\""}
{"id": "532804", "text": "Some credit unions also offer them and support Business banking as well. First Tech Credit Union is a great example. They also have the most security-oriented banking website I've seen to date. https://www.firsttechfed.com/ As a side note I've found that Credit Unions are a MUCH better deal for personal and business banking."}
{"id": "532932", "text": "Unless the amounts involved are very small, it is MUCH better to incorporate. First, incorporation gives you limited liability for your acts as an employee. As an individual, you have unlimited liability. Second, incorporating allows you to deduct (for tax purposes) the costs of doing business, including all of your health insurance, most transportation, and some meals. The exception to the rule is if the amounts you are earning are so small that they don't cover the cost of incorporating, accounting fees, etc. (a few hundred, or at most a few thousand dollars)."}
{"id": "533549", "text": "There is a basis for that if you consider the power of compounding. So, the sooner you re-invest the dividends the sooner the time will give you results (through compounding). There is also the case of the commissions, if they are paid with a percentage of the amount invested they automatically gain more from you. Just my 2cents, though the other answers are probably more complete."}
{"id": "533727", "text": "\"First, to mention one thing - better analysis calls for analyzing a range of outcomes, not just one; assigning a probability on each, and comparing the expected values. Then moderating the choice based on risk tolerance. But now, just look at the outcome or scenario of 3% and time frame of 2 days. Let's assume your investable capital is exactly $1000 (multiply everything by 5 for $5,000, etc.). A. Buy stock: the value goes to 103; your investment goes to $1030; net return is $30, minus let's say $20 commission (you should compare these between brokers; I use one that charges 9.99 plus a trivial government fee). B. Buy an call option at 100 for $0.40 per share, with an expiration 30 days away (December 23). This is a more complicated. To evaluate this, you need to estimate the movement of the value of a 100 call, $0 in and out of the money, 30 days remaining, to the value of a 100 call, $3 in the money, 28 days remaining. That movement will vary based on the volatility of the underlying stock, an advanced topic; but there are techniques to estimate that, which become simple to use after you get the hang of it. At any rate, let's say that the expected movement of the option price in this scenario is from $0.40 to $3.20. Since you bought 2500 share options for $1000, the gain would be 2500 times 2.8 = 7000. C. Buy an call option at 102 for $0.125 per share, with an expiration 30 days away (December 23). To evaluate this, you need to estimate the movement of the value of a 102 call, $2 out of the money, 30 days remaining, to the value of a 102 call, $1 in the money, 28 days remaining. That movement will vary based on the volatility of the underlying stock, an advanced topic; but there are techniques to estimate that, which become simple to use after you get the hang of it. At any rate, let's say that the expected movement of the option price in this scenario is from $0.125 to $ 1.50. Since you bought 8000 share options for $1000, the gain would be 8000 times 1.375 = 11000. D. Same thing but starting with a 98 call. E. Same thing but starting with a 101 call expiring 60 days out. F., ... Etc. - other option choices. Again, getting the numbers right for the above is an advanced topic, one reason why brokerages warn you that options are risky (if you do your math wrong, you can lose. Even doing that math right, with a bad outcome, loses). Anyway you need to \"\"score\"\" as many options as needed to find the optimal point. But back to the first paragraph, you should then run the whole analysis on a 2% gain. Or 5%. Or 5% in 4 days instead of 2 days. Do as many as are fruitful. Assess likelihoods. Then pull the trigger and buy it. Try these techniques in simulation before diving in! Please! One last point, you don't HAVE to understand how to evaluate projected option price movements if you have software that  does that for you. I'll punt on that process, except to mention it. Get the general idea? Edit P.S. I forgot to mention that brokers need love for handling Options too. Check those commission rates in your analysis as well.\""}
{"id": "533791", "text": "Regarding transferring a residential investment property into your SMSF, no you cannot do it. You cannot transfer residential property into your SMSF from a related party. You can only transfer Business Real Property (that is commercial or industrial property) into a SMSF from a related party. You can buy new residential property inside your SMSF, and you can also borrow within the fund (using a non-recourse loan) to help you buy it, or you could buy it as tenants-in-common with your SMSF (that is you own say 50% in your own name and 50% under the SMSF). Regarding self-managing the investment properties held in your SMSF, yes you can, but you should make sure all your paperwork is in order (all your t's crossed and your i's dotted). You can even charge your SMSF for managing the properties, but this should be at market rates (not more)."}
{"id": "533808", "text": "\"There are way too many details missing to be able to give you an accurate answer, and it would be too localized in terms of time & location anyway -- the rules change every year, and your local taxes make the answer useless to other people. Instead, here's how to figure out the answer for yourself. Use a tax estimate calculator to get a ballpark figure. (And keep in mind that these only provide estimates, because there are still a lot of variables that are only considered when you're actually filling out your real tax return.) There are a number of calculators if you search for something like \"\"tax estimator calculator\"\", some are more sophisticated than others. (Fair warning: I used several of these and they told me a range of $2k - $25k worth of taxes owed for a situation like yours.) Here's an estimator from TurboTax -- it's handy because it lets you enter business income. When I plug in $140K ($70 * 40 hours * 50 weeks) for business income in 2010, married filing jointly, no spouse income, and 4 dependents, I get $30K owed in federal taxes. (That doesn't include local taxes, any itemized deductions you might be eligible for, IRA deductions, etc. You may also be able to claim some expenses as business deductions that will reduce your taxable business income.) So you'd net $110K after taxes, or about $55/hour ($110k / 50 / 40). Of course, you could get an answer from the calculator, and Congress could change the rules midway through the year -- you might come out better or worse, depending on the nature of the rule changes... that's why I stress that it's an estimate. If you take the job, don't forget to make estimated tax payments! Edit: (some additional info) If you plan on doing this on an ongoing basis (i.e. you are going into business as a contractor for this line of work), there are some tax shelters that you can take advantage of. Most of these won't be worth doing if you are only going to be doing contract work for a short period of time (1-2 years). These may or may not all be applicable to you. And do your research into these areas before diving in, I'm just scratching the surface in the notes below.\""}
{"id": "534019", "text": "You can illustrate why expense ratio fees are in the numerator with an extreme example:  Let's say you have $100 in a mutual fund, their expense ratio is 50%, your nominal return is 900% and inflation is 900%.  Thus, without the expense, your investment would give you $100 in present value (because your return and inflation are identical), and $1000 in future value.  So with the expense ratio of 50% and no change in present value, you can reason that you would expect the expense ratio will eat half the present value.  If you apply your equation and include expenses in the numerator, you end up with:  ((100 - 100(.50))*(1+9))/(1+9) = $50 present value as you would expect  If you apply the manager's assumption that fees are applied external to inflation, then you end up with:  (100 * (1 + 9))/(1+9) - (100 * (1+9) * .50) = $-400 present value.  With this example you can see applying the fees externally acts as though they are charging you the fees on future returns today.  *Edit:  It's probably not worth fighting with someone senior to you over, as inflation rates are noisy estimates to begin with and the difference between these is typically not material to the decision being made; but pissing off someone senior by showing them their math is off will probably have a material impact on you."}
{"id": "534027", "text": "\"Another essential component of one's life is financial security, which is why you're well advised to stay clear away from Richard Cayne, Meyer Asset Management / Meyer International / Asia Wealth / Expat Wealth.   All of the above, along with the now defunct Royal Siam Trust and Managed Savings (run by his former partner in crime, Greg Pitt) are complete scams. Hundreds of .. \"\"clients\"\" have lost tens of thousands of dollars because of him.\""}
{"id": "534158", "text": "2% is a very low interest rate; you can do much better by investing your new found money on a 2 year CD, or short term bonds. You could pay the 0% card according to the terms as well. Therefore, considering the low rates of your cards, you should check into some safe investments with guaranteed return rates."}
{"id": "534277", "text": "\"A C-Corp is not a pass-through entity, any applicable taxes would be paid by the Corporation, which is a separate legal entity from yourself. If you use the points to purchase something for yourself, that would constitute \"\"income\"\" to you, and would be taxable on your personal income tax.\""}
{"id": "534370", "text": "In the United States, when key people in a company buy or sell shares there are reporting requirements.  The definition of key people includes people like the CEO, and large shareholders. There are also rules that can lock out their ability to buy and sell shares during periods where their insider knowledge would give them an advantage. These reporting rules are to level the playing field regarding news that will impact the stock price.  These rules are different than the reporting rules that the IRS has to be able to tax capital gains. These are also separate than the registration rules for the shares so that you get all the benefits of owning the stock (dividends, voting at the annual meeting, voting on a merger or acquisition)."}
{"id": "534518", "text": "A CD will give you a higher rate of return.  The tradeoff is you cannot access your money until the CD matures. If you need the ability to get your money, you should choose a savings account.  If you won't use your money for awhile, choose a CD. Right now interest rates are so abysmal, you aren't going to get much return with either (so I would recommend against locking up your money in a CD)."}
{"id": "534552", "text": "The calculation can be made on the basis that the loan is equal to the sum of the repayments discounted to present value.  (For more information see Calculating the Present Value of an Ordinary Annuity.) With Deriving the loan formula from the simple discount summation.  As you can see, this is the same as the loan formula given here. In the UK and Europe APR is usually quoted as the effective interest rate while in the US it is quoted as a nominal rate.  (Also, in the US the effective APR is usually called the annual percentage yield, APY, not APR.) Using the effective interest rate finds the expected answer. The total repayment is \u00a330.78 * n = \u00a31108.08 Using a nominal interest rate does not give the expected answer."}
{"id": "534837", "text": "One should fund a 401(k) or matched retirement account up to the match, even if you have other debt. Long term, you will come out ahead, but you must be disciplined in making the payments. If one wants to point out the risk in a 401(k), I'd suggest the money need not be invested in stocks, there's always a short term safe option."}
{"id": "534887", "text": "\"Typical Human Advisor: Advantages: They can recommend funds and allocations that fit to your portfolio. Disadvantages: Those who are just fund salespeople in disguise will usually recommend poor-performing funds for higher commission pay. Their advice will not be much different from random person internet advice. When your portfolio drops, they still get paid, and they don't care because they are not a fiduciary. Robo-Advisor: Advantages: Rules are automated, and typically based on crunched numbers. Somebody else executes the trades, and remembers to rebalance your portfolio when you'd usually forget to. Disadvantages: Not always accurate, usually relies on momentum from popularity. No one at the helm to adjust for risk. If you follow, you'll usually just lag behind. Yet, those with simple, low-cost diversified ETF portfolios can be attractive. Market ETFs: Advantages: Low cost funds that typically match the market. High performance. Easy to sell when you need to, zero decision making required, and you will be sure to nearly match the general market. Disadvantages: Boring. You need to enter your own orders, but you won't be doing that too often. No thrill except counting all the commas in your account. No wacky stories to wow your friends and family about your gambling addiction. Seriously, some people just can't help but take the high risk route. Newsletter / Portfolio / Online \"\"Expert\"\": Advantages: They usually have some idea of what indicators to look for and can make predictions about price movements. Disadvantages: Predictions are as frequently wrong as they are right. Good ones won't have much to say, and incompetent ones will write multi-paragraph essays about Fibonacci sequences, resistance levels, trends RSI, ROIT, everything that might show an indicator in some direction maybe... and it's usually forgotten by the next newsletter.\""}
{"id": "535110", "text": "Let\u2019s turn this round. Now what if the only people willing to own part of company are doing it due to the expectation that they will make money in the short term form the company\u2026."}
{"id": "535314", "text": "I think you're looking at the picture in an odd way. When each of you made your initial investments and determined what portions you owned, that gave the company capital that they could use to finance its operations. In return, you are entitled to the future profits of the company (in proportion to your ownership). Any future investment by either of you is at your own discretion. Your company now faces a situation where it would like to pursue a potentially lucrative opportunity, but needs more capital than it has to do so. So, you need to raise more capital. That capital can come from one or both of you (or from an outsider). Since that investment would be discretionary, what the investor gets is a negotiation: the company negotiates with the investor how much equity (in the form of new shares) to award in exchange for the new investment (or whatever other compensation you decide on, if not equity)."}
{"id": "535469", "text": "No chance. First off, unless the company provides audited financials (and they don't from what I can tell), there is no way I'm tinkering with a bunch of small business owners. Transparency is a substantial part of investing and this actually exempts or excludes these companies, from what I can tell."}
{"id": "535518", "text": "\"Investment strategies abound. Bonds can be part of useful passive investment strategy but more active investors may develop a good number of reasons why buying and selling bonds on the short term. A few examples: Also, note that there is no guarantee in bonds as you imply by likening it to a \"\"guaranteed stock dividend\"\". Bond issuers can default, causing bond investors to lose part of all of their original investment. As such, if one believes the bond issuer may suffer financial distress, it would be ideal to sell-off the investment.\""}
{"id": "535651", "text": "This doesn't make any sense. For the people who ask you this, suggest that they borrow the money to invest with you. They can use their bitcoins as collateral for the loan. That way, they get the same benefit and your company doesn't go out of business if the price of bitcoin drops, even temporarily, because the loan becomes unsecured. If they want to try to use a volatile asset as collateral and have to figure out how to cover when the price drops temporarily, great. But why should they put that risk on your other investors who may not be so crazy? Also, this obviously won't meet the investor's concerns anyway. Say the price of bitcoin goes up but you lose 10% of the money you borrowed. Clearly, your investors can't have an interest that worth as much as they would have if they held bitcoin since you lost 10%."}
{"id": "535659", "text": "Is my math correct? The Math is correct, however Dividends don't work this way. The Yield is Post Facto. i.e. Given the dividend that is declared every quarter, once calculates the yield. The dividends are not fixed or guaranteed. These change from Quarter to Quarter or at times they are not given at all. The yield is 3.29% and the value is $114 per share. Assuming that the price remains exactly the same for an entire year, and that I purchase only one share, then this should be the math for calculating the yield: 114 x 0.0329 = 3.7506 What the Link is showing is that last dividend of MCD was 0.94 for Q3; that means total for a year will be 0.94*4 [3.76], this means yield will be 3.29%. Note this year there were only 3 Dividend was 0.89 on 26-Feb, 0.89 on 2-Jun and 0.94 on 29-Nov. It is unlikely that there will be one more dividend this year. So for this year the correct post facto calculation would be 0.89+0.89+.94 = 2.72 and hence an yield of 2.38%  Also, are there any fees/deductions, or would I receive the amount in full, which should be $3.75? There are no fee deducted. Not sure about US tax treatment on Dividends."}
{"id": "535673", "text": "From the Massachusetts Department of Revenue:   1st - Massachusetts Source Income That is Excluded   Massachusetts gross income excludes certain items of income derived from sources within Massachusetts: non-business related interest, dividends and gains from the sale or exchange of intangibles, and qualified pension income. 2nd - Massachusetts Source Income That is Included:   Massachusetts gross income includes items of income derived from sources within Massachusetts. This includes income: 3rd - Trade or business, Including Employment Carried on in Massachusetts:   A nonresident has a trade or business, including any employment carried on in Massachusetts if: A nonresident generally is not engaged in a trade or business, including any employment carried on in Massachusetts if the nonresident's presence for business in Massachusetts is casual, isolated and inconsequential. A nonresident's presence for business in Massachusetts will ordinarily be considered casual, isolated and inconsequential if it meets the requirements of the Ancillary Activity Test (AAT) and Examples. When nonresidents earn or derive income from sources both within Massachusetts and elsewhere, and no exact determination can be made of the amount of Massachusetts source income, an apportionment of income must be made to determine that amount considered Massachusetts gross income. 4th - Apportionment of Income:   Apportionment Methods:   The three most common apportionment methods used to determine Massachusetts source income are as follows:   Gross income is multiplied by a:   So if you go to Massachusetts to work, you have to pay the tax.  If you collect a share of the profit or revenue from Massachusetts, you have to pay tax on that.  If you work from Oregon and are paid for that work, then you don't pay Massachusetts tax on that.  If anything, your company might have to pay Oregon taxes on revenue you generate (you are their agent or employee in Oregon).   Does the answer change depending on whether the income is reported at 1099 or W-2? This shouldn't matter legally.  It's possible that it would be easier to see that the work was done in Oregon in one or the other.  I.e. it doesn't make any legal difference but may make a practical difference.   All this assumes that you are purely an employee or contractor and not an owner.  If you are an owner, you have to pay taxes on any income from your Massachusetts business.  Note that this applies to things like copyrights and real estate as well as the business.   This also assumes that you are doing your work in Oregon.  If you live in Oregon and travel to Massachusetts to work, you pay taxes on your Massachusetts income in Massachusetts."}
{"id": "535697", "text": "It means a 3% return on the value of the stock. If a stock has a $10 share price, the dividend would be $0.30. Normally though, the dividends are announced as a fixed amount per share, because the share price fluctuates. If a percentage were announced, then the final cost would not be known as the share priced could change radically before the dividend date."}
{"id": "535737", "text": "If your investment returns are the main variable you use to determine if your advisor is doing a good job you are using his or her services incorrectly  Also, if you are using a good advisor, he or she needs to know how your investments are doing, not you.  However, my thoughts are based on the idea that you can't go it alone.  If you are not among the people concerned about the market, waiting for the market to go down 'so you can find a better buying opportunity', or making one of many other novice mistakes, I'm not speaking directly to you with my comments."}
{"id": "535936", "text": "You can only lose your 7%. The idea that a certain security is more volatile than others in your portfolio does not mean that you can lose more than the value of the investment. The one exception is that a short position has unlimited downside, but i dont think there are any straight short mutual funds."}
{"id": "536043", "text": "The opposite of a hedge is leverage (aka gearing). A hedge is where you spend money to reduce your exposure. Leverage is where you spend money to increase your exposure. Spread bets are a form of leverage - that's what makes them such an effective way to lose all your money, quickly."}
{"id": "536059", "text": "\"The financing is built into the price.  I do not have hard facts, but I strongly suspect that very few people buy brand-new smartphones at full price upfront.  Most pay a monthly installment to the carrier or retailer equal to 1/24 of the full price, which in effect is \"\"0% financing for 2 years\"\".  Samsung might be able to advertise a lower retail price and then offer financing at some rate of interest, but from a marketing standpoint, offering \"\"0%\"\" financing makes it feel like you're getting \"\"free money\"\", when in fact it's built into the overall price. Which sounds better, buying an $840 phone with 0% financing for two years or buying an $800 phone at 4.85% APR for two years (both have a $35 monthly payment)?\""}
{"id": "536282", "text": "ETrade allows this without fees (when investing into one of the No-Load/No-Fees funds from their list). The Sharebuilder plan is better when investing into ETF's or stocks, not for mutual funds, their choice (of no-fees funds) is rather limited on Sharebuilder."}
{"id": "536462", "text": "My reaction to this is that your observation @D.W. is spot on correct: It sounds like long-term market timing: trying to do a better job than   the rest of the market at predicting, based upon a simple formula,   whether the market is over-priced or under-priced. I read the post by the founder of Valuation Informed Indexing, Rob Bennet. Glance at  the comments section. Rob clearly states that he doesn't even use his own strategy, and has not owned, nor traded, any stocks since 1996! As another commenter summarizes it, addressing Rob: This is 2011. You\u2019ve been 100% out of stocks \u2014 including indexes \u2014   since 1996? That\u2019s 15 years of taking whatever the bond market, CDs or   TIPS will yield (often and currently less than 2%)... I\u2019m curious how   you defend not following your own program even as you recommend it for   others? Rob basically says that stocks haven't shown the right signals for buying since 1996, so he's stuck with bonds, CD's and fixed-income instead. This is a VERY long-term horizon point of view (a bit of sarcasm edges in from me). Answering your more general question, what do I think of this particular Price/ Earnings based ratio as a way to signal asset allocation change i.e. Valuation Informed Investing? I don't like it much."}
{"id": "536463", "text": "\"There is no universal answer here.  Some card issuers will.  Some that will close the account will warn you first.  For my \"\"sock drawer\"\" cards I'll try to take each out semi-annually to make a single transaction, then put it back in the drawer. I've heard you should charge something quarterly, I've never had one closed with semi-annual charges.\""}
{"id": "536554", "text": "If upper and Bollinger bands either converge ... or diverge ..., does that mean the market is TRENDING? No - Bollinger bands measure volatility, which is an measure of how much variation there is in the price of the instrument. It does not indicate a trend which means that the instrument tends to move in a consistent direction.  When Bollinger bands are close together, that means volatility is relatively low, and vice-versa. They can  be interpreted as signals that a stock might move in one direction or the other, but they are not a measure of directional movement."}
{"id": "536564", "text": "Just so I'm clear- the end result is a long call, and you think the stock is going up. There is nothing wrong with that fundamentally.  Be aware though: That's a negative theta trade. This means if your stock doesn't increase in price during the remaining time to expiration of your call option, the option will lose some of its value every day. It may still lose some of its value every day, depending on how much the stock price increases. The value of the call option just goes down and down as it approaches maturity, even if the stock price stays about the same. Being long a call (or a put) is a tough way to make money in the options market.  I would suggest using an out-of-the-money butterfly spread. The potential returns are a bit less. However, this is a cheap positive theta trade so you avoid time decay on the value of the option."}
{"id": "536610", "text": "\"The wash sale rule only applies when the sale in question is at a loss.  So the rule does not apply at all to your cases 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, and 16, which all start with a gain.  You get a capital gain at the first sale and then a separately computed gain / loss at the second sale, depending on the case, BUT any gain or loss in the IRA is not a taxable event due to the usual tax-advantaged rules for the IRA. The wash sale does not apply to \"\"first\"\" sales in your IRA because there is no taxable gain or loss in that case.  That means that you wouldn't be seeking a deduction anyway, and there is nothing to get rolled into the repurchase. This means that the rule does not apply to 1-8.  For 5-8, where the second sale is in your brokerage account, you have a \"\"usual\"\" capital gain / loss as if the sale in the IRA didn't happen. (For 1-4, again, the second sale is in the IRA, so that sale is not taxable.) What's left are 9-10 (Brokerage -> IRA) and 13-14 (Brokerage -> Brokerage).   The easier two are 13-14.  In this case, you cannot take a capital loss deduction for the first sale at a loss.  The loss gets added to the basis of the repurchase instead.  When you ultimately close the position with the second sale, then you compute your gain or loss based on the modified basis.  Note that this means you need to be careful about what you mean by \"\"gain\"\" or \"\"loss\"\" at the second sale, because you need to be careful about when you account for the basis adjustment due to the wash sale. Example 1: All buys and sells are in your brokerage account.  You buy initially at $10 and sell at $8, creating a $2 loss.  But you buy again within the wash sale window at $9 and sell that at $12.  You get no deduction after the first sale because it's wash.  You have a $1 capital gain at the second sale because your basis is $11 = $9 + $2 due to the $2 basis adjustment from wash sale. Example 2: Same as Example 1, except that final sale is at $8 instead of at $12.  In this case you appear to have taken a $2 loss on the first buy-sell and another $1 loss on the second buy-sell.  For taxes however, you cannot claim the loss at the first sale due to the wash.  At the second sale, your basis is still $11 (as in Example 1), so your overall capital loss is the $3 dollars that you might expect, computed as the $8 final sale price minus the $11 (wash-adjusted) basis. Now for 9-10 (Brokerage->IRA), things are a little more complicated.  In the IRA, you don't worry about the basis of individual stocks that you hold because of the way that tax advantages of those accounts work.  You do need to worry about the basis of the IRA account as a whole, however, in some cases.  The most common case would be if you have non-deductable contributions to your traditional IRA.  When you eventually withdraw, you don't pay tax on any distributions that are attributable to those nondeductible contributions (because you already paid tax on that part).  There are other cases where basis of your account matters, but that's a whole question in itself - It's enough for now to understand 1. Basis in your IRA as a whole is a well-defined concept with tax implications, and 2. Basis in individual holdings within your account don't matter. So with the brokerage-IRA wash sale, there are two questions:  1. Can you take the capital loss on the brokerage side?  2. If no because of the wash sale, does this increase the basis of your IRA account (as a whole)?  The answer to both is \"\"no,\"\" although the reason is not obvious. The IRS actually put out a Special Bulletin to answer the question specifically because it was unclear in the law. Bottom line for 9-10 is that you apparently are losing your tax deduction completely in that case. In addition, if you were counting on an increase in the basis of your IRA to avoid early distribution penalties, you don't get that either, which will result in yet more tax if you actually take the early distribution. In addition to the Special Bulletin noted above, Publication 550, which talks about wash sale rules for individuals, may also help some.\""}
{"id": "536647", "text": "None of your options or strategies are ideal. Have you considered looking at the stock chart and making a decision? Is the price currently up-trending, or is it down-trending, or is it going sideways? As Knuckle Dragger mentions, you could just set a limit price order and if it does not hit by Friday you can just sell at whatever price on Friday. However, this could be very damaging if the price is currently down-trending. It may fall considerably by Friday. I think a better strategy would be to place a trailing stop loss order, say 5% from the current price. If the stock starts heading south you will be stopped out approximately 5% below the current price. However, if the price goes up, your trailing stop order will move up as well, always trailing 5% below the highest price reached. If the trailing stop has not been hit by Friday afternoon, you can sell at the current price. This way you will be protected on the downside (only approx. 5% below current price) and can potentially benefit from any short term upside."}
{"id": "536674", "text": "Note that your link shows the shares as of March 31, 2016 while http://uniselect.com/content/files/Press-release/Press-Release-Q1-2016-Final.pdf notes a 2-for-1 stock split so thus you have to double the shares to get the proper number is what you are missing. The stock split occurred in May and thus is after the deadline that you quoted."}
{"id": "536693", "text": "Your main choices are ISAs and property. You can put over \u00a315,000 per year into an ISA, which means over \u00a3450,000 by the time you retire, not allowing for growth in your ISA investments. But if you're paying rent, and worried about being able to pay rent when you retire, the obvious choice is to buy a flat now on a thirty-year mortgage so that you can stop paying rent and the mortgage will be paid off by the time you retire."}
{"id": "536988", "text": "Sale price minus the loan balance, minus any closing costs is your net.  The numbers don't care whether you have a profit or loss, nor does the bank. People buy too high, pay a mortgage for 10 years, and walk away from the closing with little to no money, every day."}
{"id": "537053", "text": "A debenture is a security document. This means that the bond is secured over assets. Under English law, you can issue bonds which, if defaulted upon, you can enforce your security against the issuer (i.e. the company), which means you can attempt to get your money back by getting hold of the company's assets.   As for a floating charge, I'll first explain what a fixed charge is. Say you're a bank (a lender) and you lend \u00a31000 to X. You take security by way of a fixed charge over X's photocopy machines. X is unable to dispose of the machines without the lender's consent. This means that if X cannot pay up the loan, you can enforce security by taking possession of the photocopy machines, sell them, and hopefully get enough money back to cover the default.  A floating charge works the same way but over assets which fluctuate, e.g. X's stock of potatoes. X sells potatoes to supermarkets all the time so you can't just take a fixed charge over it for practical reasons, you can't just ask the lender each time you want to sell a potato. When an event of default occurs, i.e. you don't pay back the loan or breach a condition of the loan agreement, the floating charge crystallises, and becomes a fixed charge, thus enabling the lender to sell the potatoes to get their money back.  Random examples, but makes sense?  Source; future English solicitor."}
{"id": "537326", "text": "You can just buy the items personally and then submit an expense report to the company to get reimbursed. Keep all the receipts. Paying with a company check is also fine, but you might run into problems with stores not accepting checks."}
{"id": "537394", "text": "If you are concerned about FDIC coverage, then yes, you can spread your money across multiple banks. The limit is $250k, so after you invest in property, 4 banks should do it.  That having been said, in my opinion, it would be a waste to keep all this money in a bank's savings account. You will slowly lose value over time due to inflation. I suggest you spend a little money on an independent fee-based investment advisor. Choose someone who will teach you about investing in mutual funds, so you can feel comfortable with it. He or she should take into account your tolerance for risk, look at your goals, and help you come up with a low cost plan for investing your money.  It's certainly okay to keep the money in a bank short-term, but don't wait too long; take steps toward putting that money to work for you."}
{"id": "537729", "text": "You're a god damn idiot. Anyone who actually read a little about the debt knows it doesn't even matter. Our debt shows a strong economy and dollar. It shows value and investment worthy. Anyone can buy treasury bonds. You.. me... apple... you think our debt is at 20t because it's all we can get invested? Fuck no people are waiting in line to buy new treasury bonds. They're solid investments for people who don't want to worry about stock trading and know for a fact in 30 years they get their money and interest. But somehow you think the Jews were able to pool enough money to lend out 20t but not have the ability to increase the debt and lend out 5t a year and not 600b. Hah..."}
{"id": "537857", "text": "Compound interest means that the interest in each time period is calculated taking into account previously earned interest and not only the initial sum. Thus, if you had $1000 and invested it so that you'd earn 5% each year, than if you would withdraw the earnings each year you in 30 years you would earn 0.05*30*1000 = $1500, so summarily you'd have $2500, or 150% profit. However, if you left all the money to earn interest - including the interest money - then at the end of 30 years you'd have $4321 - or 330% profit.  This is why compound interest is so important - the interest on the earned interest makes money grow significantly faster. On the other hand, the same happens if you owe money - the interest on the money owed is added to the initial sum and so the whole sum owed grows quicker.  Compound interest is also important when calculating interest by time periods. For example, if you are told the loan accumulates 1% interest monthly, you may think it's 12% yearly. However, it is not so, since monthly interest is compounded - i.e., in February the addition not only February's 1% but also 1% on 1% from January, etc. - the real interest is 12.68% yearly. Thus, it is always useful to know how interest is compounded - both for loans and investments - daily, monthly, yearly, etc."}
{"id": "537913", "text": "wow thanks for the info. So if i wanted a masters in finance, should i take  math electives to get them out of the way earlier? I'm a senior in high school and I'm very interested in finance, but I'll admit not the best at math.."}
{"id": "538023", "text": "You've never saved money?  Have you ever bought anything?  There probably was a small window of time that you had to pool some cash to buy something.    In my experience, if you make it more interesting by 'allocating money for specific purposes' you'll have better results than just arbitrarily saving for a rainy day.    Allocate your money for different things (ie- new car, emergency, travel, or starting a new business) by isolating your money into different places.  Ex- your new car allocation could be in a savings account at your bank.   Your emergency allocation can be in cash under your bed.   Your new business allocation could be in an investment vehicle like a stocks where it could potentially see significant gains by the time you are ready to use it.    The traditional concept of savings is gone.  There is very little money to be earned in a savings account and any gains will be most certainly wiped out by inflation anyway.  Allocate your money, allocate more with new income, and then use it to buy real things and fund new adventures when the time is right."}
{"id": "538086", "text": "If you see something that looks like a sales pitch, be skeptical, even if they sound informed, say things which resonate with your concerns and promise to alleviate your problems. Watch out in particular for people who pontificate about matters which are tangentially related to the investment (e.g. populist anti-Wall-Street sentiment). Beware limited-time opportunities, offers, and discounts. I'm specifically talking about your email pitches, Motley Fool. They're shameful. Remember you're allowed to change your mind and go back on something that you've said a few minutes ago. If anyone tries to trick you into agreeing to go along with them by taking what something you've said and manipulating it, or uses logic to demonstrate that you must buy something based on things you've said, tell them you're not comfortable, head for the door and don't look back. Don't be afraid of embarrassment or anything like that. (You can investigate whether your position is in fact logically consistent later.) Run away from anyone who resents or deprecates the notion of a second opinion. Don't ever go along with anything that seems shady: it may be shadier than you know. Some people thought Bernie Maddoff was doing some front-running on the side; turns out it was a Ponzi scheme. (Likewise the Ponzi scheme that devastated Albania's economy was widely suspected of being dirty, but people suspected more of a black-market angle.) Beware of anyone who is promising stability and protection. Insurance companies can sell you products (especially annuities) which can deliver it, but they're very expensive for what you get. Don't buy it unless you seriously need it."}
{"id": "538208", "text": "There are many ways to value a business. Here is a simple method to get a ball park number on most businesses. This business is made of two parts. For the real estate: For the business:  I would consider this type of small business riskier than the stock market and so you should expect a higher return. Maybe 15 or 20%? If the rental business makes $50k profit (not revenue) and that is 20% return of your investment, the business is worth $250k. If the business makes no money or if they only make money because they don't take a salary then this is a hobby and not a business. There's no business to buy here and you are just bidding on the real estate to do with what you please. The assets worth $600k and the business worth $250k would be added together for a fair sale price of $850k. Adjust for your actual numbers and you should be able to get a ball park of what you think the business is worth. If you do the math and it works out that you'll make 1-3% on your business, compare that to investing in other places. If it works out that you'll make 40% on your money that's pretty awesome too."}
{"id": "538209", "text": "Hi, I'm going to be a social studies teacher and will have to introduce students to economics. I am saving your post for the future because it is an amazingly well crafted and engaging lesson.. the village analogy can even be used for group enactment. Thanks so much for this!"}
{"id": "538237", "text": "\"GLD, IAU, and SGOL are three different ETF's that you can invest in if you want to invest in gold without physically owning gold. Purchasing an ETF is just like purchasing a stock, so you're fine on that front.  Another alternative is to buy shares of companies that mine gold. An example of a single company is Randgold Resources (GOLD), and an ETF of mining companies is GDX. There are also some more complex alternatives like Exchange traded notes and futures contracts, but I wouldn't classify those for the \"\"regular person.\"\"  Hope it helps!\""}
{"id": "538260", "text": "What's your basis? If you have just made a 50% gain, maybe you should cash out a portion and hold the rest. Don't be greedy, but don't pass up an opportunity either."}
{"id": "538552", "text": "Actually it is possible that it came from nowhere - the government could simply have printed it, just like the Zimbabwian government did when they were in need of cash.   Of course, you really don't want you're government to do that because it's one way to drive your economy straight into the ground with inflation..."}
{"id": "538743", "text": "\"There needs to be a buyer of the shares you are offering.  There are a lot of feature rich options for buying and selling.  I don't understand them all in depth, but for example on TD Ameritrade here are some of the order types \"\"Limit\"\", \"\"Market\"\", \"\"Stop Market\"\", \"\"Stop Limit\"\", \"\"Trailing Stop %\"\", \"\"Trailing Stop $\"\".  This web page will explain the different order types https://invest.ameritrade.com/cgi-bin/apps/u/PLoad?pagename=tutorial/orderTypes/overview.html Stock with a higher volume will allow your trade to execute faster, since there are more frequent trades than stocks with lower volume. (UPDATE: More specifically, not more frequent trades, but more shares changing hands.) I'm a bit of a noob myself, but that's what I understand.\""}
{"id": "539008", "text": "I dont get people, i have my mortgage and that's it, 4% locked in for 10 years and dropping fast, my cousin, a couple months ago (since the rates are so low !!) refinanced her house to buy a brand new car. But she still is paying her old car, witch she traded in for the new one.  I dont get people."}
{"id": "539133", "text": "There is some benefit to creating a corporation or LLC -- you theoretically have a liability shield. As Michael Pryor points out in his answer, though, there will probably be little difference if you get sued. Operating the corporation or LLC incurs some extra costs: you have to pay annual fees to the state, and there's a bit of extra administrative overhead (very little overhead for an LLC though)."}
{"id": "539251", "text": "&gt; you're also signaling the value of tangible things like storage, weather, and transportation costs as well as intangibles such as future macroeconomic events, global policy decisions, etc.  To whom? I, as a buyer of the future, only get to know this from normal news, as can other people. Or is the assumption that I have a special source that not all people have access to, and hence when I buy the contract, other people think that I have some special information that they don't, and use this fact to then derive the prices of whatever?  Apologies if what I say makes no sense. I am a noob to finance. Please also provide some links for Price Discovery if you feel my understanding is wrong."}
{"id": "539462", "text": "Yes, they're often a beneficial choice because it means you are earning the interest on the money instead of the government. You won't necessarily pay taxes on it, you have many options once you reach the point of wanting to do something with the money. Many people accumulate the wealth and then pass it down to subsequent generations without paying tax, which is perfectly legal if done right. Others make donations to charity.  Those are just a couple examples, but the point is that you accumulated the wealth over a long period of time and bought yourself time to decide what to do with it. Edit: No, if the investor decides to cash the money out all at once at the end, it would not be equivalent. Assuming you had $1,000 to put in an account and could get a 5% return on your money and you were in the 25% tax rate, the tax-free account ends up with more in the end (mostly by virtue of the compounding being tax-free):"}
{"id": "539473", "text": "\"Agree with wrschneider99. Also, since it's a \"\"credit report\"\" it helps to have a history of credit. My wife has been in the U.S. for 14 years and now has a higher credit score than me, a U.S. citizen. When we leased a car we put it in her name. When we took out a mortgage it's under both our names.\""}
{"id": "539508", "text": "If you make 100K in the U.S., you are most definitely NOT paying 25.7% tax federally. Only money that you made over 37.5K is even charged at 25% AND you didn't even factor in that you get deductions which decrease your effective tax rate. Where are you pulling your numbers?"}
{"id": "539881", "text": "\"The appropriate structure for an organization depends largely on the size of the firm. Smaller firms can employ some non-traditional hierarchies more easily (i.e., flat design), whereas the same structures are more difficult to use in mid-size and large companies. The most important pieces of any corporate structure are (1) clarity of roles, (2) accountability, and (3) ease of communication.  Firstly, everyone in the organization must have clarity of their own role and how it fits into the bigger picture. That means a structure that is easy to understand, and a comprehension of how all the roles tie in to each other.   Secondly, a good structure will enable and empower leadership to hold the team accountable, and be held accountable in turn. What is often misunderstood about accountability is that people often assume that it simply means punishing poor behavior when something breaks down. In reality, that's holding people responsible, not accountable. Accountability is something that is self-driven and is a product of sound relationships and transparency. As an example, one of the most common breakdowns in accountability is found in passive non-responsiveness. This is when you may reach out to a business partner for help or an update, but they simply do not reply (as in email, text, or voicemail).   Thirdly, the structure should be such that it is easy for individuals to communicate across and up/down the chain. This doesn't mean that if you send an email, communication is easy. Rather, who do I reach out to for this problem? What are the best practices or agreed-upon methodologies for a certain practice, and how does the team know this? Some of this should be codified in the form of standard operating procedures (SOPs) which can be referenced at any time. Many companies use a \"\"playbook\"\" which is a high-level reference guide on how to operate the business (an example is found here: https://www.atlassian.com/team-playbook). A playbook can be anything from a PDF to an interactive website like the aforementioned link. It should always have the most up-to-date information.  Most companies will change their structure over time as their environment (both internal and external) change and they need to adapt. For example, a small firm may not need an HR department, but as it employs more and more people, a need to have someone (or an entire team) focused on human capital management rises quickly -- an owner-operator can handle only so much before it is time to scale up.  The most important thing to consider is who you hire. People are the largest expense to an organization, and having the right people in the right roles is the best way to avoid unnecessary incremental costs resulting from inefficiency, fraud, or risky behavior. Always look for the personality traits that make a good employee relative to the role (i.e., customer service: friendliness; finance: integrity; operations: teamwork).  One of the most obvious parts of a business as it scales up is specialization. You want to find a balance, though. For example, HR handles all human relations issues, while Legal handles all internal claims, suits, and patents. There is an overlap that occurs here, as internal claims often start as human relations issues, which means you must have healthy communication and clear accountability for an appropriate hand-off so Legal takes a claim at the right point in time. While this example may be a little obvious, many times the edges are blurred, and clarity of role can be difficult.  I hope that helps! Reach out with any follow-up questions.\""}
{"id": "540292", "text": "Is this possible and will it have the intended effect? From the US tax perspective, it most definitely is and will. Is my plan not very similar to Wash Sale? Yes, except that wash sale rules apply for losses, not gains. In any case, since you're not a US tax resident, the US wash sale rules won't apply to you."}
{"id": "540389", "text": "\"What you're describing is a non-deductible traditional IRA.  That is what happens when your employer 401K or your high income disqualifies gou from using a traditional IRA the normal way.   Yes, non-deductible traditional IRAs are stupid.**   Now let's be clear on the mechanism behind the difference.  There's an axiom of tax law that the same money can't be taxed twice.  This is baked so deep into tax law that it often isn't even specified particularly.  The IRS is not allowed to impose tax on money already taxed, i.e. The original contribution on an ND Trad IRA.  So this is not a new kind of IRA, it is simply a Trad IRA with an asterisk.  **But then, some say so are deductible traditional IRAs when compared to the Roth.   The real power of an ND Trad IRA is that it can be converted to Roth at all income levels.  This is called the \"\"Roth Backdoor\"\".  It combines three factors. Contribute to an ND Trad IRA, stick it in a money market/sweep fund, and a week later convert to Roth, pay taxes on the 17 cents of growth in the sweep fund since the rest was already taxed.  The net effect is to work the same as a Roth contribution - not tax deductible, becomes a Roth, and is not taxed on distribution.   If you already have traditional IRA money that you contributed that wasn't taxed, this really screws things up.  Because you can't segment or LIFO your IRA money, the IRS considers it one huge bucket, and requires you draw in proportion. EEK! Suppose you contribute $5000 to an IRA in a non-deductible mode.  But you also have a different IRA funded with pretax money that now has $45,000.   As far as IRS is concerned, you have one $50,000 IRA and only $5000 (10%) is post-tax.   You convert $5000 to Roth and IRS says 90% of that money is taxable, since it's the same pool of money.  You owe taxes on all of it less the $500 fraction that was pre-taxed, and $4500 of already-taxed IRA remains in the account.  The math gets totally out-of-hand after just a couple of conversions.   Your best bet is to convert the whole shebang at one time -- and to avoid a monstrous tax hit, do this in a gap year.\""}
{"id": "540516", "text": "For now we can pay off our debt in United States dollars. If we lose our reserve currency status, we would have to pay it off with a different currency. If we continued printing money we would be debasing our currency against the new reserve currency, which would mean that after we took on too much debt we wouldn't really be able to pay our creditors back after exchanging our devalued currency for the new one on the international markets. We are lucky enough not to have to worry about this now. But I think OP was referring to all countries in these situations. Other countries don't have the luxury of just printing out massive amounts of money to pay off their debts. That is why I am saying that America has a very disillusioned view of reality when it comes to deficit spending. We wouldn't have that any more if the UN followed through with its suggestion to create a global reserve currency or reverted back to the gold standard (I don't think the second option is nearly as realistic but we never know)."}
{"id": "540688", "text": "\"gatorsrule, First I want to say that I agree with you that the gators rule.  Now, on to economics.  I will try to address each of your points as best I can.   -The lack of \"\"demand\"\" is aggregate demand.  This includes individual spending, corporate spending, government spending, and exports.  Individual spending is down as geerussel pointed out.  Whether or not that is a good thing let's reserve for later.  Next, corporate spending is at all time lows.  The S&amp;P 500 companies have the highest cash on hand ever in history.  Nobody is hiring.  Bond issues are down.  Mergers are down.  Capital is being hoarded.  Third up, government spending.  We all know this is up, but don't rush to add in the fed and bailouts to this number, lets just consider it what the government actually spends into the economy.  Lastly, exports are down because the rest of the world is hurting.  So, 3 out of the 4 components of aggregate demand are down, and there are those that want the government to stop spending as well, which would make it a straight 4 for 4.   -Interest rates.  Well, if you know that aggregate demand is down, that tells you everything you need to know about interest rates.  If companies were borrowing, hiring, expanding, opening plants, etc. etc. etc., then interest rates would naturally rise due to loans being made to these companies.  The fact is that companies are not expanding, and loans are not being made, due to no demand for them.  Bank reserves are at an all time high.  Nobody is willing to take out a loan to grow their business right now because aggregate demand is down so hard.  At the same time the stock market spooked everyone, and on top of it, people are paying down their home mortgages at a record pace.  So you have record low demand for loans, and record high supply of capital (money), so, yeah interest rates are at 1%, effectively 0 if you are in a savings account.   -Devaluing the currency to boost the exports component of the aggregate demand curve seems like it could work, but since the rest of the world is also hurting who are you going to export to?  The corporate sector isn't going to start spending until the consumer is on their feet.  The consumer isn't going to start spending until they get jobs.  Do you see the chinese finger trap here???  The only way out of the riddle is to increase government spending, and history has shown that it works.\""}
{"id": "540859", "text": "\"Yes, so what I'm saying is that the balance of $9 left over from your trade surplus, no matter how you invest it in the U.S., even in treasuries or simply as a bank deposit technically counts as an \"\"investment\"\" right?\""}
{"id": "541145", "text": "\"TL;DR: Because stocks represent added value from corporate profits, and not the price the goods themselves are sold at. This is actually a very complicated subject.  But here's the simplest answer I can come up with.  Stocks are a commodity, just like milk, eggs, and bread.  The government only tracks certain commodities (consumables) as part of the Consumer Price Index (CPI).  These are generally commodities that the typical person will consume on a daily or weekly basis, or need to survive (food, rent, etc.).  These are present values. Stock prices, on the other hand, represent an educated guess (or bet) on a company's future performance.  If Apple has historically performed well, and analysts expect it to continue to perform, then investors will pay more for a stock that they feel will continue pay good dividends in the future.  Compound this with the fact that there is usually limited a supply of stock for a particular company (unless they issue more stock). If we go back to Apple as an example, they can raise their price they charge on an iPhone from $400 to $450 over the course of say a couple years.  Some of this may be due to higher wage costs, but efficiencies in the marketplace actually tend to drive down costs to produce goods, so they will probably actually turn a higher profit by raising their price, even if they have to pay higher wages (or possibly even if they don't raise their price!).  This, in economics, is termed value added. Finally, @Hart is absolutely correct in his comment about the stocks in the S&P 500 not being static.  Additionally, the S&P 500 is a hand picked set of \"\"winners\"\", if you will.  These are not run-of-the-mill penny stocks for companies that will be out of business in a week.  These are companies that Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC thinks will perform well.\""}
{"id": "541298", "text": "I would like to add one minor point for clarity: Cosigning means that you, alongside your friend, enter into a contract with the bank. It does not necessarily mean that you now have a contract with your friend, although that could implicitly be concluded. If the bank makes use of their contracted right to make you pay your friend's debts with them, this has no effect on your legal relationship with your friend. Of course, you can hold him or her liable for your damages he or she has caused. It is another question whether this would help you in practice, but that has been discussed before."}
{"id": "541315", "text": "If you took advantage of options like a home buyers plan (HBP) you definitely need to file since you must designate how much of the plan to repay.  Your employer does not know about what you do with your money so cannot take this into account for the withheld taxes.  If you do not report repayment of the HBP it will be treated as a withdrawal from your RRSP i.e. additional income for that tax year."}
{"id": "541366", "text": "&gt; If you can't cough up $200 for this, you need to rethink if you are in business or playing at being in business.  You don't know anything about my financial situation and I resent the implication that poor people shouldn't start businesses.  Also, the whole project is less than $200 so it wouldn't make much sense hiring a lawyer."}
{"id": "541421", "text": "\"My question to you would be \"\"When is the market down?\"\" I know that a lot of people attempt to do this and never get close.   With 40 years left to retirement, I would have you consider to just invest in the manner that you are most comfortable and let dollar cost averaging do the rest.\""}
{"id": "541682", "text": "If you are paid by foreigners then it is quite possible they don't file anything with the IRS. All of this income you are required to report as business income on schedule C.  There are opportunities on schedule C to deduct expenses like your health insurance, travel, telephone calls, capital expenses like a new computer, etc... You will be charged both the employees and employers share of social security/medicare, around ~17% or so, and that will be added onto your 1040.   You may still need a local business license to do the work locally, and may require a home business permit in some cities.  In some places, cities subscribe to data services based on your IRS tax return.... and will find out a year or two later that someone is running an unlicensed business.  This could result in a fine, or perhaps just a nice letter from the city attorneys office that it would be a good time to get the right licenses. Generally, tax treaties exist to avoid or limit double taxation. For instance, if you travel to Norway to give a report and are paid during this time, the treaty would explain whether that is taxable in Norway.  You can usually get a credit for taxes paid to foreign countries against your US taxes, which helps avoid paying double taxes in the USA.   If you were to go live in Norway for more than a year, the first $80,000/year or so is completely wiped off your US income.  This does NOT apply if you live in the USA and are paid from Norway. If you have a bank account overseas with more than $10,000 of value in it at any time during the year, you owe the US Government a FinCEN Form 114 (FBAR).  This is pretty important, there are some large fines for not doing it.  It could occur if you needed an account to get paid in Norway and then send the money here... If the Norwegian company wires the money to you from their account or sends a check in US$, and you don't have a foreign bank account, then this would not apply."}
{"id": "541718", "text": "Leveraged ETFs are prone to volatility decay, also known as leverage decay: http://blog.quantumfading.com/2009/07/12/measuring-leveraged-etf-decay/ You can increase your chances by using a non-leveraged short ETF like TBF or simply shorting the long ETF. Beware: shorting bonds ETFs will result in you having the pay the dividends, which can be substantial. Edit: SBND has recently appeared on the market. It is leveraged 3x monthly. In theory, monthly leverage should be less destructive than daily leverage."}
{"id": "541928", "text": "American options (like those on ADBE) can be exercised by the holder anytime before expiration. They will be exercised automatically at expiration if they are in the money. However, if there is still time before expiration (as in this case), and they are not extremely in the money, there is probably extrinsic value to the option, and you should sell it, not exercise it. European options are only automatically exercised at expiration, and only if they are in the money. These are usually cash settled on products like SPX or VIX. They can not be exercised before expiration, but can be sold anytime."}
{"id": "542024", "text": "Will buying a flat which generates $250 rent per month be a good decision? Whether investing in real estate is a good decision or not depends on many things, including the current and future supply/demand for rental units in your particular area. There are many questions on this site about this topic, and another answer to this question which already addresses many risks associated with owning property (though there are also benefits to consider). I just want to focus on this point you raised: I personally think yes, because rent adjusts with inflation and the rise in the price of the property is another benefit. Could this help me become financially independent in the long run since inflation is getting adjusted in it? In my opinion, the fact that rental income general adjusts with 'inflation' is a hedge against some types of economic risk, not an absolute increase in value. First, consider buying a house to live in, instead of to rent:  If you pay off your mortgage before your retire, then you have reduced your cost of accommodations to only utilities, property taxes, and repairs. This gives you a (relatively) known, fixed requirement of cash outflows. If the value of property goes up by the time you retire - it doesn't cost you anything extra, because you already own your house. If the value of property goes down by the time you retire, then you don't save anything, because you already own your house. If you instead rent your whole life, and save money each month (instead of paying off a mortgage), then when you retire, you will have a larger amount of savings which you can use to pay your monthly rental costs each month. By the time you retire, your cost of accommodations will be the market price for rent at that time. If the value of property goes up by the time you retire - you will have to pay more on rent. If the value of property goes down by the time you retire, you will save money on rent. You will have larger savings, but your cash outflow will be a little bit less certain, because you don't know what the market price for rent will be. You can see that, because you need to put a roof over your own head, just by existing you bear risk of the cost of property rising. So, buying your own home can be a hedge against that risk. This is called a 'natural hedge', where two competing risks can mitigate each-other just by existing. This doesn't mean buying a house is always the right thing to do, it is just one piece of the puzzle to comparing the two alternatives [see many other threads on buying vs renting on this site, or on google]. Now, consider buying a house to rent out to other people:  In the extreme scenario, assume that you do everything you can to buy as much property as possible. Maybe by the time you retire, you own a small apartment building with 11 units, where you live in one of them (as an example), and you have no other savings. Before, owning your own home was, among other pros and cons, a natural hedge against the risk of your own personal cost of accommodations going up. But now, the risk of your many rental units is far greater than the risk of your own personal accommodations. That is, if rent goes up by $100 after you retire, your rental income goes up by $1,000, and your personal cost of accommodations only goes up by $100. If rent goes down by $50 after you retire, your rental income goes down by $500, and your personal cost of accommodations only goes down by $50. You can see that only investing in rental properties puts you at great risk of fluctuations in the rental market. This risk is larger than if you simply bought your own home, because at least in that case, you are guaranteeing your cost of accommodations, which you know you will need to pay one way or another. This is why most investment advice suggests that you diversify your investment portfolio. That means buying some stocks, some bonds, etc.. If you invest to heavily in a single thing, then you bear huge risks for that particular market. In the case of property, each investment is so large that you are often 'undiversified' if you invest heavily in it (you can't just buy a house $100 at a time, like you could a stock or bond). Of course, my above examples are very simplified. I am only trying to suggest the underlying principle, not the full complexities of the real estate market. Note also that there are many types of investments which typically adjust with inflation / cost of living; real estate is only one of them."}
{"id": "542139", "text": "First of all $1k is not enough money to start a web business.  You're probably going to lose all your money, your business and your friendship.  Second of all you need to retain a lawyer.  I really can't emphasize this enough.  If a lawyer is too expensive for you, then THIS BUSINESS IS TOO EXPENSIVE FOR YOU.  If you don't have the money, then you don't have the time.  When you say it's his idea - did he come to you with a fully written business plan?  Even if he did, that's not really worth 20% of the equity.  I would insist on 50/50 if the capital is 50/50, and salary to whoever is working on it.  You're not going to have profits in the first year.  Let me repeat that.  YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE PROFITS IN THE FIRST YEAR.  Things never, ever, EVER work that way.  Or ok they do but it's like 1%.  It's not going to happen to you."}
{"id": "542667", "text": "There are strategies based on yields. Dogs of the Dow being a specific example while Miller Howard has a few studies around dividends that may be of use if you additional material. Selling off a portion of the holding can run into problems as how could one hold 10 shares, selling a non-zero whole number every year for over 20 years if the stock doesn't ever pay a dividend in additional shares or cash?"}
{"id": "542806", "text": "[This article says 550k people](http://fortune.com/2017/07/28/wells-fargo-loan-default-scandal/). You're also making the assumption they all paid it for a full year at least, when the refunds are estimated at $25 million for one group, an additional $39 million (including fines) for another, and $16 million for the worst, but smallest, group.   ~$80 million is not $400 million. The current CEO is not the same CEO who would have been at the helm when this issue started. The old CEO likely didn't have insight into this tiny subset of the company."}
{"id": "543254", "text": "You could classify the mortgage as a different assets class and then create automated additions and deductions to the account as deems fit. other than that quickbooks online is a bit fishy so it seems."}
{"id": "543275", "text": "Depends, sure you could save a buck or two here and there but maybe that time could be used for better things - i.e. earning a side income It's all situational and relative to you and where you are in life - try things, don't be afraid of mistakes"}
{"id": "543522", "text": "\"#####&amp;#009;  ######&amp;#009;  ####&amp;#009;  [**Share repurchase**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share%20repurchase): [](#sfw)   ---  &gt;  &gt;__Share repurchase__ (or __stock buyback__) is the re-acquisition by a [company](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company) of its own stock.  In some countries, including the [US](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) and the [UK](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom), a [corporation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation) can repurchase its own [stock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock) by distributing [cash](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cash) to existing [shareholders](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) in exchange for a fraction of the company's outstanding [equity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholders%27_equity); that is, cash is exchanged for a reduction in the number of [shares outstanding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shares_outstanding).   The company either retires the repurchased shares or keeps them as [treasury stock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasury_stock), available for re-[issuance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Issued_capital).  &gt;Under US [corporate law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporations_law) there are five primary methods of stock repurchase: open market, private negotiations, repurchase '[put](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Put_option)' rights and two variants of self-tender repurchase: a fixed price [tender offer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tender_offer) and a [Dutch auction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction). In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, there was a sharp rise in the volume of share repurchases in the US: [US$](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_dollar)5 [billion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1000000000_(number\\)) in 1980 rose to US$349 billion in 2005.   &gt;It is relatively easy for insiders to capture insider-trading like gains through the use of \"\"open market repurchases\"\". Such transactions are legal and generally encouraged by regulators through safe-harbours against [insider trading](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading) liability.    &gt;  ---  ^Interesting: [^Accelerated ^share ^repurchase](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_share_repurchase) ^| [^Dividend](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend) ^| [^Equity ^\\(finance)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equity_\\(finance\\)) ^| [^Treasury ^stock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasury_stock)   ^Parent ^commenter ^can [^toggle ^NSFW](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&amp;message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cjwf4oy) ^or[](#or) [^delete](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&amp;message=%2Bdelete+cjwf4oy)^. ^Will ^also ^delete ^on ^comment ^score ^of ^-1 ^or ^less. ^| [^(FAQs)](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/wiki/index) ^| [^Mods](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1x013o/for_moderators_switches_commands_and_css/) ^| [^Magic ^Words](http://www.np.reddit.com/r/autowikibot/comments/1ux484/ask_wikibot/)\""}
{"id": "543619", "text": "I've had the same thoughts recently and after reading Investing at Level 3 by James Cloonan I believe his thesis that for the passive investor you're giving up too much if you're not 100% in equities. He is clear to point out that you need to be well aware of your withdrawal horizons and has specific tactics for shifting the portfolio when you know you must have the money in the next five years and wouldn't want to pull money out when you're at a market low. The kicker for me was shifting your thought to a plotting a straight line of reasonable expectations on your return. Then you don't worry about how far down you are from your high (or up from your low) but you measure yourself against the expected return and you'll find some real grounding. You're investing for the long term so you're going to see 2-3 bear markets. That isn't the the time to get cold feet and react. Stay put and it will come back. The market gets back to the reasonable expectations very quickly as he confirms in all the bear markets and recessions of any note. He gives guidelines for a passive investing strategy to leverage this mentality and talks about venturing into an active strategy but doesn't go into great depth. So if you're looking to invest more passively this book may be enough to get you rolling with thinking differently than the traditional 70/30 split."}
{"id": "543714", "text": "I'm answering this from a slightly different angle, but there are people (individuals) who will do this for you. I know private Forex traders who are 'employed' to manage Forex trading accounts for wealthy individuals. The trader takes a percentage of the wins but is also responsible for a percentage of the loss (if there is a loss in a particular month). However the fact that the trader is able to prove that they have a consistent enough trading history to be trusted with the large accounts generally means that losses are rare (one would hope!). Obviously they have contracts in place (and the terms of the contract are crucial to the responsibility of losses) etc. but I don't know what the legalities are of offering or using this kind of service. I just wanted to mention it, while perhaps not being the best option for you personally, it does exist and matches your requirements.  You would just have to be extremely careful to choose someone respectable and responsible, as it would be much easier to get ripped off while looking for a respected individual to trade your account than it would be while looking for a respected firm (I would imagine)."}
{"id": "543770", "text": "Some platforms/brokers have HTB indication for a stock symbol, meaning Hard To Borrow. That usually means you can't sell it short at the moment."}
{"id": "543842", "text": "You only pay tax on the capital gain of the bond, not the principal, unless the source of the money for the principal was gain from another investment, if that makes sense.   In other words, if you bought the bond with income earned from your job, that money was already taxed as income, so it isn't subject to taxation again when you redeem the bond.  On the other hand, if you cashed out of one investment and used those proceeds to buy a bond, then the entire amount might be taxable."}
{"id": "543874", "text": "\"common sentiment that no investor can consistently beat the market on returns.  I guess its more like very few investor can beat the market, a vast Majority cannot / do not. What evidence exists for or against this? Obviously we can have a comparison of all investors. If we start taking a look at some of the Actively Managed Funds. Given that Fund Managers are experts compared to common individual investors, if we compare this, we can potentially extend it more generically to others. Most funds beat the markets for few years, as you keep increasing the timeline, i.e. try seeing 10 year 15 year 20 year return; this is easy the data is available, you would realize that no fund consistently beat the index. Few years quite good, few years quite bad. On Average most funds were below market returns especially if one compares on longer terms or 10 - 20 years. Hence the perception Of course we all know Warren Buffet has beat the market by leaps and bounds. After the initial success, people like Warren Buffet develop the power of \"\"Self Fulfilling Prophecy\"\". There would be many other individuals.\""}
{"id": "543898", "text": "The sentence you quoted does not apply in the case where you sell the stock at a loss. In that case, you recognize zero ordinary income, and a capital loss (opposite of a gain) for the loss. Reference: http://efs.fidelity.com/support/sps/article/article2.html"}
{"id": "544070", "text": "\"Personally, I think you are approaching this from the wrong angle.  You're somewhat correct in assuming that what you're reading is usually some kind of marketing material.  Systematic Investment Plan (SIP) is not a universal piece of jargon in the financial world.  Dollar cost averaging is a pretty universal piece of jargon in the financial world and is a common topic taught in finance classes in the US. On average, verified by many studies, individuals will generate better investment returns when they proactively avoid timing the market or attempting to pick specific winners.  Say you decide to invest in a mutual fund, dollar cost averaging means you invest the same dollar amount in consistent intervals rather than buying a number of shares or buying sporadically when you feel the market is low. As an example I'll compare investing $50 per week on Wednesdays, versus 1 share per week on Wednesdays, or the full $850 on the first Wednesday.   I'll use the Vanguard Large cap fund as an example (VLCAX).  I realize this is not really an apples to apples comparison as the invested amounts are different, I just wanted to show how your rate of return can change depending on how your money goes in to the market even if the difference is subtle.  By investing a common dollar amount rather than a common share amount you ultimately maintain a lower average share price while the share price climbs.  It also keeps your investment easy to budget. Vanguard published an excellent paper discussing dollar cost averaging versus lump sum investing which concluded that you should invest as soon as you have funds, rather than parsing out a lump sum in to smaller periodic investments, which is illustrated in the third column above; and obviously worked out well as the market has been increasing. Ultimately, all of these companies are vying to customers so they all have marketing teams trying to figure out how to make their services sound interesting and unique.  If they all called dollar cost averaging, \"\"dollar cost averaging\"\" none of them would appear to be unique.  So they devise neat acronyms but it's all pretty much the same idea.  Trickle your money in to your investments as the money becomes available to you.\""}
{"id": "544328", "text": "\"He is wrong.  Using Total Return (Reinvesting Dividend), from the peak in December 1999, it only took 6 years to recover.   You can check the data for free here. Make sure you choose \"\"Gross Index Level\"\".  ACWI Index is Developed Markets + Emerging Markets.  World Index is Developed Markets only.\""}
{"id": "545172", "text": "I said I knew about FEIE. So what happens when you want to open a private tax-deferred pension that is common in most industrialized countries? Now you have capital gains that are not taxed. Uh oh. Oh, you want to work for yourself, have fun paying US social security even though you may never actually receive any benefit and aren't providing anything to the US, oh and that income not being counted in the FEIE. Oh you made a mistake on reporting your retirement account, the US government is now authorized to penalize you 40% of the balance of your retirement savings. That's great that you found an organization that says IRS won't use it for now, but who knows how long that will last.  But things like retirement savings and working for yourself must only be for crazy rich people, right?"}
{"id": "545267", "text": "\"Very interesting question. While searching i also found that some precious metal ETFs (including IAU) gains are taxed at 28% because IRS considers it \"\"collectible\"\", rather than the usual long term 15% for stocks and stock holding ETFs. As for capital gain tax you have to pay now my guess it's because of the following statement in the IAU prospectus (page 34): When the trust sells gold, for example   to pay expenses, a Shareholder will   recognize gain or loss ....\""}
{"id": "545284", "text": "\"Obviously a stock that's hit a high is profit waiting to be taken, be safe, take the money, Sell Sell Sell!! Ah.. but wait, they say \"\"run your winners, cut your losers\"\", so here this stock is a winner... keep on to it, Hold Hold Hold!!!!! Of course, if you're holding, then you think it's going to return even higher.... Buy Buy Buy!!!! So,  hope that's clears things up for you - Sell, Hold, or maybe Buy :-) A more serious answer is not ever to worry about past performance, if its gone past a reasonable valuation then consider selling, but never care about selling out just because its reached some arbitrary share price. If you are worried about losses, you might like to set a trailing stop and sell if it drops, but if you're a LTBH type person, just keep it until you feel it is overvalued compared to its fundamentals.\""}
{"id": "545712", "text": "In the short-term, a savings account with an online bank can net you ~1% interest, while many banks/credit unions with local branches are 0.05%. Most of the online savings accounts allow 6 withdrawals per month (they'll let you do more, but charge a fee), if you pair it with a checking account, you can transfer your expected monthly need in one or two planned transfers to your checking account. Any other options that may result in a higher yield will either tie up your money for a set length of time, or expose you to risk of losing money. I wouldn't recommend gambling on short-term stock gains if you need the money during the off-season."}
{"id": "545719", "text": "Do a share split.  Your initial 1 share each becomes 10 (or 100) shares each,  then you can sell/gift/etc shares as needed."}
{"id": "545805", "text": "\"Here's a formula;  I had to go over to SEMath, use their MathJax to compose the answer and then paste this screen shot. As a result, I can't fix a typo:  \"\"ST\"\" is the same as \"\"St\"\"\""}
{"id": "545859", "text": "Very interesting. I would like to expand beyond just precious metals and stocks, but I am not ready just to jump in just yet (I am a relatively young investor, but have been playing around with stocks for 4 years on and off). The problem I often find is that the stock market is often too overvalued to play Ben Graham type strategy/ PE/B, so I would like to expand my knowledge of investing so I can invest in any market and still find value. After reading Jim Rogers, I was really interested in commodities as an alternative to stocks, but I like to play really conservative (generally). Thank you for your insight. If you don't mind, I would like to add you as a friend, since you seem quite above average in the strategy department."}
{"id": "546020", "text": "Some people cannot get bank accounts because they have been seized by a creditor or they're illegal.   Some companies don't (or can't) deal with paper checks.  Giving them a prepaid debit card and auto depositing it to the card is sometimes simpler or cheaper.   Hell, when I was on unemployment the government tried to make me receive the funds on a debit card.  It was a major pain just to get the money sent to my bank account."}
{"id": "546070", "text": "I agree with the advice given, but I'll add another angle from which to look at it. It sounds like you are already viewing the money used to either pay off the loan early or invest in the market as an investment, which is great. You are wise to think about opportunity cost, but like others pointed out, you are overlooking the risk factor. The way I would look at this is: I could take a guaranteed 6.4% return by paying off the loan or a possible 7% return by investing the money.  If the risk pays off modestly, all you've done is earned 0.6%, with a huge debt still hanging over you. Personally, I would take the guaranteed 6.4% return by paying off the debt, then invest in the stock market. Now this is looking at the investment as a single, atomic pool of money.  But you can split it up a bit.  Let's say the amount of extra disposable income you want to invest with is $1,000/mo.  Then you could pay an extra $500/mo to your student loan and invest the other $500 in  the stock market, or do a 400/600 split, or whatever suits your risk tolerance. You mentioned multiple loans and 6.4% is the highest loan.  What I would do, based on what I value personally, is put every extra penny into paying off the 6.4% loan because that is high.  Once that is done, if the next loan is 4% of less, then split my income between paying extra to it and investing in the market. Remember, with each loan you pay off, the monthly income that previously went to it is now available, and can be used for the next loan or the other goals."}
{"id": "546075", "text": "\"Brendan, The short answer is no, there is no need to get into any other funds. For all intents and purposes the S&P 500 is \"\"The Stock Market\"\". The news media may quote the Dow when the market reaches new highs or crashes but all of the Dow 30 stocks are included in the S&P 500.  The S&P is also marketcap weighted, which means that it owns in higher proportion the big \"\"Blue Chip\"\" stocks more than the smaller less known companies. To explain, the top 10 holdings in the S&P represent 18% of the total index, while the bottom 10 only represent 0.17% (less than 1 percent). They do have an equal weighted S&P in which all 500 companies represent only 1/500th of the index and that is technically even more diversified but in actuality it makes it more volatile because it has a higher concentration of those smaller less known companies. So it will tend to perform better during up markets and worse during down markets. As far as diversification into different asset classes or other countries, that's non-sense. The S&P 500 has companies in it that give you that exposure. For example, it includes companies that directly benefit from rising oil prices, rising gold prices, etc known as the Energy and Materials sector. It also includes companies that own malls, apartment complexes, etc. known as the Real Estate sector. And as far as other countries, most of the companies in the S&P are multi-national companies, meaning that they do business over seas in many parts of the world. Apple and FaceBook for example sell their products in many different countries. So you don't need to invest any of your money into an Emerging Market fund or an Asia Fund because most of our companies are already doing business in those parts of the world. Likewise, you don't need to specifically invest into a real estate or gold fund.  As far as bonds go, if you're in your twenties you have no need for them either. Why, because the S&P 500 also pays you dividends and these dividends grow over time. So for example, if Microsoft increases its dividend payment by 100% over a ten year period , all of the shares you buy today at a 2.5% yield will, in 10 years, have a higher 5% yield. A bond on the other hand will never increase its yield over time. If it pays out 4%, that's all it will ever pay. You want to invest because you want to grow your money and if you want to invest passively the fastest way to do that is through index ETFs like the $SPY, $IVV, and $RSP. Also look into the $XIV, it's an inverse VIX ETF, it moves 5x faster than the S&P in the same direction. If you want to actively trade your money, you can grow it even faster by getting into things like options, highly volatile penny stocks, shorting stocks, and futures. Don't get involved in FX or currency trading, unless it through futures.\""}
{"id": "546150", "text": "I have managed two IRA accounts; one I inherited from my wife's 401K and my own's 457B.  I managed actively my wife's 401 at Tradestation which doesn't restrict on Options except level 5 as naked puts and calls. I moved half of my 457B funds to TDAmeritrade, the only broker authorized by my employer, to open a Self Directed account.  However, my 457 plan disallows me from using a Cash-secured Puts, only Covered Calls.  For those who does not know investing, I resent the contention that participants to these IRAs should not be messing around with their IRA funds.  For years, I left my 401k/457B funds with my current fund custodian, Great West Financial.  I checked it's current values once or twice a year. These last years, the market dived in the last 2 quarters of 2015 and another dive early January and February of 2016.  I lost a total of $40K leaving my portfolio with my current custodian choosing all 30 products they offer, 90% of them are ETFs and the rest are bonds. If you don't know investing, better leave it with the pros - right?  But no one can predict the future of the market.  Even the pros are at the mercy of the market. So, I you know how to invest and choose your stocks, I don't think your plan administrator has to limit you on how you manage your funds. For example, if you are not allowed to place a Cash-Secured Puts and you just Buy the stocks or EFT at market or even limit order, you buy the securities at their market value. If you sell a Cash-secured puts against the stocks/ETF you are interested in buying, you will receive a credit in fraction of a dollar in a specific time frame.  In average, your cost to owning a stock/ETF is lesser if you buy it at market or even a limit order.  Most of the participants of the IRA funds rely too much on their portfolio manager because they don't know how to manage. If you try to educate yourself at a minimum, you will have a good understanding of how your IRA funds are tied up to the market.  If you know how to trade in bear market compared to bull market, then you are good at managing your investments.  When I started contributing to my employer's deferred comp account (457B) as a public employee, I have no idea of how my portfolio works.  Year after year as I looked at my investment, I was happy because it continued to grow.  Without scrutinizing how much it grew yearly, and my regular payroll contribution, I am happy even it only grew 2% per year.  And at this age that I am ready to retire at 60, I started taking investment classes and attended pre-retirement seminars.  Then I knew that it was not totally a good decision to leave your retirement funds in the hands of the portfolio manager since they don't really care if it tanked out on some years as long at overall it grew to a meager 1%-4% because they managers are pretty conservative on picking the equities they invest.  You can generalize that maybe 90% of IRA investors don't know about investing and have poor decision making actions which securities/ETF to buy and hold. For those who would like to remain as one, that is fine.  But for those who spent time and money to study and know how to invest, I don't think the plan manager can limit the participants ability to manage their own portfolio especially if the funds have no matching from the employer like mine. All I can say to all who have IRA or any retirement accounts, educate yourself early because if you leave it all to your portfolio managers, you lost a lot.  Don't believe much in what those commercial fund managers also show in their presentation just to move your funds for them to manage.  Be proactive.  If you start learning how to invest now when you are young, JUST DO IT!"}
{"id": "546277", "text": "Note:  This is not professional tax advice.  If you think you need professional tax advice, find a licensed professional in your local area. What are the expected earnings/year? US$100? US$1,000?  US$100,000?  I would say if this is for US$1,000 or less that registering an EIN, and consulting a CPA to file a Partnership Tax return is not going to be a profitable exercise.... all the earnings, perhaps more, will go to paying someone to do (or help do) the tax filings. The simplest taxes are for a business that you completely own.  Corporations and Partnerships involve additional forms and get more and more and complex, and even more so when it involves foreign participation.  Partnerships are often not formal partnerships but can be more easily thought of as independent businesses that each participants owns, that are simply doing some business with each other. Schedule C is the IRS form you fill out for any businesses that you own. On schedule C you would list the income from advertising.  Also on schedule C there is a place for all of the business expenses, such as ads that you buy, a server that you rent, supplies, employees, and independent contractors.  Amounts paid to an independent contractor certainly need not be based on hours, but could be a fixed fee, or based on profit earned.   Finally, if you pay anyone in the USA over a certain amount, you have to tell the IRS about that with a Form 1099 at the beginning of the next year, so they can fill out their taxes.  BUT.... according to an article in International Tax Blog you might not have to file Form 1099 with the IRS for foreign contractors if they are not US persons (not a US citizen or a resident visa holder)."}
{"id": "546315", "text": "I'll check it out. We'll need it to be a reference that's easy to understand for those that will ask us these questions--not for those of us with master's degrees in business.       (*I* don't need it to be easy to understand--I need something that saves me the trouble of explaining over and over...)"}
{"id": "546318", "text": "Just to make the deal sweeter, see if you can negotiate a cash discount for paying for grad school with cash. If not, at least look into paying with a rewards credit card so you can get a rebate through your own means. Pay the school loan. People can default on mortgages, school loans are forever. Nothing wrong with sacrificing your dreams for a house several more years while you save. My wife and I are debt free, but it will take a few more years to save for a down payment on a house. It sure feels good knowing we don't owe anyone anything while we make our money have the purpose we want to give it. When you have to pay the bank interest, you do not have control on some of your money."}
{"id": "546356", "text": "You've got the right idea, except that the stated interest rate is normalized for a 1-year investment.  Hence if you buy a 4-week bill, you're getting something closer to 4/52 of what you've computed in your question.  More precisely, the Treasury uses a 360 day year for these calculations, so you multiply the stated rate by (number of days until maturity)/360 to get the actual rate of return."}
{"id": "546400", "text": "Yeah I get that. But there are literally people who make a very good living by simply shorting small/micro caps that pop for no particular reason. Imagine if you shorted DCTH after it went from .05 to .31 Now it sits at .16 and will likely fall to .10 and under. Those are where the money making opportunities are now. Hit a home run on the way up and double your gains on the way back down."}
{"id": "546509", "text": "Costs for home / small business equipment under US$10,000 don't have to  be capitalized. They can be expensed (that is, claimed as an expense all in one year.)  Unless this printer is one of those behemoths that collates, folds, staples, and mails medium-sized booklets, it cost less than that. Keep track of your costs. Ask the charity to pay you those costs for the product you generate, and then donate that amount of money back to them. This will be good for the charity because they'll correctly account for the cost of printing."}
{"id": "546589", "text": "Icelandish and Irish Economies began to fail in 2008, Ireland was bailed out by the IMF and Britain, Iceland by the Germany and the IMF. Greek economy has essentially failed, and is at risk of being kicked out of the Euro currency by the Eurozone members. Spanish and Italian economies are faltering. Worst case scenario, everybody can't pay back money and keep accumulating debt, which would lead to a complete collapse of the European economy, resulting in a global economic meltdown. Germany currently are in control of al lot of countries debts (especially Ireland) which means that they will become the main players in decisions regarding the proliferation/faltering of the european economy in the future."}
{"id": "546598", "text": "\"What about getting the saving account - \"\"Bausparen\"\" (~100EUR/month) which you can later use for credit to get better mortgage deal and to buy a flat for renting to others (Anlegerwohnung)?\""}
{"id": "546678", "text": "While you have found a way to possibly gain $1275 in tax free income, you are also risking $1275 if you end up not using the money you contributed. You will have to find a way to have that much in medical expenses by your retirement date or you will leave some money in the Flexible Spending Account. There are risks you take with these accounts (use it or lose it) and risks the company takes (leave with a deficit in the account). Many times we get questions about how to spend all that the employee contributed before the last day of work, or the end of the plan year.  You can play it more fair by selecting the maximum amount per check to be taken from your pay check, then waiting until the retirement date to decide how much you will withdraw from the FSA. Your last day of work is your last day to incur a medical expense but you are given a window to submit your claims that extends beyond your last day of work.  I have not personally heard of an employer requiring a former employee to pay back the money when there is a  deficit in their FSA.  Remember people are fired, or laid off with little or no warning trapping their money in a FSA. The fact that you have the ability to plan for this event and considered your options, is a great position to be in."}
{"id": "547036", "text": "Credit cards are a basic building block of a stable financial plan.  By using a credit card for every purchase above, say, the price of a coffee you gain a number of material benefits.  You get the free use of the bank's money for about a month.  You reduce the amount of cash you require to almost nothing.  You get a handy budget tracking tool as many credit cards help you assign categories to expenses.  You can typically download your transactions and import them into a budget app for handy record keeping.  Many cards offer benefits such as extended warranties on items purchased, travel insurance, reward points and other benefits. There is only one caveat: Pay the entire balance, in full, every month, on or before the due date.  Don't even THINK about paying anything less and don't EVER be late."}
{"id": "547050", "text": "It's tough to borrow fixed and invest risk free. That said, there are still some interesting investment opportunities. A 4% loan will cost you 3% or less after tax, and the DVY (Dow high yielders) is at 3.36% but at a 15% favored rate, you net 2.76% if my math is right. So for .5%, you get the fruits of the potential rise in dividends as well as any cap gains. Is this failsafe? No. But I believe that long term, say 10 years or more, the risk is minimal."}
{"id": "547127", "text": "Banks don't want to manage property.  They despise the fact that they have all of these foreclosures that they can't sell.  They just want to loan you the money at X% and collect the fees and interest. The value of a reverse mortgage to the lender is that it's a collateralized loan against a property.  When the owner exits the property, it's attached to the property and must be paid back before the property is sold.  They carefully consider the age of the recipient, equity in the property, etc. when they decide how much to pay the owner so that the chances of the loan going underwater are minimized."}
{"id": "547773", "text": "\"Generally cashiers checks do not expire, since they are \"\"like cash\"\" and fully funded at the time of issue. However, whether they can be cashed after a long period of time (and also what the definition of \"\"long\"\" is) depends on the bank. Eventually, if left uncashed it probably would be escheated to the state to wait for someone to claim it. Being that it's been less than a year I expect it could be cashed by the payee written on the check without any issues. If the payee is deceased then the check can be cashed by the estate, as it should be considered the property of the estate the same way it would be if it had already been cashed and was now sitting in a bank account in your mother's name. Under normal circumstances the \"\"estate\"\" in this case would go to your mother's spouse first, then to you (and your siblings if you have any), unless there is a will specifying otherwise. The only way your aunt would be able to deposit the check on her own is if she was listed as an \"\"OR\"\" on the check, or if she is the executor of OP's mother's estate. It sounds like the second line of the check is indeed referring to your aunt, however, from your description of the check it sounds like the second line is simply a designation of what the check is for rather than an additional payee. I bet a probate attorney in your state could easily tell by simply looking at the check.\""}
{"id": "547774", "text": "I've worked at a bank, and even the best prop traders have low Sharpe ratios and large swings.  I would advise that the average person without access to flow information does not a chance, and will end up losing eventually."}
{"id": "547982", "text": "\"**Japan Has Entered The Next Phase: Unlimited Money Printing**  Investors have been watching Japan for over a decade now, wondering what happens to a country that has a debt-to-GDP ratio of 234%--too big\u00a0to realistically pay off. We are starting to get the answer. For review, Japan was the first country in the modern central banking era to begin a policy of\u00a0quantitative easing--an unconventional form of monetary policy that is used when interest rates have already been lowered to the zero bound. Quantitative easing, which involves the purchase of \"\"printed\"\" money to buy government bonds, was widely viewed in Japan as a failure, but what most people don't understand about Japan's early QE experiments is that they were very small--less than $20 billion a month. It took Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, and BOJ Governor Haruhiko\u00a0Kuroda to ramp up asset purchases significantly in what was called \"\"Abenomics.\"\"     Shinzo Abe, Japan's prime minister. Photographer: Akio Kon/Bloomberg     The results of Abenomics have been mixed, but the stock market is certainly higher and the yen is certainly lower, although it's not clear that either of those two developments have really helped. Japan's stock market is mostly foreign-owned, and the weaker yen didn't materially help the balance of trade. Still, there are a lot of people who said that Japan's endless debt deflation would have been worse\u00a0without Abenomics, so it has remained firmly in place for five years.  Abenomics rapidly began to cause distortions, as accelerated asset purchases caused the Bank of Japan to hold a huge percentage of outstanding government bonds, at 40% and rising, as well as being the majority holder of index ETFs. Investors who traffic in JGBs have remarked that the market now functions very poorly, since so much of the market is held by the BOJ. It seems that will get worse, not better. Last year the BOJ implemented a policy of yield curve targeting (ostensibly to help the banks), keeping the overnight rate negative but targeting a 10 year rate at zero percent. The BOJ has been buying longer-dated bonds for years, but this was the first time it ever explicitly capped a rate at longer maturities. Some people wondered how committed the BOJ would be to maintain that cap in the event that JGBs were caught up in a global duration selloff, which we experienced in the last two weeks.  As 10-year JGB yields rose above 0.10% last week, the BOJ announced that it was prepared to buy an\u00a0unlimited amount of bonds to keep yields close to zero percent. As you can imagine, buying an unlimited amount of 10-year JGBs involves printing a theoretically unlimited amount of yen, so the yen weakened significantly on the news. \u00a0It still remains about ten percent stronger than it was in 2015. We are getting closer to the endgame for Japan. What happens if yields rise further? What happens if the yen depreciates significantly? How much could it depreciate? Could Japan have a currency crisis? What happens if the BOJ ends up owning the entire bond market? These are the questions that investors are asking, and nobody really knows the answers. We are in uncharted territory. I believe that a currency crisis isn't just possible--it's inevitable. And it probably happens at about the time that the BOJ owns all or nearly all of the JGB market, and has to resort to\u00a0canceling the debt. This sounds like a neat magic trick to make the debt go away, but the laws of economics are not to be conned. Anything is possible--a currency crash, a bond market crash--anything. This is the very definition of debt monetization that resulted in hyperinflation in places like Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe. Is Japan different? We shall see. We will find out soon, as Japan has taken a major step in that direction. \u00a0Jared Dillian is the\u00a0author of All the Evil of This World, and the editor of the 10th Man newsletter for Mauldin Economics. Subscribe here.  *Forbes articles have 8 tracking cookies and 9 tracking scripts. This comment has none.*(https://www.reddit.com/r/raws/comments/68xk37/about/)\""}
{"id": "548102", "text": "WilliamKF explained it pretty well, but I want to put it in a more simplistic form:"}
{"id": "548291", "text": "Wait. You started a company and contracted it with the company you currently work for? I don\u2019t know why but for some reason this sends up a legal red flag to me. I have no idea, but maybe double check that there isn\u2019t any violations in this arrangement... or just never tell them."}
{"id": "548299", "text": "\"Can I use the foreign earned income exclusion in my situation? Only partially, since the days you spent in the US should be excluded. You'll have to prorate your exclusion limit, and only apply it to the income earned while not in the US. If not, how should I go about this to avoid being doubly taxed for   2014? The amounts you cannot exclude are taxable in the US, and you can use a portion of your Norwegian tax to offset the US tax liability. Use form 1116 for that. Form 1116 with form 2555 on the same return will require some arithmetic exercises, but there are worksheets for that in the instructions. In addition, US-Norwegian treaty may come into play, so check that out. It may help you reduce the tax liability in the US or claim credit on the US taxes in Norway. It seems that Norway has a bilateral tax treaty with the US, that, if   I'm reading it correctly, seems to indicate that \"\"visiting researchers   to universities\"\" (which really seems like I would qualify as) should   not be taxed by either country for the duration of their stay. The relevant portion of the treaty is Article 16. Article 16(2)(b) allows you $5000 exemption for up to a year stay in the US for your salary from the Norwegian school. You will still be taxed in Norway. To claim the treaty benefit you need to attach form 8833 to your tax return, and deduct the appropriate amount on line 21 of your form 1040. However, since you're a US citizen, that article doesn't apply to you (See the \"\"savings clause\"\" in the Article 22). I didn't even give a thought to state taxes; those should only apply   to income sourced from the state I lived in, right (AKA $0)? I don't know what State you were in, so hard to say, but yes - the State you were in is the one to tax you. Note that the tax treaty between Norway and the US is between Norway and the Federal government, and doesn't apply to States. So the income you earned while in the US will be taxable by the State you were at, and you'll need to file a \"\"non-resident\"\" return there (if that State has income taxes - not all do).\""}
{"id": "548467", "text": "\"1000 (\u00a3/$/\u20ac) is also not a lot to start with.  Assuming you want to buy stocks or ETFs you will be paying fees on both ends.  Even with online brokerages you are looking at 7.95 (\u00a3/$/\u20ac) a trade.  That of course translates to a min of .795% x 2 = 1.59% increase in value you would need just to break even already. There is a way around some of this as a lot of the brokerages do not charge fees for their ETFs or their affiliated ones. However, I would try to hold out till at least $5000 before investing in assets such as stocks.  In the meantime there are many great books out there to \"\"invest in knowledge\"\".\""}
{"id": "549009", "text": "\"you want more information on what? The general bond market? This article is getting at something different, but the first several pages are general background info on the corporate bond market.  http://home.business.utah.edu/hank.bessembinder/publications/transparencyandbondmarket.pdf  If you are trying to relate somehow the issue of federal debt ( a la treasuries) to corporate debt you will find that you are jumping to a lot of conclusions.   Debt is not exactly currency, only the promise of repayment at a certain date in the future. The only reason that U.S. treasuries ( and those of certain other highly rated countries ) is interchangeable is because they are both very liquid and have very low risk.   There is very little similarity to this in the corporate bond market. Companies are no where near to the risk level of a government (for one they can't print their own money) and when a corporation goes bankrupt it's bondholder are usually s.o.l (recovery rates hover at around 50% of the notional debt amount). This is why investors demand a premium to hold corporate debt. Now consider even the best of companies, (take IBM ) the spread between the interest the government must pay on a treasury bond and that which IBM must pay on a similar bond is still relatively large.   But beyond that you run into a liquidity issue. Currency only works because it is highly liquid. If you take the article about Greece you posted above, you can see the problem generated by lack of liquidity. People have to both have currency and be willing to accept currency for trade to occur. Corporate bond are notoriously illiquid because people are unwilling to take on the risk involved with holding the debt (there are other reasons, but I'm abstracting from them). This is the other reason treasuries can be used as \"\"currency\"\" there is always someone willing to take your treasury in trade (for the most part because there is almost zero risk involved). You would always be much more willing to hold a treasury than an equivalent IBM bond.   Now take that idea down to a smaller level. Who would want to buy the bonds issued by the mom and pop down the street? Even if someone did buy them who would in turn take these bonds in trade? Practically speaking: no one would. They have no way to identify the riskiness of the bond and have no assurance that there would be anyone willing to trade for it in the future.   If you read the whole post by the redditor from your first link this is precisely why government backed currency came about, and why the scenario that I think you are positing is very unlikely.\""}
{"id": "549037", "text": "Notify his bank.  They should know where the check was cashed.  Assuming it had your name and someone cashed it, they committed fraud and the bank will want to know that.  But r/personalfinance is a better place to ask questions like that."}
{"id": "549040", "text": "\"I know some derivative markets work like this, so maybe similar with futures.  A futures contract commits two parties to a buy/sell of the underlying securities, but with a futures contract you also create leverage because generally the margin you post on your futures contract is not sufficient to pay for the collateral in the underlying contract. The person buying the future is essentially \"\"borrowing\"\" money while the person selling the future is essentially \"\"lending\"\" money. The future you enter into is generally a short term contract, so a perfectly hedged lender of funds should expect to receive something that approaches the fed funds rate in the US. Today that would be essentially nothing.\""}
{"id": "549223", "text": "Your annual contributions are capped at the maximum of $5500 or your taxable income (wages, salary, tips, self employment income, alimony).  You pay taxes by the regular calculations on Form 1040 on your earned income.  In this scenario, you earn the income, pay taxes on the amount you earn, and put money in the Roth IRA.    The alternative, a Traditional IRA, up to certain income levels, allows you to put the amount you contribute on line 32 of Form 1040, which subtracts the Traditional IRA contribution amount from your Adjusted Gross Income (line 37) before tax is calculated on line 44.  In this scenario, you earn the income, put the money in the Traditional IRA, reduce your taxable income, and pay taxes on the reduced amount."}
{"id": "549254", "text": "\"Exposure is the amount of money that you are at risk of losing on a given position (i.e. on a UST 10 year bond), portfolio of positions, strategy (selling covered calls for example), or counterparty, usually represented as a percentage of your total assets. Interbank exposure is the exposure of banks to other banks either through owning debt or stock, or by having open positions with the other banks as counterparties. Leveraging occurs when the value of your position is more than the value of what you are trading in. One example of this is borrowing money (i.e. creating debt for yourself) to buy bonds. The amount of your own funds that you are using to pay for the position is \"\"leveraged\"\" by the debt so that you are risking more than 100% of your capital if, for example, the bond became worthless). Another example would be buying futures \"\"on margin\"\" where you only put up the margin value of the trade and not the full cost. The problem with these leveraged positions is what happens if a credit event (default etc.) happens. Since a large amount of the leverage is being \"\"passed on\"\" as banks are issuing debt to buy other banks' debt who are issuing debt to buy debt there is a risk that a single failure could cause an unravelling of these leveraged positions and, since the prices of the bonds will be falling resulting in these leveraged positions losing money, it will cause a cascade of losses and defaults. If a leveraged position becomes worth less than the amount of real (rather than borrowed or margined) money that was put up to take the position then it is almost inevitable that the firm in that position will default on the requirements for the leverage. When that firm defaults it sparks all of the firms who own that debt to go through the same problems that it did, hence the contagion.\""}
{"id": "549272", "text": "The money you will be bringing to the US will be classified as your own money, and will not be taxable. The proceeds from the sale are taxable to you, probably as capital gains. The fact that you kept the proceeds out of the US is irrelevant for that purpose (it is relevant for FBAR/FATCA etc). Since you had no basis in the property, all the proceeds are taxable to you at the time of the sale and should be reported on your tax return."}
{"id": "549290", "text": "I would not advise this for two reasons: Your point that the investment could be lower at the end of the 3 years is a concern, although with a safe investment, it is less so, but this reduces the potential gain. While your interest is not gaining interest, your interest charged is based on the principal. If you pay off the loans, you reduce the principal and therefore you pay less interest in the long run, even if the interest isn't capitalized. All that this means is that you are basically being charged simple interest as opposed to compounding interest, but reducing the principal helps in either case. You are mistaken about the benefits of the tax deduction. You reduce your tax bill by the marginal rate times the student loan interest you paid for the year. So if you are in the 15% tax bracket and paid $100 in interest, you save $15. This is not a reason to keep the loans (because you have to pay $100 to get $15), but you are mistaken on the benefit, it has nothing to do with shifting the tax brackets. Also, speaking of taxes, don't forget that you pay taxes on investment gains."}
{"id": "549364", "text": "\"As you alluded to in your question, there is not one answer that will be true for all mutual funds.  In fact, I would argue the question is not specific to mutual funds but can be applied to almost anyone who must make an investment decision: a mutual fund manager, hedge fund manager, or an individual investor. Even though money going into a company 401(k) retirement savings plan is typically automatically allocated to different funds as we have specified, this is generally not the case for other investment accounts. For example, I also have a Roth IRA in which I have some money from each paycheck direct deposited and it's up to me to decide whether to leave that money in cash or to invest it somewhere else.  Every time you invest more money into a mutual fund, the fund manager has the same decision to make. There are two commonly used mutual fund figures that relate to your question: turnover rate, and cash reserves. Turnover rate measures the percent of a fund's portfolio that changes every year.  For example, a turnover rate of 100% indicates that a fund replaces every asset it held at the beginning of the year with something else at the end of the year \u2013 funds with turnover rates greater than 100% average a holding period for a given asset of less than one year, and funds with turnover rates less than 100% average a holding period for a given asset of more than one year. Cash reserves simply measure the amount of money funds choose to keep as cash instead of investing in other assets. Another important distinction to make is between actively managed funds and passively managed funds. Passively managed funds are often referred to as \"\"index funds\"\" and have as their goal only to match the returns of a given index or some other benchmark.  Actively managed funds on the other hand try to beat the market by exploiting so-called market inefficiencies; e.g. buying undervalued assets, selling overvalued assets, \"\"timing\"\" the market, etc. To answer your question for a specific fund, I would encourage you to look at the fund's prospectus. I take as one example of a passively managed fund the Vanguard 500 Index Fund (VFINX), a mutual fund that was created to track the S&P 500.  In its prospectus, the fund states that, \"\"to track its target index as closely as possible, the Fund attempts to remain fully invested in stocks\"\". Furthermore, the prospectus states that \"\"the fund's daily cash balance may be invested in one or more Vanguard CMT Funds, which are very low-cost money market funds.\"\"  Therefore, we would expect both this fund's turnover rate and cash reserves to be extremely low. When we look at its portfolio composition, we see this is true \u2013 it is currently at a 4.8% turnover rate and holds 0.0% in short term reserves.  Therefore, we can assume this fund is regularly purchasing shares (similar to a dollar cost averaging strategy) instead of holding on to cash and purchasing shares together at a specific time. For actively managed funds, the picture will tend to look a little different.  For example, if we look at the Magellan Fund's portfolio composition, we can see it has a turnover rate of 42%, and holds around .95% in cash/short term reserves.  In this case, we can safely guess that trading activity may not be as regular as a passively managed fund, as an active manager attempts to time the market.  You may find mutual funds that have much higher cash reserves \u2013 perhaps 10% or even more. Granted, it is impossible to know the exact trading strategy of a mutual fund, and for good reason \u2013 if we knew for example, that a fund purchases shares every day at 2:30PM in order to realign with the S&P 500, then sellers of S&P components could up the prices at that time to exploit the mutual fund's trade strategy.  Large traders are constantly trying to find ways to conceal their actual trading activity in order to avoid these exact problems. Finally, I feel obligated to note that it is important to keep in mind that trade frequency is linked to transactions costs \u2013 in general, the more frequently an investment manager (whether it be you or a mutual fund manager) executes trades, the more that manager will lose in transactions costs.\""}
{"id": "549601", "text": "I know of no generic formula for determining if an investment property is a good investment, besides the trivial formula. Make sure your income is greater than your expenses, and hope the value of the property doesn't drop. Some people will tell you to expect the monthly rent to be a fixed percentage of the purchase price, but that is a goal not a certainty. It is also impossible to estimate the difficulty renting the property, or how long the roof will last. Taxes can't be predicted, as the value of the house increase, so do the property taxes, but you might not be able to increase the rent.  You can't even predict the quality of the tenant. Will they damage the property? Or skip out early? You will need somebody who knows the local market to estimate the local conditions, and help you determine the estimated costs and income based on the actual property involved."}
{"id": "549620", "text": "\"&gt; . A us ceo will pay more in income taxes than a 1000 factory workers.  From quick google searches, average auto worker make about $35-40 an hour,  meaning they pay about $20,000 a year in taxes.  $20,000 * 1,000 = $20million  Ford CEO reportedly gets about that in gross compensation, which he probably pays closer to the capital gains tax rate for (~20%).  Though I'm not sure why you are trying to start an argument here.  You said you were considering \"\"buying a car from a foreign manufacturer\"\" and I simply pointed out that the car in question was manufactured here in America.\""}
{"id": "549665", "text": "Why would a lender for a down payment want proof of income for a house when a credit card issuer gave me more and doesn't care? The risk profile and rate of interest are different.  Could I use this argument as a basis that they have no reasoning to request proof of income, if another lender (credit card company) would give me more without proof of repayment? You could argue anything, but it does not mean the other company will agree with your argument. Should I borrow a home loan from a credit card company then? Or what's the catch here? You can. Check the rate of interest and penal fees; you would realize how much you will end up paying. Depending on the country, the difference could be in the region of 10-15%."}
{"id": "549736", "text": "This is adequately covered by the differential between lending and receiving interest rates.  ...and technically, they pay the central bank an interest rate on the money lent as well, which means that they *are* paying back equity holders (all be it very slowly and very slightly).  The equity holders have the ability to will money into existence, so there's no artificial limitation they face with respect to the branch banking system."}
{"id": "549870", "text": "\"You are on the right track, for tax purposes its all ordinary income at the end of 2016. If the free lance \"\"employer\"\" will withhold fed,state and local tax, then that takes care of your estimated tax. If they can't or won't, you will need to make those estimates and make payments quarterly for the fed and state tax at your projected tax liability.  Or, you can bump up withholding by your day job employer and cover your expected tax liability at year end without making estimated tax payments.\""}
{"id": "549895", "text": "Investopedia has a nice article on this here The Key benefit looks like better returns with lower capital. The disadvantage is few brokers offering that can be trusted. Potentially lower return due to margins / spreads. Higher leverage and can become an issue."}
{"id": "550172", "text": "It is in the bank's interest to sell the property for as much as they can (although it is doubtful they will put as much effort/time into selling it as the owner might). They will certainly not sell it for $1. The main reason for this is that the bank would prefer to own $100k, than a loan to them from a customer for $100k. Banks have to discount the value of loans to take into account the likelihood of the loan not being repaid. They classify certain loans as riskier than others, and these are discounted more heavily. An unsecured home loan to a customer that has already defaulted, has no collateral, and now needs to pay rent AND loan repayments would count as an extremely risky loan."}
{"id": "550274", "text": "If you've got the money to pay the bill today, do it. They are giving you a 25% discount if you do. You won't find an investment that will beat that.  Let's look at the details of your scheme.  Instead of paying $1696 today, you decide that you will pay $2261 over 60 months, or $37.68 per month.  You also decide to invest $1696 today, and expect to get 6% return each year. Your investment gets you $102 each year, but you have to pay taxes on that.  If you are in the 25% tax bracket, you only keep $76 (ignoring state taxes).  In addition, the loan is costing you $452 in payments each year. At the end of the 5 years, you will have paid $2261 to the hospital, and your $1696 investment will be worth about $2123 after taxes. Instead, let's say that you paid the hospital $1696 today, and invested the $37.68 per month.  At the end of 5 years, assuming the same 6% growth and 25% tax bracket, your investment will be worth $2552. In order for you to come out ahead by investing today and paying off the hospital over time, you would need to get at least a 17% growth on your investment.  If you are ignoring taxes, then the number you need to hit is at least 13%. Conclusion: You will come out ahead by paying the hospital today, and investing the monthly payment plan that you avoided. (Note: Bankrate has a very handy investment calculator that makes it easy to calculate returns on a monthly investment.) Now, let's look at the ethics of the situation.  Assume that you were able somehow to find an investment with a guaranteed return high enough to come out ahead with your plan.  Should you do it? The hospital has provided you a service, and you owe the money.  As a public service to people that cannot pay the bill, they allow people to pay off the bill over time at no interest.  However, you are not one of these people.  You have the money to pay.  It is not ethical, in my opinion, to use the hospital's money to invest and try to profit."}
{"id": "550440", "text": "This is an excellent question; kudos for asking it. How much a person pays over spot with gold can be negotiated in person at a coin shop or in an individual transaction, though many shops will refuse to negotiate.  You have to be a clever and tough negotiator to make this work and you won't have any success online. However, in researching your question, I dug for some information on one gold ETF OUNZ - which is physically backed by gold that you can redeem.  It appears that you only pay the spot price if you redeem your shares for physical gold: But aren't those fees exorbitant? After all, redeeming for 50 ounces   of Gold Eagles would result in a $3,000 fee on a $65,000 transaction.   That's 4.6 percent! Actually, the fee simply reflects the convenience premium that gold   coins command in the market. Here are the exchange fees compared with   the premiums over spot charged by two major online gold retailers: Investors do pay an annual expense ratio, but the trade-off is that as an investor, you don't have to worry about a thief breaking in and stealing your gold."}
{"id": "550642", "text": "If annualized rate of return is what you are looking for, using a tool would make it a lot easier.   In the post I've also explained how to use the spreadsheet.   Hope this helps."}
{"id": "550647", "text": "Not only what you mentioned about the tax deductions, but cutting marketing expenses is potentially dangerous advice. Evaluating your marketing efforts and making adjustments that make sense for your business seems to be a much better bit of advice."}
{"id": "550783", "text": "I would stay away from the Actively Managed Funds.  Index funds or the asset allocation funds are your best bet since they have the lowest fees.  What is your risk tolerance?  How old are you? I would suggest reading:"}
{"id": "550876", "text": "I think a lot of highly educated people fall victim to keeping up with the joneses. Not everyone that is in their same position comes from the same background. For example, a co-worker with an MBA from Vanderbilt may have no student loan debt because his lawyer/doctor parents paid for it, while another co-worker with an MBA from University of Phoenix may be getting crushed with loan repayments.  However, assuming that they both make the same salary, one will look to the other to set an example of what houses/cars/other things people in this salary range buy. Salary and social pressures sometimes outweigh financially sound decisions."}
{"id": "550939", "text": "\"Most folks would loan out money for the purpose of being re-loaned.  Depositing money in the bank, is loaning the bank money who will re-loan it.  Buying bond based mutual funds is another way that it could be viewed that people are loaning money for the purpose of the money being re-loaned.  The reason why banks always have money available for withdrawal, is because of the reserve.  Fractional reserve banking in its simplest explanation, is that banks are allowed to take deposits and loan them out so long as they keep a set reserve.  If the reserve rate is 10% (it's really much lower), and somebody deposits $100, then the bank is allowed to loan out $90, keeping $10 as a reserve.  Now even with a reserve, a bank does run some risk of the deposits being withdrawn faster than the loans are paid back, this is called a run.  What protects banks most from this, is that deposits, withdrawals, loans, and loan repayments, all happen at a fairly steady and predictable rate (short term), so banks are able to judge how many loans they should give out.  Even when banks do see their reserve depleting, they have options.  The first and most common, is simply getting a loan from another bank.  The rule with the reserve, is that banks need to meet it at the end of the day, so banks will loan each other money overnight for the purpose of making up for the slight fluctuations that occur in a normal business day.  If you have ever heard the Fed talking about the \"\"overnight rate\"\" they are talking about the rate banks loan each other money for the night.  Another common way for banks to make up for a deficit in deposits, in a longer term solution,is to sell assets.  Fairly rare for a bank to sell actual physical assets, but the loans they hold are assets, and they can sell them to other banks.  Most banks will also hold some bonds that are available to sell.  The major functions that allow a bank to be profitable would still apply to the OP's idea.  The only real difference would be that commercial banks have direct access to the central banks, and the OP's idea would need to have a commercial bank to act as the middle man between the central bank.\""}
{"id": "551040", "text": "The latter. Simply because having some savings is always better than having no savings. Using a credit card in an emergency will always be an option (as long as you are paying off debt) but using savings earmarked for emergencies is better."}
{"id": "551099", "text": "\"Welcome to Money.SE. I will say upfront, Personal Finance is just that, personal, and you are likely to get multiple, perhaps conflicting, answers. Are you sure the PMI will drop off after 2 years? The rules are specific, and for PMI, when prepayments put you at that 78/80% LTV, your bank can require an appraisal, not automatically drop it. Talk to the banks, get confirmation, and depending what they say, keep hacking away at the mortgage.  After this, I suggest jumping on Roth IRAs. You are in the 15% bracket, and the Roth will let you deposit $5500 for each you and your wife. A great way to kickstart a higher level of retirement savings.  After this, I'm not comfortable with the emergency savings level. If you lose your job tomorrow (Funny story, my wife and I lost our's on the same day 3 years ago) and don't have enough savings (Our retirement accounts were good to just retire that day) you can easily run out of money and be late on the mortgage. It's great to prepay the mortgage to get rid of that PMI, but once there, I'd do the Roth and then focus on savings. 6 months expenses minimum.  We have a great Q&A here titled Oversimplify it for me: the correct order of investing in which I go in to more detail, as do 4 other members.  I am not getting on the \"\"investments will return more than your mortgage cost\"\" soapbox. A well-funded emergency fund is a very conservative bit of advice. With no matched 401(k), I suggest a balance of the Roth savings and prepayments.  From another great post, Ideal net worth by age X? Need comparison references you should have nearly 1 year's salary (90K) saved toward retirement.  Any question on my advice, add a comment and I will edit in more details.\""}
{"id": "551145", "text": "None of your options seem mutually exclusive.  Ordinarily nothing stops you from participating in your 401(k), opening an IRA, qualifying for your company's pension, and paying off your debts except your ability to pay for all this stuff.  Moreover, you can open an IRA anywhere (scottrade, vanguard, etrade, etc.) and freely invest in vanguard mutual funds as well as those of other companies...you aren't normally locked in to the funds of your IRA provider. Consider a traditional IRA.  To me your marginal tax rate of 25% doesn't seem that great.  If I were in your shoes I would be more likely to contribute to a traditional IRA instead of a Roth.  This will save you taxes today and you can put the extra 25% of $5,500 toward your loans.  Yes, you will be taxed on that money when you retire, but I think it's likely your rate will be lower than 25%.  Moreover, when you are retired you will already own a house and have paid off all your debt, hopefully.  You kind of need money now.  Between your current tax rate and your need for money now, I'd say a traditional makes good sense.  Buy whatever funds you want.  If you want a single, cheap, whole-market fund just buy VTSAX.  You will need a minimum of $10K to get in, so until then you can buy the ETF version, VTI.  Personally I would contribute enough to your 401(k) to get the match and anything else to an IRA (usually they have more and better investment options).  If you max that out, go back to the 401(k). Your investment mix isn't that important.  Recent research into target date funds puts them in a poor light. Since there isn't a good benchmark for a target date fund, the managers tend to buy whatever they feel like and it may not be what you would prefer if you were choosing.  However, the fund you mention has a pretty low expense ratio and the difference between that and your own allocation to an equity index fund or a blend of equity and bond funds is small in expectation.  Plus, you can change your allocation whenever you want. You are not locked in. The investment options you mention are reasonable enough that the difference between portfolios is not critical.  More important is optimizing your taxes and paying off your debt in the right order. Your interest rates matter more than term does. Paying off debt with more debt will help you if the new debt has a lower interest rate and it won't if it has a higher interest rate.  Normally speaking, longer term debt has a higher interest rate.  For that reason shorter term debt, if you can afford it, is generally better.  Be cold and calculating with your debt.  Always pay off highest interest rate debt first and never pay off cheap debt with expensive debt. If the 25 year debt option is lower than all your other interest rates and will allow you to pay off higher interest rate debt faster, it's a good idea.  Otherwise it most likely is not.  Do not make debt decisions for psychological reasons (e.g., simplicity).  Instead, always chose the option that maximizes your ultimate wealth."}
{"id": "551234", "text": "Surely some borrowers and lenders make decisions about making and taking loans based on the actual interest rates on the actual loans? In which case it doesn't matter so much if the rates are calculated based on a fictional assumption about something. At the end of the day every borrower or lender in the market makes their own decision about which lending contracts they take part in."}
{"id": "551286", "text": "The person may just want to get out of that position in order to buy a different stock, he or she feels may go up faster. There is really a lot of reasons."}
{"id": "551398", "text": "On line 21 of Schedule D, you write the smaller of So, in your case, since your Line 16 shows a loss of more than $3000 on Line 21, you write 3000 on Line 21 (the parentheses indicating that is it a negative number are already included on the form). Also, you write (3000) on Form 1040 Line 13. The rest of the loss is a carryover to next year (be sure to fill out the Capital Loss Carryover Worksheet where the carryover to next year is computed). Summary: you cannot write 0 on Line 21 of Schedule D and carry over the entire loss to next year. You must deduct $3000 this year and carry over the rest of the loss to next year."}
{"id": "551423", "text": "\"In my opinion, you should pay off the student loans as soon as possible, before you start saving for the house downpayment. $26k is a big number, but you have a great salary.  (Nice!)  Up until now, you have been a poor college student, accustomed to a relatively low standard of living.  Your $800 per month plan would have you pay off the loan in 3 years, but I would challenge you to pay off this entire student loan in 1 year or less.  A monthly loan payment of $2226 will pay off your loan in 12 months. After that is done, if you take the same amount you had been paying toward your student loans and save it for your condo, in less than two years you'll have a 10% down payment saved ($50k).  The whole thing will take less than three years. There are three reasons why I recommend paying off the loan first before saving for the condo: one is practical and two are philosophical. Practical: You will save money on interest.  Paying off the loan in 1 year vs. 3 years will save you $1343.  You won't find a short-term safe investment that will beat 5% in interest. Philosophical: The loan is something current and concrete that you can focus on.  Your condo is a dream at this point, and there is lots of time to change your mind.  If the $2k+ per month amount is at all a sacrifice for you, then in a few months, you might be tempted to say to yourself, \"\"This month I really want a vacation, so I'll just skip this month of saving.\"\"  For the loan, however, if you establish a concrete goal of 12 months to pay off the loan, it will hopefully help motivate you to allocate this money and stick to your plan. Philosophical: Getting used to borrowing money, making payments to a bank, and paying interest is not a great way to live.  It is better, in my opinion, to eliminate your debt as fast as possible and start getting accustomed to saving cash for what you want.  Clean up your debt, and resolve not to borrow any more money except for a reasonably-sized mortgage on your home.\""}
{"id": "552220", "text": "\"Thanks.  This is super simplified as I said.  It gets much deeper when you start looking at costs of capital, country risk premiums (for projects in emerging markets), \"\"risk free rate of return\"\" (putting cash in guaranteed returns such as a us treasury note), mutually exclusive projects, etc.  But the basic concept is... what is the minimum required return on a project to justify choosing to pursue it.  If you borrow money via loan at 10%, your required rate of return on whatever project you invest it in has to be at least that 10%.  Otherwise you're better off just not doing anything.\""}
{"id": "552305", "text": "I think the best advice you're going to get on the subject is: If you made $250k in half a year, you definitely have enough to hire an accountant!  Get professional help on the subject, and they'll make sure you don't end up getting in any legal trouble."}
{"id": "552363", "text": "\"Things don't just happen, you have to make them happen, you have to do the marketing and sales - link up with your prospective customers. And you have to have a well designed and well operating business. The key to good business management is \"\"do unto others as you would have them do unto you\"\" - ie. look at your business from your customers' perspective.\""}
{"id": "552533", "text": ""}
{"id": "552756", "text": "This author is conflating a sole proprietorship and a one-man shop.  Sole proprietorship is a tax designation as to who *owns* the business; an individual rather than a shareholder(s) or partner.  I operate as a sole proprietor, and have always had between four and six employees."}
{"id": "552792", "text": "\"Aside from the calculations of \"\"how much you save through reducing interest\"\", you have two different types of loan here.  The house that is mortgaged is not a wasting asset. You can reasonably expect that in 2045 it will have retained its worth measured in \"\"houses\"\", against the other houses in the same neighbourhood. In money terms, it is likely to be worth more than its current value, if only because of inflation. To judge the real cost or benefit of the mortgage, you need to consider those factors. You didn't say whether the 3.625% is a fixed or variable rate, but you also need to consider how the rate might compare with inflation in the long term. If you have a fixed rate mortgage and inflation rises above 3.625% in future, you are making money from the loan in the long term, not losing what you pay in interest. On the other hand, your car is a wasting asset, and your car loans are just a way of \"\"paying by installments\"\" over the life of the car. If there are no penalties for early repayment, the obvious choice there is to pay off the highest interest rates first. You might also want to consider what happens if you need to \"\"get the $11,000 back\"\" to use for some other (unplanned, or emergency) purpose. If you pay it into your mortgage now, there is no easy way to get it back before 2045. On the other hand, if you pay down your car loans, most likely you now have a car that is worth more than the loans on it. In an emergency, you could sell the car and recover at least some of the $11,000. Of course you should keep enough cash available to cover \"\"normal emergencies\"\" without having to take this sort of action, but \"\"abnormal emergencies\"\" do sometimes happen!\""}
{"id": "553031", "text": "Your question seems like you don't understand what a Roth IRA is. A Roth IRA isn't an investment, per se. It is just a type of account that receives special tax treatment.  Just like a checking and savings account are different at a bank, a ROTH IRA account is just flagged as such by a brokerage. It isn't an investment type, and there aren't really different ROTH IRA accounts.  You can invest in just about anything inside that account so that is what you need to evaluate. One Roth IRA account is as good as any other.As to what to invest your money in inside a ROTH, that is a huge question and off-topic per the rules against specific investing advice."}
{"id": "553583", "text": "&gt; Greece is the homeless, one-armed drug addict with no prospects that struggles to find a few bucks to spend a night in a hostel. The size of the debt is more or less irrelevant. It's the ability to pay it that really matters.  But we're talking about the debt-to-GDP ratio, not the debt as an absolute value.  Which means we're quite literally structuring our comparison in terms of the nation's ability to pay it off."}
{"id": "553605", "text": "Our second to last addition was due to buying out a smaller business. We do call locally owned and small scale businesses often but they surprising have a contract set up with a different company or aren't looking to sell right away."}
{"id": "553748", "text": "\"It sounds like you want a place to park some money that's reasonably safe and liquid, but can sustain light to moderate losses. Consider some bond funds or bond ETFs filled with medium-term corporate bonds. It looks like you can get 3-3.5% or so. (I'd skip the municipal bond market right now, but \"\"why\"\" is a matter for its own question). Avoid long-term bonds or CDs if you're worried about inflation; interest rates will rise and the immediate value of the bonds will fall until the final payout value matches those rates.\""}
{"id": "553809", "text": "Your argument with elvendude happened because your comment makes it appear that you think that if a business has less cash at the end of a year than at the beginning, the business does not need to pay taxes. elvendude is trying to show you that this isn't true."}
{"id": "553817", "text": "&gt; \u201cThe economy, as measured by gross domestic product, can be expected to grow at an annual rate of about 3 percent over the long term, and inflation of 2 percent would push nominal GDP growth to 5 percent, Buffett said. Stocks will probably rise at about that rate and dividend payments will boost total returns to 6 percent to 7 percent, he said.\u201d  [Warren Buffett](https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/The-Simple-Dollar/2013/0506/What-Warren-Buffett-s-stock-market-math-means-for-your-retirement)  This isn't the whole picture, but it's a start."}
{"id": "554018", "text": "\"Well I disagree with the economists who claim Bitcoin can't (or wouldn't) be a currency.  As far as I'm concerned, Bitcoin is the best-established digital \"\"unit of account\"\", and in the event of a Dollar/Euro crisis you are likely to see some entrepreneurs figure out ways to speed its adoption.  I don't own any Bitcoin now, and I wouldn't put more than 15% of my total portfolio in it, simply because it's not possible to predict if something like that would catch on.  But I own a ton of silver (about 20% of which is physical and the other 80% is via Sprott's ETF).  I also don't own physical gold, but I own a lot of Swiss Francs, which in my view are a good proxy for gold and a safe haven given the fact Switzerland owns so much gold-per-capita.  You get the benefits of gold AND a captive, skilled tax-livestock.  Soros indicated recently he thinks the Euro won't last much longer than a few months.  I'm always amazed by how the elite can push things off, though.  So I hold about 50% of my savings as cash USD.  In the event of market turmoil (you'll know it when you see it, like 2008) you can use this to scoop up some cheap stocks and gold/silver coins.  Don't beat yourself up over missing opportunities, though.  The main thing is just to steer clear of government bonds and the stock market.  If you do that, you're going to come out in the top 20% over the next few years.\""}
{"id": "554140", "text": "Sending your money off to do the heavy lifting is a way of saying that compound returns can do the bulk of your retirement investing work.  Check out the image below, I swiped this from a quick google search so I cannot claim graphic credit. But as you can see the earning potential of your money as you approach retirement is many times higher than your annual contributions. With the aim of having your money earn interest/returns to pay your annual living expenses, replacing your previous annual income.  https://i.stack.imgur.com/fpZPN.jpg I tried to post the image but do not have enough rep."}
{"id": "554217", "text": "\"Here's what Suze Orman has to say about it: Good debt is money you borrow to purchase an asset, such as a home you can afford. History shows that home values generally rise in step with the inflation rate, so a mortgage is good debt. Student loans are, too, because they're an investment in the future. Census data pegs the average lifetime earnings of a high school graduate at a million dollars below that of someone with a bachelor's degree. Bad debt is money you borrow to buy a depreciating asset or to finance a \"\"want\"\" rather than a \"\"need.\"\" A car is a depreciating asset; from the day you drive it off the lot, it starts losing value. Credit card balances or a home equity line of credit that's used to pay for indulgences\u2014vacations, shopping, spa days\u2014is bad debt.\""}
{"id": "554293", "text": "\"You should contact the company and the broker about the ownership. Do you remember ever selling your position? When you look back at your tax returns/1099-B forms - can you identify the sale? It should have been reported to you, and you should have reported it to the IRS. If not - then you're probably still the owner. As to K-1 - the income reported doesn't have to be distributed to you. Partnership is a pass-through entity, and cannot \"\"accumulate\"\" earnings for tax purposes, everything is deemed distributed. If, however, it is not actually distributed - you're still taxed on the income, but it is added to your basis in the partnership and you get the tax \"\"back\"\" when you sell your position. However, you pay income tax on the income based on the kind of the income, and on the sale - at capital gains rates. So the amounts added to your position will reduce your capital gains tax, but may be taxed at ordinary rates. Get a professional advice on the issue and what to do next, talk to a EA/CPA licensed in New York.\""}
{"id": "554465", "text": "If you want to see a more academic version of this look up Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC).   It's a formula that tells you how much it costs for a company to raise $1 of capital whether it be through issuing bonds or stocks.   One thing you learn is that there are times that if you take on loans (even if you don't need it) you can raise shareholder value and therefore the total company netvalue. The thought process is (as it states in the article above) that a company can issue debt for cheaper than issue shares and it will have extra cash which it can use to get a better return than its net effective interest rate.   I tried to give an example but I only ended up rehashing what it says in the article. Anyhow look up WACC and you'll understand the fundamentals."}
{"id": "554784", "text": "\"After much research, the answer is \"\"a\"\": recompute the tax return using the installment sales method because (1) the escrow payment was subject to \"\"substantial restrictions\"\" by virtue of the escrow being structured to pay buyer's indemnification claims and (2) the taxpayer did not correctly elect out of the installment method by reporting the entire gain including the escrow payments on the return in the year of the transaction.\""}
{"id": "554814", "text": "\"I don't follow the numbers in your example, but the fundamental question you're asking is, \"\"If I can borrow money for a low cost, and if I think I can invest it and receive returns greater than that cost, should I do it?\"\" It doesn't matter where that money comes from, a mortgage that's bigger than it needs to be, a credit card teaser rate, or a margin line from your stock broker. The answer is \"\"maybe\"\" - depending on the certainty you have about the returns you'd receive on your investments and your tolerance for risk. Only you can answer that question for yourself. If you make less than your mortgage rates on the investments, you'll wish you hadn't! As an aside, I don't know anything about Belgian tax law, but in US tax law, your deductions can be limited to the actual value of the home. Your law may be similar and thus increase the effective mortgage interest rate.\""}
{"id": "555101", "text": "You need to get yourself a credit card, and use it regularly and also repay on time. This will help increase your credit score.  Hope you have a regular job which is bringing in money every month, but having just this isnt enough, get a credit card."}
{"id": "555124", "text": "\"Accrued interest generally means \"\"interest that is earned but not received\"\" (http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/accrued-interest.html).  This is the interest that is added on top of the amount that was originally agreed upon. Because your friend missed some months, she will have gained 3% interest on top of the original loan amount for every month that she didn't pay.  The interest even applies to the increased loan amount, so it will increase exponentially for every month that she does not make a payment.  For example, if the loan amount was for $1,000 and she missed the payment the first month, the 3% accrued interest will raise that loan amount to $1030.  If she misses the second month, then the loan amount will become $1060.90 and so on. This means that it will take her more months to pay the loan in its entirety. \"\"Arrears\"\" are the overdue payments that she had not made (http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/arrears.asp). So the sentence \"\"with susbsequent payments paying the arrears before being applied to the current month's payment\"\" means that she must pay the overdue debt from the previous months first before she can even make the payment for the current month.\""}
{"id": "555276", "text": "I would ask your HR or benefits department to be certain, but here's how I read that without any specific knowledge of the situation: What is right to receive the RSU consideration? Company A was bought by Company B.  You had unvested Restricted Stock Units in A, which is now gone.  B is saying that you now have the right to receive consideration equivalent to the value of those RSUs in A. Since B is private, there's no publicly traded stock, so it will likely be in cash, but read the rest of the paperwork or talk to HR to be certain.   For example, if you had 100 RSUs vesting next year and the price of stock in A was $50 when the company was bought, those RSUs would be worth $5,000.  B is give you the right to consideration for those RSUs, hopefully for somewhere around $5,000.  That consideration is unvested, meaning you must stay employed until the vesting period in order to claim that right. If you are fired without cause (i.e. laid off), you will receive those unvested claims as compensation.   I assume the same will be applicable if employee leaves the company  Probably not.  In any situation, if you voluntarily leave a company, any unvested stock, RSUs, options, etc. are forfeited."}
{"id": "555351", "text": "Good! The article says it was some kind of collateral protection insurance that customers were signed up for despite it being unrequired for the loan. The accusations is that WF racketeered about 800,000 loans by bundling in this bunk insurance cost as part of the loan structure. I'm glad you're not caught up in it."}
{"id": "555414", "text": "You didn't identify the fund but here is the most obvious way: Some of the stocks they owned could had dividends. Therefore they would have had to pass them on to the investors. If the fund sold shares of stocks, they could have capital gains. They would have sold stocks to pay investors who sold shares. They also could have sold shares of stock to lock in gains, or to get out of positions they no longer wanted.  Therefore a fund could have dividends, and capital gains, but not have an increase in value for the year. Some investors look at how tax efficient a fund is, before investing."}
{"id": "555438", "text": "In today's dollars, cost including room and board can total $20K - $60K/yr depending on the school. With college 15 years away, these numbers can double by then. And the annual savings required, adjusted accordingly. If we look at the low end, we're still at $40k/yr or $160k total, and it would be prudent to start saving $10k/yr if possible. It's easy enough to drop the number if 5 years in, you see college costs dropping or rising less quickly."}
{"id": "555476", "text": "They return capital to investors every year to keep the fund size smaller, since there are a set number of money-making opportunities in the space.  In other words, if they will make $1 billion per year regardless of invested capital, why not lever up a few times so you don't have to put as much in?"}
{"id": "555506", "text": "I can't provide a list, but when I took out my Stocks and Shares, I extensively researched for a good, cheap, flexible option and I went with FoolShareDealing.  I've found them to be good, and their online trading system works well.  I hope that's still the case."}
{"id": "555559", "text": "Yes there is an inverse relationship but that's how it's meant to work.  Debt creates money. Banks do lend out customers savings for return interest as the bank can make a profit rather than the cash just sitting there. The process of Lending pumps money into the economy that wouldn't be there otherwise so it creates money. The banks will either have a cash deficit or surplus at end of each day and either need to borrow from other banks to balance their books or if in surplus lend to other banks to make interest because that's more profitable than holding the cash surplus. The overnight cash rate then determines interest rates we pay.    High private debt occurs when lots of people are investing &amp; buying things so there is stimulation and growth in the economy. A lot more tax is being paid in these periods so government debt is lower because they are getting lots of tax money. Also To stimulate the economy into this growth period the government usually sells off large cash bonds (lowering their debt) to release cash into the economy, the more cash available the less banks have to borrow to cover deficits on overnight cash market and the lower interest rates will be. Lower interest rates = more borrowing and higher Private debt.   The government can't let growth get out of control as they don't want high inflation so they do the opposite to slow down growth, I.e buy up cash bonds and take money out of economy causing higher interest rates and less borrowing = More debt for government less for private."}
{"id": "555639", "text": "This image is an advertisement from this week's Barron's. The broker would want to put himself in the best light, correct?  This shows you that of their current accounts, 53.5% are not profitable. And these guys have the best track record of the list. Also keep in mind that their client base isn't random. The winners tend to stay, so even if it were 50/50, the 50% of losers might represent many times that number of people who came to the table, lost their money and left."}
{"id": "555794", "text": "\"Two things to consider: When it comes to advice, don't be \"\"Penny wise and Pound foolish\"\". It is an ongoing debate whether active management vs passive indexes are a better choice, and I am sure others can give good arguments for both sides. I look at it as you are paying for advice. If your adviser will teach you about investing and serve your interests, having his advise will probably prevent you from making some dumb mistakes. A few mistakes (such as jumping in/out of markets based on fear/speculation) can eliminate any savings in fees. However, if you feel confident that you have the resources and can make good decisions, why pay for advise you don't need? EDIT In this case, my opinion is that you don't need a complex plan at this time. The money you would spend on financial advise would not be the best use of the funds.  That said, to your main question, I would delay making any long-term decisions with these funds until you know you are done with your education and on an established career path. This period of your life can be very volatile, and you may find yourself halfway through college and wanting to change majors or start a different path. Give yourself the option to do that by deferring long-term investment decisions until you have more stability. For that reason, I would avoid focusing on retirement savings. As others point out, you are limited in how much you can contribute per year. If you want to start, ROTH is your best bet, but if you put it in don't pull it out. That is a bad habit to get into. Personal finance is as much about developing habits as it is doing math... A low-turnover index fund may be appropriate, but you don't want to end up where you want to buy a house or start a business and your investment has just lost 10%...  I would keep at least half in a liquid, safe account until after graduation. Any debt you incur because you tied up this money will eliminate any investment gains (if any). Good Luck! EDITED to clarify retirement savings\""}
{"id": "556353", "text": "\"if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck  This cliche is appropriate for your situation. Every aspect of this endeavor says \"\"scam.\"\" It's a classic pyramid scheme with a product for sale that you don't even believe in. Too bad it's a friend that brought it to you.\""}
{"id": "556545", "text": "\"If you're looking for ways to turn $1000 into more, don't just think of ways it can make money -- also consider whether there are any ways you can use it to save money. Among the advantages of this approach is that you're not taxed for reducing your expenditures. The good news is that there are a lot more ways to save a little bit of money on a $1000 budget than there are to make a little money on that budget. The bad news is that most of them will require some additional input: labor. Have you taken an economics course? Capital + Labor => output.  I don't know what you spend your money on exactly, but some thoughts: You may find more opportunities for things like this as you move out from college and into your own apartment (/house) and the university isn't taking care of as many of your needs. Just don't confuse yourself about where the line is between actually saving money that you were going to spend anyway, and just consuming more. Consumption is fine in and of itself (and ultimately it's what you have money for) but doesn't make you financially better off. Also, when considering what to do with the money, don't just think \"\"I can spend $2000 on this bike and it will ultimately save me gas money\"\" unless you also know how to think \"\"I could spend $200 on a slightly lesser bike and still save all the gas money, or maybe even spend $20 on a yard sale bike.\"\". Consider borrowing kitchen equipment from the parents, instead of buying new stuff, or buy it at a yard sale. Also, make sure you actually will use the things you buy.\""}
{"id": "556688", "text": "I didn't mean to imply that bankruptcy is a magical process. I was using that to clarify my use of conservative vs. aggressive. To be fair, I guess it can vary depending on your perspective. If you're taking the perspective of the debt-laden company, then yes, erring on the side of a higher value could be defined as aggressive. If you're taking the perspective of someone looking to acquire business, I would say erring on the side of a higher value is conservative.   if the debt is trading at, say, $0.20 on the dollar, then yes, I can agree that the market value of the debt is likely more representative of the book value. I guess I wasn't thinking of that type of extreme example. A more common scenario I'd encounter would be a) the debt trading at maybe $0.95 on the dollar and b) taking the perspective of someone looking to invest in the equity, which is why I'd say that it's more conservative to use the higher value, which is the book value.  So I'm persuaded that using market value of the debt can make sense in some cases, but I would still argue that the book value might make more sense in other cases."}
{"id": "556913", "text": "Keep in mind that it's a cliche statement used as non-controversial filler in articles, not some universal truth. When you were young, did you mom tell you to eat your vegetables because children are starving in Ethiopia? This is the personal finance article equivalent of that. Generally speaking, the statement as an air of truth about it. If you're living hand to mouth, you probably shouldn't be thinking about the stock market. If you're a typical middle class individual investor, you probably shouldn't be messing around with very speculative investments. That said, be careful about looking for some deeper meaning that just isn't there. If the secret of investment success is hidden in that statement, I have a bridge to sell you that has a great view of Brooklyn."}
{"id": "557369", "text": "http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/homes/rea08.shtm    &gt; lenders cannot: &gt; &gt;discourage you from applying for a mortgage or reject your application because of your race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because you receive public assistance.  If the borrower is married the insurance policy is likely already in place and has been for years."}
{"id": "557758", "text": "Financial advice from good advisers sounds a good idea.  Talk to two or three before taking their advice... their services and advice are surprisingly and sometimes alarmingly diverse.  Gaining money from renting out property is harder than it seems and 10% sounds very ambitious after all costs. Buying abroad especially is a challenge to make money on.. You need to be lucky, and have a strong flair to do it despite all. Bear in mind santander pay 3% on current accounts by the way. Have you ever thought about living abroad somewhere stable or cheap or downsizing. A part time job or low pressure job might top up a limited pension for long enough to find a long term solution while giving you the feeling of starting retirement. Just some thoughts... think it through carefully .. weigh the risks.. be realistic and good luck. Jonjo"}
{"id": "557852", "text": "My point of view is that monopolies happen because politics (whether that's politicians, trade boards, or oversight committies) allows them to occur. It's a failure of politicians in allowing it to happen, not a failure in business (as they're just pursuing their profits). When business started to interfere in politics to gain market advantages, that's when monopolies started to form. Competitive marketplaces are self-sustaining unless you create the conditions for monopolies to form.  Once you legalize what price you sell a good at you're going down a slippery slope of communism. It's a free market and companies should be able to freely sell a good at whatever price they want. If other companies can't compete in the market at that price then they aren't as efficient as the other company and it would hurt the economy in the long run to have them operating at higher costs than similar companies who can do it better.  I didn't say that the **only** exit for a startup is acquisition but I digress... The reality is that the tech market is dominated by large businesses who meddle in politics to maintain their position ([such as Google and Apple colluding in hiring practices](http://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/). This is bad for everyone and especially for startups and needs to be redesigned so that startups and big companies alike can competitively challenge each other in the tech sectors.  I think we're arguing for roughly the same thing but it seems that it's a different between equality vs equity (I might be wrong however)."}
{"id": "557877", "text": "\"This answer relies on why you are holding shares of a company in the first place. So let's address that: So does this mean you would like to vote with your shares on the directions the company takes? If so, your reasons for selling would be different from the next speculator who only is interested in share price volatility. Regardless of your participation in potential voting rights associated with your share ownership, a different reason to sell is based on if your fundamental reasons for investing in the company have changed.  Enhancements on this topic include: Trade management, how to deal with position sizes. Buying and selling partial positions based on price action while keeping a core long term position, but this is not something \"\"long term investors\"\" generally put too much effort in. Price targets, start your long term investment with a price target in mind, derived from a future market cap based on your initial fundamental analysis of the company's prospects. And finally, there are a lot of things you can do with a profitable investment in shares.\""}
{"id": "557885", "text": "For reporting purposes, I would treat the purchase and sale of gold like a purchase and sale of a stock. The place to do so is Schedule D. (And if it's the wrong form, but you reported it, there is might not be a penalty, whereas there is a penalty for NOT reporting.) The long term gain would be at capital gains rates. The short term gain would be at ordinary income rates. And if you have two coins bought at two different times, you get to choose which one to report (as long as you report the OTHER one when you sell the second coin)."}
{"id": "557961", "text": "\"Firstly, if a stock costs $50 this second, the bid/ask would have to be 49/50.  If the bid/ask were 49/51, the stock would cost $51 this second.  What you're likely referring to is the last trade, not the cost.  The last trading price is history and doesn't apply to future transactions. To make it simple, let's define a simple order book.  Say there is a bid to buy 100 at $49, 200 at $48, 500 at $47.  If you place a market order to sell 100 shares, it should all get filled at $49.  If you had placed a market order to sell 200 shares instead, half should get filled at $49 and half at $48.  This is, of course, assuming no one else places an order before you get yours submitted.  If someone beats you to the 100 share lot, then your order could get filled at lower than what you thought you'd get.  If your internet connection is slow or there is a lot of latency in the data from the exchange, then things like this could happen.  Also, there are many ECNs in addition to the exchanges which may have different order books.  There are also trades which, for some reason, get delayed and show up later in the \"\"time and sales\"\" window. But to answer the question of why someone would want to sell low... the only reason I could think is they desire to drive the price down.\""}
{"id": "558057", "text": "yes.   you can take out 500,000 form your paid of house.  you pay back 500,000 at 3.5. percent.       you do get a tax break for not owning your house.  it is less then 3.5 you are paying back the back. about one forth of that, BUT you take the 500,000 in invest.   Now cd low 1 percent,  stock is risky.    You can do REIT, with are about 8 to 12  every year. so even at 8 - tax 1.5 is 6.5 - 3.5 bank loan.  that   3 percent on your 500,000 thousand, plus tax break, but that only at 8 percent.      or 500,000 and buy a apartment building, again about 7 to 10 percent,   so that 2 to 3 percent profit, but the building goes up over years."}
{"id": "558130", "text": "How do (index and active) mutual funds trade? Do they buy stocks as soon as a I buy a share in the mutual fund, or do they have fixed times they trade, such as once every week/month/quarter?   Is it theoretical possible for someone to front run mutual funds, if someone holds individual stocks? Let's say an institutional investor creates an order of $100m in a mutual fund, how likely can a broker, which holds a fraction of the fund's portfolio, front run and take advantage of that trade? It is more likely to front run that fund if it's an active small cap fund, but how likely is it to front run trades for index funds?"}
{"id": "558233", "text": "I've been offered a package that includes 100k stock options at 5 dollars a share. They vest over 4 years at 25% a year. Does this mean that at the end of the first year, I'm supposed to pay for 25,000 shares? Wouldn't this cost me 125,000 dollars? I don't have this kind of money. At the end of the first year, you will generally have the option to pay for the shares. Yes, this means you have to use your own money. You generally dont have to buy ANY until the whole option vests, after 4 years in your case, at which point you either buy, or you are considered 'vested' (you have equity in the company without buying) or the option expires worthless, with you losing your window to buy into the company. This gives you plenty of opportunity to evaluate the company's growth prospects and viability over this time. Regarding options expiration the contract can have an arbitrarily long expiration date, like 17 years. You not having the money or not isn't a consideration in this matter. Negotiate a higher salary instead. I've told several companies that I don't want their equity despite my interest in their business model and product. YMMV.   Also, options can come with tax consequences, or none at all. its not a raw deal but you need to be able to look at it objectively."}
{"id": "558542", "text": "One reason this happens is due to dividends. If the dividend amount is greater than the time value left on a call, it can make sense to exercise early to collect the dividend.  Deep in the money puts also may get exercised early. There's usually little premium on a deep in the money put and the spread on the bid-ask might erase what little premium there is. If you have stock worth $5,000 but own puts on them that will give you $50,000 upon exercise (and no spread to worry about), the interest you can gain on the $50k might be more than the little to no time value left on the position... even at several weeks to expiration."}
{"id": "558618", "text": "What taxes will I have to pay to India?  Income earned outside of India when your status is Non-Resident Indian, there is no tax applicable. You can repatriate the funds back to India within 7 years without any tax event. Someone else may put an answer about US taxes."}
{"id": "558742", "text": "Back of the envelope calculation: 30K limit, 5 year draw, 5 year post draw payback. Int 6% a year, 3% minimum payment. Borrow 5K at the start of the draw period, make the minimum payment for the next 5 years. At the end of 5 years still owe approximately $1123, and have paid ~775 in interest. Borrow 5K at the start of the draw period, make the minimum payment for the next 5 years but borrow the money from the line of credit. At the end of 5 years still  owe approximately $6711, and have paid ~1711 in interest. The bank loves you. The balance grows instead of decreases. That growing balance become pur profit. Of course you are good for it, because you never came anywhere near the maximum limit of 30K.  This is a variation of somebody tapping the line of credit to invest it, then discovering that it is hard to make enough money to make it worthwhile.   Detailed scenario:"}
{"id": "558832", "text": "I would say you can file your taxes on your own, but you will probably want the advice of an accountant if you need any supplies or tools for the side business that might be tax deductible. IIRC you don't have to tell your current employer for tax reasons (just check that your contract doesn't state you can't have a side job or business), but I believe you'll have to tell HMRC. At the end of the year you'll have to file a tax return and at that point in time you'll have to pay the tax on the additional earnings. These will be taxed at your highest tax rate and you might end up in a higher tax bracket, too. I'd put about 40% away for tax, that will put you on the safe side in case you end up in the high tax bracket; if not, you'll have a bit of money going spare after paying your taxes."}
{"id": "558921", "text": "Answers here are correct but I'll offer an extremely (overly) simple explanation that should help you in understanding the more detailed answers.  When most people own stock they do so through a broker.  Unless you jump through some hoops, the broker keeps the shares in the name of the brokerage.  This is called holding the stock in street name. When you sell short through a brokerage, the broker is letting you borrow a certain number of shares owned by someone else and sell them for cash now.  At some point, you need to repay this loan with the same number of shares you borrowed.  Ideally, you want the stock to drop to $0.  The reason you might be forced to purchase the stock is that the actual owner(s) of the stock want to sell.  If the broker has too many people wanting to sell, you will need to repay some of all of the loan (in shares) i.e. purchasing shares at the current market price."}
{"id": "559157", "text": "\"Bonds are priced \"\"very high\"\" because their price is compared to their yields. With the current interest rates, which are very low, the bond yields will be low. However, bond issuers still need the money, so there still will be high par value, and investors will not sell bonds at a loss unless there's a better investment (=bonds with better yields). Once the rates start going up, you'll see bonds with current rates dropping in value significantly. Once alternatives appear, people holding them will start dumping them to move the money somewhere more profitable. Similarly the stocks - since there's no other investment alternatives (yields on the bonds are low, interests are low), people invest more in the stocks. Once the rates go up, the investors will start rebalancing portfolios and cashing out.\""}
{"id": "559168", "text": "\"So, there is no truly \"\"correct\"\" way to calculate return.  Professionals will often calculate many different rates of return depending on what they wish to understand about their portfolio.  However, the two most common ways of calculating multi-period return though are time-weighted return and money-weighted return. I'll leave the details to this good Investopeadia article, but the big picture is time-weighted returns help you understand how the stock performed during the period in question independent of how you invested it it.  Whereas money-weighted return helps you understand how you performed investing in the stock in question.  From your question, it appears both methods would be useful in combination to help you evaluate your portfolio. Both methods should be fairly easy to calculate yourself in a spread sheet, but if you are interested there are plenty of examples of both in google docs on the web.\""}
{"id": "559198", "text": "I think your comment sounded a lot more reasonable and aware of how it goes than the writer; and yes it does makes sense that for little investors like retailers, there is not really a point to consider it, as you said. I don't think it redeems the article at all."}
{"id": "559436", "text": "The ex-dividend date, prevents this, but people are still able to do this and this is an investment strategy. There are some illiquid and immature markets where prices don't adjust.  In the options market people are able to find mispriced deep in the money calls to take advantage of the ex-dividend date. It is called dividend capture using covered calls."}
{"id": "559654", "text": "If your new employer has a Final Salary or defined benefit type pension scheme, join it. DB plans are attractive because they are often less a risk for the employee. If your employer has a defined contribution scheme and contributes to it, join it and contribute at least up to the maximum amount that they will match \u2013 otherwise you are leaving free money on the table. You also probably need to sit down with an independent adviser for what to do with your existing pension (is it a DC or DB) and if you want to have a pension outside of your employer."}
{"id": "559718", "text": "It's generally a bad idea to use low-risk credit (low-risk in sense you're practically guaranteed to be forced to pay it off) to buy high-risk shares. In optimistic scenario, the profit from shares would be higher than your credit percentages. In less optimistic scenario you come with nothing. In worse scenario you have worthless shares and another credit to pay.  If your only problem is the non-profitable property, you can always sell it and get rid of negative cash flow. It won't affect your quality of life negatively. In your high-risk scenario you trade the opportunity for a bit better life with for a risk of turning it into disaster for you and your family."}
{"id": "559768", "text": "\"What you are seeking is termed \"\"Alpha\"\", the mispricing in the market. Specifically, Alpha is the price error when compared to the market return and beta of the stock. Modern portfolio theory suggests that a portfolio with good Alpha will maximize profits for a given risk tolerance. The efficient market hypotheses suggests that Alpha is always zero. The EMH also suggests that taxes, human effort and information propagation delays don't exist (i.e. it is wrong). For someone who is right, the best specific answer to your question is presented Ben Graham's book \"\"The Intelligent Investor\"\" (starting on page 280). And even still, that book is better summarized by Warren Buffet (see Berkshire Hathaway Letters to Shareholders). In a great disservice to the geniuses above it can be summarized much further: closely follow the company to estimate its true earnings potential... and ignore the prices the market is quoting. ADDENDUM: And when you have earnings potential, calculate value with: NPV = sum(each income piece/(1+cost of capital)^time) Update: See http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/02/24/warren-buffett-berkshire-letter/ \"\"When Charlie Munger and I buy stocks...\"\" for these same ideas right from the horse's mouth\""}
{"id": "559866", "text": "Generally speaking no person or program is really going to be able to help you lower your current tax burden, most tax decisions are done well before you reach the tax time. You either qualify for the deduction/credit or your don't. Where a good accountant will really be able to help you out is in planning that will limit your future tax burden. Particularly if you run a small business or are very wealthy you will probably want to consider using an accountant. I would always avoid the large scale tax prep places like HR Block they provide the same or lower quality service for a higher price than the software. I run a small business and do my own taxes using turbo tax, but my business isn't overly complex Sole prop, no employees, couple 1099's simple expenses (nothing to amortize) etc."}
{"id": "560087", "text": "\"Assuming its in the US: No, it is not, and such things are usually treated as \"\"red flags\"\" for audit (and no, golf club memberships are not deductible either). The food expenses are not deductible in their entirety as well, only up to 50% of the actual expense, and only if it is directly business related. From what you've described, it sounds like if you have an audit coming you'll be in trouble. The purposes and activities of a club, not its name, will determine   whether or not you can deduct the dues. You cannot deduct dues paid   to: Country clubs, Golf and athletic clubs, Airline clubs, Hotel clubs, and Clubs operated to provide meals under circumstances generally considered to be conducive to business discussions.\""}
{"id": "560208", "text": "\"Often in life we have to choose the lesser of evils.  Whole Life as an investment vs. Term Life and invest the difference is one of these times. I assume the following statement is true. \"\"The commissions on whole life are sick. The selling agent gets upward of 90% of your first year's premium.\"\" But how does that compare to investing in mutual funds (as one alternative)?   Well according to Vanguard the average mutual fund keeps 60% of the total returns over the average investors lifetime. And of course income taxes (on withdrawal) consume another 30% (or more) of the dollars you withdraw (from a tax deferred retirement plan like a 401k.) http://www.fool.com/School/MutualFunds/Performance/Record.htm So you have to pick your poison and make the choice that fits your view of the future. Personally I don't believe my cost of living in retirement will be radically lower than my cost of living while working. Additionally I believe income tax rates will be higher in the future than the in the present and so deferring taxes (like a 401k) doesn't make sense to me.  (In 1980 a 401k made sense when the average 401k participant was paying over 50% in federal income tax and also got a pension.) So paying 90% of my first year's premium rather than 60% of my gains over my lifetime seems acceptable.  And borrowing tax free against my life insurance once retired (with no intention of paying it back) will, I believe, provide greater income than a 401k could.\""}
{"id": "560340", "text": "It depends where you are going to live and how you are going to pay for your new accommodation. If you are moving within the UK and intend to buy another house you run into the problem that you will find it hard to get a second mortgage. If you rent out the house in Kent you will probably have to change the mortgage basis on it to a mortgage that allows for letting - normal residential mortgages exclude that entirely - which would allow you to take out a residential mortgage. It depends how much equity you have in the house. If most of the value of the house is mortgaged then you'll (1) find it hard to re mortgage on a commercial mortgage (2) may find it hard to cover the costs by letting and (3) are very sensitive to house prices falling. Also bear in mind that for the past three months in a row, house prices in the UK have mostly either stagnated or fallen... so you cannot guarantee any increase in value of the house in Kent. What I'm saying is ... there is no crystal ball that will tell you what's financially the best thing to do. Talk to estate agents, find out how much the house would sell for / how much it would rent for. Talk to your mortgage lender and find out if they will let you rent it out. Talk to other mortgage lenders and find out how much a commercial mortgage would cost. Do the sums, find out if renting the house would cover the costs, in which case you can gamble on the housing market continuing to rise. Don't rely on house prices continuing to rise as they have done before. Certainly where I live due to the number of new houses being built and other economic issues house prices have fallen appreciably over the past few months and may well continue to fall as more and more new houses come on the market."}
{"id": "560380", "text": "It is generally best to avoid such situations. Any credits to your accounts need to be explained to tax authorities whenever they enquire.  This cannot be treated as income as you did not work in exchange for the amount. It can be treated by tax authorities as GIFT. Gift upto certain amount is tax free. Beyond the amount its taxable. Gifts from close relatives has not amount limit and is tax free. Whenever the scrutiny happens, if you can convince the tax authorities that the action was more for convenience, it maybe fine."}
{"id": "560776", "text": "\"Earned income is what your software is doing, so it is taxable.  So you can't really make it tax exempt. You can form a business and claim the revenues from that business as income and deduct expenses it costs you to earn that revenue.  If you buy a server to run your software, then that is an acceptable expense to deduct from your revenues.  Others can be more questionable and the best thing to do is to consult a CPA.   If you are still in the testing stage and the revenues will be small then it should not matter.  Worry about the important things, not if you paid the IRS a few hundred to much. Are you in a state/country that allows online gambling?  In most states here in the US you are operating on shaky legal ground.  Before \"\"Black Friday\"\" I used to earn a nice part-time income playing online poker.\""}
{"id": "561056", "text": "you should always invest if your investment rate of return is higher   than your interest rate Your next line, about standard deviation is dead on.  There are too many variables to give an exact answer here, in my opinion. The main reason is that one variable isn't easy to quantify - One's risk tolerance.  Clearly, there's one extreme, the 18% credit card. Unless you are funding loanshark type rates of 2%/week, it's safe to say that 18% debt should take priority over any investments, except for the matched 401(k) deposits.  What I think you're talking about is something we've addressed here in multiple threads.  Do I prepay my sub 4% mortgage or invest? In this case, (and to Noah's comment) the question is whether you can expect a post-tax return of over 3% during your time horizon. I look at the return for 15 years from 1998-2013 and see a 6% CAGR for the S&P. I chose 15 years, as the choice is often one of paying a 30 year mortgage faster, as fast as 15. The last 15 years offer a pretty bad scenario, 2 crashes and a mortgage crisis. 6% after long term gains would get you 5.1% net.  You can pull the data back to 1871 and run CAGR numbers for the timeframe of your choosing. I haven't done it yet, but I imagine there's no 15 year span that lags the 3% target I cite.  What makes it more complex is that the investment isn't lump sum. It may not be obvious, but CAGR is a dollar invested at T=0, and returns calculated to T=final year. It would take a bit of spreadsheeting to invest the extra funds every month/year over your period of analysis.  In the end, there are still those who will choose to pay off their 4% mortgage regardless of what the numbers show. Even if the 15 year result showed worst case 3.5% (almost no profit) and an average 10%, the feeling of risk is more than many will want."}
{"id": "561123", "text": "\"While you would probably not use your ATM card to buy a $1M worth mansion, I've heard urban legends about people who bought a house on a credit card. While can't say its reliable, I wouldn't be surprised that some have actual factual basis. I myself had put a car down-payment on my credit card, and had I paid the sticker price, the dealer would definitely have no problem with putting the whole car on the credit card (and my limits would allow it, even for a luxury brand). The instruments are the same. There's nothing special you need to have to pay a million dollars. You just write a lot of zeroes on your check, but you don't need a special check for that. Large amounts of money are transferred electronically (wire-transfers), which is also something that \"\"regular\"\" people do once or twice in their lives. What might be different is the way these purchases are financed. Rich people are not necessarily rich with cash. Most likely, they're rich with equity: own something that's worth a lot. In this case, instead of a mortgage secured by the house, they can take a loan secured by the stocks they own. This way, they don't actually cash out of the investment, yet get cash from its value. It is similarly to what we, regular mortals, do with our equity in primary residence and HELOCs. So it is not at all uncommon that a billionaire will in fact have tons of money owed in loans. Why? Because the billions owned are owned through stock valuation, and the cash used is basically a loan secured by these stocks. It might happen that the stocks securing the loans become worthless, and that will definitely be a problem both to the (now ex-)billionaire and the bank. But until then, they can get cash from their investment without cashing out and without paying taxes. And if they're lucky enough to die before they need to repay the loans - they saved tons on money on taxes.\""}
{"id": "561377", "text": "I don't understand the logic in the other answer, and I think it doesn't make sense, so here is my take: You pay taxes on income, not on sales price. So if you put X $ of your own money in the account and it becomes X + Y $ in the future, at the moment of liquidation, you will own taxes on the Y $. Never on the X $, as it was your own (already taxed) money to begin with. The difference between long-term and short-term gains just influences the tax rate on Y. If you donate the gain alone (the Y $) to charity, you can deduct Y from your tax base. So adding Y to your tax base and then deducting Y again obviously leaves your tax base at the old value, so you pay no extra taxes. Which seems logical, as you didn't make any money in the process. Aside from extreme cases where the deductible gain is too large a percentage from your income or negative, I don't see why this would ever be different. So you can take your original 100 $ back out and donate all gains, and be fine. Note that potential losses are seen different, as the IRA regulations are not symmetric."}
{"id": "561764", "text": "Publication 17 Your Income Tax top of page 14 If the direct deposit cannot be done, the IRS will send a check instead. When your girlfriend gets the check, she can endorse it over to you for deposit into your account."}
{"id": "561832", "text": "Young folks and students are more likely to be overdrawn on accounts, which is ridiculously expensive. Use a program like GNUcash to anticipate all your expenses. You can enter future dated transactions, and it will show you future minimum balances. Negative future minimum balances are of course, the thing you need to worry about. This is especially important as you'll have a mix of large upfront costs (tuition, books), large upfront receivables (student loans, grants), recurring expenses (food, rent, beer), and perhaps recurring income from a part time job. Software helps you record all the nuances to this system so that you can see how much the typical 'friday night fun' will bankrupt you."}
{"id": "561884", "text": "Successful covered calls are short term capital gains. The amount of time you have owned the underlying security is irrelevant. The gain occurred in the option period which will be an amount of days less than needed for a long term capital gain classification. Failed Covered calls can be either as the date you acquired the stock you are forced to sell determines their classification."}
{"id": "561999", "text": "\"You cannot get \"\"your investment\"\" out and \"\"leave only the capital gains\"\" until they become taxable at the long-term rate. When you sell some shares after holding them for less than a year, you have capital gains on which you will have to pay taxes at the short-term capital gains rate (that is, at the same rate as ordinary income).  As an example, if you bought 100 shares at $70 for a net investment of $7000, and sell 70 of them at $100 after five months to get your \"\"initial investment back\"\", you will have short-term capital gains of $30 per share on the 70 shares that you sold and so you have to pay tax on that $30x70=$2100. The other $4900 = $7000-$2100 is \"\"tax-free\"\" since it is just your purchase price of the 70 shares being returned to you.  So after paying the tax on your short-term capital gains, you really don't have your  \"\"initial investment back\"\"; you have something less. The capital gains on  the 30 shares that you continue to hold will become (long-term capital gains) income to you only when you sell the shares after having held them for a full year or more: the gains on the shares sold after five months are taxable income in the year of sale.\""}
{"id": "562110", "text": "It's a race to the bottom. Use raising debt ceiling will mean moe helicopter money. Euro is also buying bonds. Uk is idiots having no clue what they're doing so it's also going down. You just have to spread risk to fight inflation and avoid a crash if it happens"}
{"id": "562137", "text": "Sensationalist much? The economy has picked back up, people are optimistic about the future, more secure with their jobs, and thus debts of all sorts should be increasing. The question is how much can be handled before collapse? Well, from this article's own admission default rates and delinquencies are at historic lows. The 1t in debt means nothing without the context."}
{"id": "562220", "text": "A value of zero or a negative value makes the percent change meaningless. Saying 100% when going from 0 to some other value is simply wrong. I have seen a similar situation several times when looking at a public company with a loss last quarter. On Google Finance or some other service, the PE ratio will be blank, N/A, or something like that. If the company does not currently have earnings, then the PE ratio is meaningless. Likewise, if the company previously did not have earnings, then the percent change of the earnings is meaningless. Also consider the example where the previous value was negative. If the previous value was negative 1 and the current value is positive 99, then this happens: A negative change? But the value went up! Obviously that value does not make sense and should not be shown."}
{"id": "562305", "text": "\"The goal of the single-fund with a retirement date is that they do the rebalancing for you.   They have some set of magic ratios (specific to each fund) that go something like this: Note: I completely made up those numbers and asset mix. When you invest in the \"\"Mutual-Fund Super Account 2025 fund\"\" you get the benefit that in 2015 (10 years until retirement) they automatically change your asset mix and when you hit 2025, they do it again.   You can replace the functionality by being on top of your rebalancing. That being said, I don't think you need to exactly match the fund choices they provide, just research asset allocation strategies and remember to adjust them as you get closer to retirement.\""}
{"id": "562412", "text": "According to Money Girl, home insurance premiums are higher if you have a poor credit score. You might self-insure though if you are wealthy."}
{"id": "562481", "text": "No, the reinvestment is done as a courtesy. Consider, one can have, say, 100 shares of a $50 stock. A 2% dividend is $100/yr or $25/quarter. It would be a pretty bad deal if brokers charged you even $5 for that trade. When cap gains and dividends are grouped as you suggest, it refers to Mutual Funds. My funds will have a year end dividend and cap gain distribution. In a non-retirement account, one has to pay the tax due, and be sure to add this to your cost basis, as it's money you are effectively adding to your account. It does not mean cap gain the same as when you sell your shares of Apple for a huge gain.  Those check boxes seem to offer you a chance to put all your holding on the same reinvestment plan for div/cap gain. You should also be able to choose one by one what you'd like to do."}
{"id": "562489", "text": "\"Your decision about which of these investments to make is going to depend on how long you expect to leave the money in the account. For example, based on the figures you give us, if you think you are going to want to withdraw the money in three months or less then you should chose the savings account.  For ten months or more you should choose the Fixed Deposit. (As Michael Kjorling says, \"\"flexible to withdraw at any time\"\" does not mean you won't pay penalties for withdrawing early that's why you shouldn't choose the longer term deposits if you want to withdraw earlier). That's the simplest approach. The trouble of course is that you don't necessarily know how long you are going to leave the money in. If you are saving for a house, and you know you won't want to buy in the next year, the 12 month deposit looks good. But what if your car suddenly needs repairs? You would have to withdraw that money early and pay the penalties, and it turns out you would have been better of putting it in the savings account. A good approach is:\""}
{"id": "562584", "text": "I feel the change should not be to remove the stigma from personal default. It should be to add it, in very large amounts, to corporate default. Every member of a defaulting corporation should be ashamed to be seen in public. The have let their culture down and should be mortified.  So if you defaulted on your mortgage, yeah, that's not great. If you're Donald Trump, that filed 11 a couple times, he can go fuck himself."}
{"id": "562896", "text": "You must understand that not everyone has or can get credit cards. Consider that those who are in the the lowest 20-30% of income tend to have fewer credit cards (or none), and lower credit debt, although some have quite high credit card debt relative to their income.  So you really aren't comparing the same demographics (the population of all income earners, used to calculate average income, and the population of all credit card debt holders, are not the same groups of people). Once you remove those folks from consideration, then credit card usage may still average higher, but accept that it is unusual for people making less than $20K-30K/year to have much credit card debt. You must understand that wealth and income are two very different (although related) concepts. One must note that there are millions of people in the U.S. who have wealth; they have net assets of over $1M (excluding their homes). Many of those folks have assets greatly exceeding $1M. And although it might seem foolish to carry a large balance on their credit cards, they may have quite low interest rates, and simply find it simpler and more convenient to use credit cards in lieu of personal loans.  Suppose you have $2M in net assets, and want to buy a classic car or a diamond necklace.  Charging $30K and carrying the balance until a dividend check arrives may make sense. Understand also that not everyone makes the same choices, or good choices. Carrying a credit card balance may appear like a poor choice, especially when you are not wealthy, or have lower income. But suppose you have a high credit limit across several cards, and you need to handle a short-term financial challenge (car repair, layoff, medical bills, etc).  You might use the credit card to pay for that purchase, essentially financing an extraordinary event over a longer period of time.  And although having a balance of more than 5-10% of your monthly income may seem foolish to some, it may make sense to others. And some people choose to carry balances of 50% to 100% of their credit limit.  Others realize that keeping their credit utilization below 30%, 20%, or 10% of the credit limit is a better plan (both interest rate and risk wise)."}
{"id": "562934", "text": "Congratulations on saving up $75,000.  That requires discipline and tenacity.  There are a lot of factors that would go into making your decision.   First and foremost is the security of the income stream you have now.  Being leveraged during times of hardship is not a pleasant experience.  Unexpected job losses can and do happen.  Only you can determine how secure your and your spouse's situation is.   Second, I would consider the job market in the location that you live.  If you live in a small town it will be hard to find income levels like you have now.  Rental properties are additional ties to an area.  Are you happy in the area in which you live?  If you were laid off are there opportunities in the same area.  Being a long distance landlord is again not a pleasant experience.  I can throw being forced to sell to relocate at a reduced price into this same bucket. Third, you need to have 3 to 6 months of expenses saved for emergencies.  This is in addition to having no consumer debt (credit cards, car loans, student loans).  $75,000 feels like a lot.  Life can throw you curve balls.  You need to be prepared for them because of the fundamental nature of Murphy's Law.  If you were to be a landlord you should err closer to the six month end of the scale.  I own two rentals and can speak to people being late a given month, heating and air problems, plumbing issues, washers and dryers breaking, weather related issues, and even a tenant leaving behind for truckloads of trash.  Over 20 years I guess I have seen it all.  A rental agency will only act as a minor buffer.   Fourth, your family situation is important.  I personally save 10% of my income for my child's education.  If you haven't started doing so or have different feelings on what you might contribute think about it before any financial move. Fifth, any mortgage payment you are making should be 25% or less than your take home pay for a 15 year fixed rate mortgage.  Anything less than 20% down and you start burning up money on PMI insurance.  'House Poor' is a term for people that make high incomes but have too much being spent for housing.  It is the cause of a lot of financial stress. Sixth, you need to save for retirement.  The absolute minimum I recommend is 15% of your income.  Even if the match is 6% you should invest the full 15% making it 21%.  Social Security is a scary thing and depending on it is not wise.  I think your income still qualifies you for contributions to a Roth IRA.  If you aren't personally contributing 15% do so before making a move. There is an old joke that homeless people who have a 0 net worth often are richer than people driving fancy cars and living in fancy houses.  Ultimately no one can tell you the right answer.  Every situation is unique.  You have a complex tapestry to your financial life that no else one knows."}
{"id": "562957", "text": "If you qualify for the safe harbor, you are not required to pay additional quarterly taxes.  Of course, you're still welcome to do so if you're sure you'll owe them; however, you will not be penalized. If your income is over $150k (joint) or $75k (single), your safe harbor is: Estimated tax safe harbor for higher income taxpayers. If your 2014 adjusted gross income was more than $150,000 ($75,000 if you are married filing a separate return), you must pay the smaller of 90% of your expected tax for 2015 or 110% of the tax shown on your 2014 return to avoid an estimated tax penalty. Generally, if you're under that level, the following reasons suggest you will not owe the tax (from the IRS publication 505): The total of your withholding and timely estimated tax payments was at least as much as your 2013 tax. (See Special rules for certain individuals for higher income taxpayers and farmers and fishermen.) The tax balance due on your 2014 return is no more than 10% of your total 2014 tax, and you paid all required estimated tax payments on time. Your total tax for 2014 (defined later) minus your withholding is less than $1,000. You did not have a tax liability for 2013. You did not have any withholding taxes and your current year tax (less any household employment taxes) is less than $1,000. If you paid one-fourth of your last year's taxes (or of 110% of your last-year's taxes) in estimated taxes for each quarter prior to this one, you should be fine as far as penalties go, and can simply add the excess you know you will owe to the next check."}
{"id": "563025", "text": "In view of business, we have to book the entries. Business view, owner and business are different. When capital is invested in business by owner, in future business has to repay it.  That's why, capital always credit. When we come about  bank (business prospective) - cash, bank, fd are like assets which can help in the business. Bank is current asset (Real account) - Debit (what comes into the business)                                        Credit (what goes out of the business) Hence credit and debit differs from what type of account is it.... credit - when business liables debit - what business has and receivables"}
{"id": "563446", "text": "Diversification and convenience: Is .15-0.35% fee worth it? It depends on your net worth, amount you invest and value of your time (if you have high net worth and low cost of your time the fee is highier then in case when you have low net worth but high cost of time - so Betterment seems to be a better option to young professional just after college then to someone already retired), your interest in finance, your willpower etc. Is Betterment allocation better then pure SPY? From what I understand about finance theory - yes. EDIT (as requested) I don't have any affiliation with any financial institution as far as I know. I opened it to get used to just investing as oppose to saving and ups and downs of market (and read up on the portfolio management, especially index funds) and I guess it worked well for me. I plan to move out entirely out of it once the cost of the account would be more then paying for a few coffees and move the account to Vanguard, Schwab or something similar.  In other accounts (HSA/...) I use simpler portfolio then the Betterment one (US Total, Small Value, Developed, Emerging and Bonds) but there are people who use simpler (search for 3 fund portfolio)."}
{"id": "563627", "text": "This sounds like it makes no difference if you behave in the same manner (i.e. take the same vacation time). For example, say you work 1 hour and take 1 hour of vacation and the current hourly rate is $1/hour.  You would make $2. Using your formula, new rate = 1* (1+1)/1 = 1*2 = $2.  So they would pay you $2 for the hour you worked and then you would take the 1 hour of vacation with no pay. If you plan on taking LESS vacation than used in the formula, you make more money.  If you plan on taking MORE vacation, you make less money."}
{"id": "564037", "text": "*Volatility and the VIX can be very tricky to trade.  In particular, going out longer than a month can result in highly surprising outcomes because the VIX is basically always a one month snapshot, even when the month is out in the future."}
{"id": "564271", "text": "gnasher729, was able to see my problem here. It was a silly oversight. It's not 50p a share, its 0.5p a share. @Bezzzo: The dividend is not 50p per share, it is 0.50p per share -   half a penny per share. Thanks!"}
{"id": "564408", "text": "\"Assuming the numbers in your comments are accurate, you have $2400/month \"\"extra\"\" after paying your expenses.  I assume this includes loan payments. You said you have $3k in savings and a $2900 \"\"monthly nut\"\", so only one month of living expenses in savings. In my opinion, your first goal should be to put 100% of your extra money towards savings each month, until you have six months of living expenses saved.  That's $2,900 * 6 or $17,400.  Since you have $3K already that means you need $14,400 more, which is exactly six months @ $2,400/month. Next I would pay off your $4K for the bedroom furniture.  I don't know the terms you got, but usually if you are not completely paid off when it comes time to pay interest, the rate is very high and you have to pay interest not just going forward, but from the inception of the loan (YMMV--check your loan terms). You may want to look into consolidating your high interest loans into a single loan at a lower rate.  Barring that, I would put 100% of my extra monthly income toward your 10% loan until its paid off, and then your 9.25% loan until that's paid off.  I would not consider investing in any non-tax-advantaged vehicle until those two loans (at minimum) were paid off.  9.25% is a very good guaranteed return on your money. After that I would continue the strategy of aggressively paying the maximum per month toward your highest interest loans until they are all paid off (with the possible exception of the very low rate Sallie Mae loans).  However, I'm probably more conservative than your average investor, and I have a major aversion to paying interest.  :)\""}
{"id": "564554", "text": "I think a greater problem would be the protection of your property right.  China hasn't shown much respect for the property rights of its own citizens - moving people off subsistence farms in order to build high-rise apartments - so I'm not certain that a foreigner could expect much protection.  A first consideration in any asset purchase should always be consideration of the strength of local property law.  By all accounts, China fails."}
{"id": "564759", "text": "\"You cannot dump $450K of cash into any type of retirement account. Retirement accounts have maximum annual contribution limits and earned income requirements.  If the $450K is already in a retirement account you may be able to \"\"rollover\"\" these funds into a different type of account. I personally invest in dividend paying stocks and recommend the strategy for just about everyone. $450K earning 4% in dividends would generate ~$18K in annual dividends the first year and, compounded, would generate ~$220K in dividends over a 10-year period. All this being said, I am not a registered professional of any kind and you should consult a professional before making any decisions. And yes, I know this question is from 2012 :)\""}
{"id": "564787", "text": "\"I have been considering a similar situation for a while now, and the advice i have been given is to use a concept called \"\"dollar cost averaging\"\", which basically amounts to investing say 10% a month over 10 months, resulting in your investment getting the average price over that period. So basically, option 3.\""}
{"id": "564983", "text": "\"Several people here have highlighted the incentive/agency problems that tend to naturally arise when securitizing mortgages. However, the market for mortgage-backed securities has existed for decades, and during most of that time these agency problems were held in check. Moreover, academics knew about this problem even before the credit crisis and actually *recommended* the use of trenching in order to avoid the moral hazard problems associated with securitization (see DeMarzo 2005).  So, to give a compelling historical explanation for why the crisis happened *when* it did, you need to explain what changed in the mortgage securitization market to enable these previously unproblematic agency relationships to breakdown.  So what changed? In short, the growth of the market for CDOs (collateralized debt obligations) composed of mortgage-backed securities), and not the MBS market itself. This market grew so rapidly in the mid-2000s because the ratings agencies created an opportunity for banks to take low-rated MBS debt and give it a higher rating by merely repackaging it into a CDO. It was ratings arbitrage, through and through. Explanations that place the brunt of the blame on the GSAs (i.e. Fannie and Freddie) cannot adequately explain why the majority of mortgage-related losses during the credit crisis were concentrated in CDOs of MBSs, and not in the vanilla MBS market.  Here's what happened. Back in the day -- say, pre-early 2000s -- the agency/incentive problems that naturally arise in mortgage securitization were held in check by careful institutional investors who would rigorously assess the default risk of the higher-risk MBS tranches. They had a deep knowledge of the mortgage business. Sometimes they would even go so far as manually examining the loan documentation, the profile of the borrowers, the quality of the collateral, and so on. There were a lot of indiscriminating buyers who were happy to purchase the AAA and AA tranches, but they could afford to be indiscriminating because the banks who were securitizing MBSs knew that without selling to the discriminating buyers of higher-risk debt, they wouldn't be able to break even.   It worked a bit like a market for fine wines. I don't know much about wine, but when I walk into a shop that sells fine wines, I can be reasonably certain that there will be a reasonably strong relationship between price and the quality of the wine. Basically, I get to free-ride off the superior discrimination of the wine connoisseurs who regularly visit the shop.  Once the ratings agencies created the now infamous \"\"ratings arbitrage\"\" between the MBS and CDO markets, the market for CDOs on MBSs expanded. As this market grew, these \"\"discriminating\"\" buyers became a proportionally smaller part of the MBS market. The folks building CDOs of MBSs didn't know very much about the mortgage business itself; instead, they tended to rely on statistical default models provided by the ratings agencies that predicted the probability of mortgage default based on quantitative variables such as borrowers' credit scores, loan-to-value ratios, etc.   The problem is that these models used historical data that was collected back when the \"\"discriminating\"\" institutional investors kept the agency problems in the MBS market in check. The growth of the CDO market spurred even more mortgage securitization, which led lending standards to deteriorate because firms like Countrywide knew that the CDO buyers only cared about credit scores, LTV ratios, etc. However, undiscriminating buyers of MBS were unable to detect these changes in default risk because the models they were using to \"\"see\"\" those changes were becoming invalidated by the growth of the CDO market itself  If you want to read more about this, I'd highly recommend MacKenzie's 2011 paper in the American Journal of Sociology [see here]( http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/36082/CrisisRevised.pdf). It's a detailed historical account of the changes in valuation practices/models used within the MBS and CDO markets, and how these practices became invalidated as the CDO market grew in size.  **TL;DR: the credit ratings created a \"\"ratings arbitrage\"\" that the banks took advantage of. They are as much, if not more, at fault as the GSAs.**  For more info on the deterioration in mortgage quality in the mid-2000s, check out:   Keys, Benjamin, Tanmoy Mukherjee, Amit Seru, and Vikrant Vig. 2008. Did Securitization Lead to Lax Screening? Evidence from Subprime Loans.  Rajan, Uday, Amit Seru, and Vikrant Vig. 2008. \u201cThe Failure of Models That Predict Failure: Distance, Incentives and Defaults.\u201d SSRN eLibrary (December). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1296982.  Also, the citation I mentioned above:  DeMarzo, P. (2005) \"\"The pooling and tranching of securities: a model of informed intermediation\"\" Review of Economic Studies, 18(1):1-35, 2005\""}
{"id": "565007", "text": "\"In this scenario the date of income is the date on which the contract has been signed, even if you received the actual money (settlement) later. Regardless of the NY special law for residency termination - that is the standard rule for recognition of income during a cash (not installments) sale. The fact that you got the actual money later doesn't matter, which is similar to selling stocks on a public exchange. When you sell stocks through your broker on a public exchange - you still recognize the income on the day of the sale, not on the day of the settlement. This is called \"\"the Constructive Receipt doctrine\"\". The IRS publication 538 has this to say about the constructive receipt: Constructive receipt.   Income is constructively received when an   amount is credited to your account or made available to you without   restriction. You need not have possession of it. If you authorize   someone to be your agent and receive income for you, you are   considered to have received it when your agent receives it. Income is   not constructively received if your control of its receipt is subject   to substantial restrictions or limitations. Once you signed the contract, the money has essentially been credited to your account with the counter-party, and unless they're bankrupt or otherwise insolvent - you have no restrictions over it. And also (more specifically for your case): You cannot hold checks or postpone taking possession of similar   property from one tax year to another to postpone paying tax on the   income. You must report the income in the year the property is   received or made available to you without restriction. Timing wire transfer is akin to holding and not depositing a check, from this perspective. So unless there was a restriction that was lifted after you moved out of New York, I doubt you can claim that you couldn't have received it before moving out, i.e.: you have, in fact, constructively received it.\""}
{"id": "565010", "text": "Are there any known laws explicitly allowing or preventing this   behavior? It's not the laws, it's what's in the note - the mortgage contract. I read my mortgage contracts very carefully to ensure that there's no prepayment penalty and that extra funds are applied to the principal. However, it doesn't have to be like that, and in older mortgages - many times it's not like that. Banks don't have to allow things that are not explicitly agreed upon in the contract. To the best of my knowledge there's no law requiring banks to allow what your friend wants."}
{"id": "565046", "text": "I agree. I have physical cash hidden in my house, a trick I learned from an elderly neighbor whose husband demanded they do it and it paid off for them twice. I have that and then will rely on credit if needed. My only question is if the statistic they mention is ALL savings or just what is in liquid assets."}
{"id": "565133", "text": "In the united states, they may request a check written by the bank to the other party. I have had to make large payments for home settlements, or buying a car. If the transaction was over a specified limit, they wanted a cashiers check. They wanted to make sure it wouldn't bounce.  I have had companies rebate me money, and say the maximum value of the check was some small value. I guess that was to prevent people from altering the check. One thing that has happened to me is that a large check I wanted to deposit was held for a few extra days to make sure it cleared. I wouldn't have access to the funds until the deadline passed."}
{"id": "565150", "text": "Matthew - what was the stock price and strike price of the option when you did this? I've never seen an at-the-money strike with only a month to run have a price 25% of the underlying stock. Jaydles covers the variables really well in his answer."}
{"id": "565226", "text": "It depends.  Very generally when yields go up stocks go down and when yields go down stocks go up (as has been happening lately). If we look at the yield of the 10 year bond it reflects future expectations for interest rates.  If the rate today is very low but expectations are that the short term rates will go up that would be reflected in a higher yield simply because no one would buy the longer term bond if they could simply wait out and get a better return on shoter term investments.  If expectations are that the rate is going down you get what's called an inverted yield curve.  The inverted yield curve is usually a sign of economic trouble ahead.  Yields are also influenced by inflation expectations as @rhaskett is alluding in his answer. So.  If the stock market crashes because the economy is doing poorly and if interest rates are relatively high then people would expect the rates to go down and therefore bonds will go up! However, if there's rampant inflation and the rates are going up we can expect stocks and bonds to move in opposite directions.  Another interpretation of that is that one would expect stock prices to track inflation pretty well because company revenue is going to go up with inflation.  If we're just talking about a bump in the road correction in a healthy economy I wouldn't expect that to have much of an immediate effect though bonds might go down a little bit in the short term but possibly even more in the long term as interest rates eventually head higher.  Another scenario is a very low interest rate environment (as today) with a stock market crash and not a lot of room for yields to go further down. Both stocks and bonds are influenced by current interest rates, interest rate expectations, current inflation, inflation expectations and stock price expectation.  Add noise and stir."}
{"id": "565356", "text": "The debt is absolutely real. China loans money to US via buying the US treasury bonds. The bond is essentially a promise to pay back the money with interest, just like a loan. As you point out, the US can print money. If this were to happen, then the USD that the owner of a treasury bond receives when the bond matures are worth less that than the USD used to purchase the bonds. There are lots of reasons why the US doesn't want to print lots of money, so the purchaser of the bond is probably confident it won't happen. If for some reason they think it is possible, then they will want to cover that risk by only purchasing bonds that have a higher interest rate. The higher interest offsets the risk of the USD being worth less. Of course, there are lots more details, e.g., the bonds themselves are bought and sold before maturity, but this is the basic idea."}
{"id": "565691", "text": "The assumption that house value appreciates 5% per year is unrealistic. Over the very long term, real house prices has stayed approximately constant. A house that is 10 years old today is 11 years old a year after, so this phenomenon of real house prices staying constant applies only to the market as a whole and not to an individual house, unless the individual house is maintained well. One house is an extremely poorly diversified investment. What if the house you buy turns out to have a mold problem? You can lose your investment almost overnight. In contrast to this, it is extremely unlikely that the same could happen on a well-diversified stock portfolio (although it can happen on an individual stock). Thus, if non-leveraged stock portfolio has a nominal return of 8% over the long term, I would demand higher return, say 10%, from a non-leveraged investment to an individual house because of the greater risks. If you have the ability to diversify your real estate investments, a portfolio of diversified real estate investments is safer than a diversified stock portfolio, so I would demand a nominal return of 6% over the long term from such a diversified portfolio. To decide if it's better to buy a house or to live in rental property, you need to gather all of the costs of both options (including the opportunity cost of the capital which you could otherwise invest elsewhere). The real return of buying a house instead of renting it comes from the fact that you do not need to pay rent, not from the fact that house prices tend to appreciate (which they won't do more than inflation over a very long term). For my case, I live in Finland in a special case of near-rental property where you pay 15% of the building cost when moving in (and get the 15% payment back when moving out) and then pay a monthly rent that is lower than the market rent. The property is subsidized by government-provided loans. I have calculated that for my case, living in this property makes more sense than purchasing a market-priced house, but your situation may be different."}
{"id": "565738", "text": "\"If I were in your shoes I'd probably take the Vanguard Total Market fund with Admiral shares, then worry about further diversification when there is more in the account. Many times when you \"\"diversify\"\" in to multiple funds you end up with a lot of specific security overlap.  A lot of the big S&P 500 constituents will be in all of them, etc.  So while the 10 or so basis points difference in expense ratio doesn't seem like enough of a reason NOT to spread in to multiple funds, once you split up the money between Large, Mid, Small cap funds and Growth, Value, Dividend funds you'll probably have a collection of holdings that looks substantially similar to a total market fund anyway. Unless you're looking for international or some specific industry segment exposure and all of the money is going to equities anyway, an inexpensive total market fund makes a lot of sense.\""}
{"id": "565765", "text": "I think you are mixing up forward looking statements with the actual results. The funds objective   The fund invests primarily in stocks that tend to offer current dividends. It focuses on high-quality companies that have prospects for long-term total returns as a result of their ability to grow earnings and their willingness to increase dividends over time Obviously in 1993 quite a few companies paid the dividends and hence VDIGX was able to give dividends. Over the period of years in some years its given more and in some years less. For example the Year 2000 it gave $ 1.26, 1999 it gave $ 1.71 and in 1998 it gave $ 1.87 The current economic conditions are such that companies are not making huge profts and the one's that are making prefer not to distribute dividends and hold on to cash as it would help survive the current economic conditions. So just to clarify this particular funds objective is to invest in companies that would give dividends which is then passed on to fund holders. This fund does not sell appreciated stocks to convert it into dividends."}
{"id": "566069", "text": "The simplest way is to invest in a few ETFs, depending on your tolerance for risk; assuming you're very short-term risk tolerant you can invest almost all in a stock ETF like VOO or VTI.  Stock market ETFs return close to 10% (unadjusted) over long periods of time, which will out-earn almost any other option and are very easy for a non-finance person to invest in (You don't trade actively - you leave the money there for years).  If you want to hedge some of your risk, you can also invest in Bond funds, which tend to move up in stock market downturns - but if you're looking for the long term, you don't need to put much there. Otherwise, try to make sure you take advantage of tax breaks when you can - IRAs, 401Ks, etc.; most of those will have ETFs (whether Vanguard or similar) available to invest in.  Look for funds that have low expense ratios and are fairly diversified (ie, don't just invest in one small sector of the economy); as long as the economy continues to grow, the ETFs will grow."}
{"id": "566184", "text": "\"Basically, you have purchased 25% of the condo for $40,000, and your parents bought 75% of the condo for another $115,000. We imagine for a moment that it wasn't you who lived in the condo, but some unrelated person paying rent.  You are paying $7,500 a year for tax and fees, plus $6,000 a year, so there is $13,500 leaving your wallet. If $15,500 a year was a reasonable rent, then the tax and fee would be paid out of that, there would be $8,000 left, of which you would get 25% = $2,000. If you were officially \"\"renting\"\" it, you would pay $15,500 a year, and get $2,000 back, again $13,500 leaving your wallet. So you are in exact the same situation financially as you would be if you paid $15,500 rent.   Question: Is $15,500 a year or $1,290 a month an appropriate rent for your condo? If a neighbour is renting his condo, is he or she paying $1,290 or more or less? Could you rent the same place for the same money? If $1,290 is the correct rent then you are fine. If the rent should be lower, then you are overpaying. If the rent should be higher, then you are making money.  Keep in mind that you will also be winning if rents go up in the future.\""}
{"id": "566190", "text": "Unless you are a member of the federal reserve. Guaranteed 7% baby.  Stocks and real estate during inflation,  then liquidate and still get solid returns while everyone is grasping at 4%. Come back next cycle and do it again."}
{"id": "566215", "text": "You overgeneralize too much.  Investors have their place and use.  Picking a few examples and make broad statements about a whole industry is just tiresome.  Of course they have something to gain, they are putting their money on the line.  This is capitalism, not altruism."}
{"id": "566573", "text": "The issue is the time frame. With a one year investment horizon the only way for a fund manager to be confident that they are not going to lose their shirt is to invest your money in ultra conservative low volatility investments. Otherwise a year like 2008 in the US stock market would break them. Note if you are willing to expand your payback time period to multiple years then you are essentially looking at an annuity and it's market loss rider. Of course those contacts are always structured such that the insurance company is extremely confident that they will be able to make more in the market than they are promising to pay back (multiple decade time horizons)."}
{"id": "566591", "text": "Simple Schwaab does not have actually your securities they have leased them out and have to borrow them back. all assets are linked with derivatives now. They show on the balance sheet but have to be untangled. Thats why the market drops disproportionally fast to the actual number of shares sold."}
{"id": "566745", "text": "\"I invested a small amount of money with Prosper, and later with Lending Club. I don't know why there is such a discrepancy, but over half of my Prosper loans defaulted, while only 1 of my Lending Club loans has defaulted so far. I think that P2P lending is for \"\"early adopters\"\" right now. There are regulation issues, transparency issues, legal issues, etc. Once all of those issues get worked out, I think that P2P lending will eventually overtake conventional lending, and it will be more profitable for both the lender and the borrower. The Internet is simply eroding the value that banks are adding to the process (primarily aggregation of funds), and the system has to change.\""}
{"id": "567090", "text": "\"First, stock prices forecasts are usually pretty subjective so in the following resources you will find differing opinions. The important thing is to read both positive and negative views and do some of your additional research and form your own opinion. To answer your question, some analysts don't provide price targets, some just say \"\"Buy\"\", \"\"Sell\"\", \"\"Hold\"\", and others actually give you a price target. Yahoo provides a good resource for collecting reports and giving you a price target. http://screener.finance.yahoo.com/reports.html\""}
{"id": "567165", "text": "I answered the first one, there is no time to train Americans in useful job skills because they are too busy with government schooling instead. As to the second question, I was being hyperbolic when I said 5-18 (school age). I do think teenagers could start to be trained in useful job skills, not prepubescent children though."}
{"id": "567201", "text": "\"A bona-fide company never needs your credit card details, certainly not your 3-digit-on-back-of-card #, to issue a refund.  On an older charge, they might have to work with their merchant provider.  But they should be able to do it within the credit card handling system, and in fact are required to.  Asking for details via email doesn't pass the \"\"sniff test\"\" either.  To get a credit card merchant account, a company needs to go through a security assessment process called PCI-DSS. Security gets drummed into you pretty good.  Of course they could be using one of the dumbed-down services like Square, but those services make refunds ridiculously easy.   How did you come to be corresponding on this email address?  Did they initially contact you?  Did you find it on a third party website?  Some of those are fraudulent and many others, like Yelp, it's very easy to insert false contact information for a business. Consumer forums, even moreso.  You might take another swing at finding a proper contact for the company.  Stop asking for a cheque.  That also circumvents the credit card system.  And obviously a scammer won't send a check... at least not one you'd want!  If all else fails: call your bank and tell them you want to do a chargeback on that transaction.  This is where the bank intervenes to reverse the charge.  It's rather straightforward (especially if the merchant has agreed in principle to a refund) but requires some paperwork or e-paperwork.   Don't chargeback lightly.  Don't use it casually or out of laziness or unwillingness to speak with the merchant, e.g. to cancel an order.  The bank charges the merchant a $20 or larger investigation fee, separate from the refund.  Each chargeback is also a \"\"strike\"\"; too many \"\"strikes\"\" and the merchant is barred from taking credit cards. It's serious business.   As a merchant, I would never send a cheque to an angry customer.  Because if I did, they'd cash the cheque and still do a chargeback, so then I'd be out the money twice, plus the investigation fee to boot.\""}
{"id": "567244", "text": "When the deal closes, will it be as if I sold all of my ESPP shares   with regards to taxes? Probably. If the deal is for cash and not stock exchange, then once the deal is approved and closed all the existing shareholders will sell their shares to the buyer for cash. Is there any way to mitigate this? Unlikely. You need to understand that ESPP is just a specific way to purchase shares, it doesn't give you any special rights or protections that other shareholders don't have."}
{"id": "567749", "text": "The US Treasury is not directly/transactionally involved, but can affect the junk bond market by issuing new bonds when rates rise. Since US bonds are considered completely safe, changes in yield will affect low quality debt. For example, if rates rose to levels like 1980, a 12% treasury bond would drive the prices of junk bonds issued today dramatically lower. Another price factor is likelihood of default. Companies with junk credit ratings have lousy balance sheets, so negative economic conditions or tight short term debt markets can result in default for many of these companies. Whether bonds in a fund are new issues or purchased on the secondary market isn't something that is very relevant to the individual investor. The current interest rate environment is factored into the market already via prices of bonds."}
{"id": "567842", "text": "Stop accepting new investments and wait to show a profit on your K-1."}
{"id": "568130", "text": "I would start by talking to a Fee-Only Financial Planner to make sure the portfolio fits with your goals.  You can find a list here: http://www.napfa.org/"}
{"id": "568165", "text": "\"I'm mostly guessing based on existing documentation, and have no direct experience, so take this with a pinch of salt. My best understanding is that you need to file Form 843. The instructions for the form say that it can be used to request: A refund or abatement of a penalty or addition to tax due to    reasonable cause or other reason (other than erroneous written    advice provided by the IRS) allowed under the law. The \"\"reasonable cause\"\" here is a good-faith confusion about what Line 79 of the form was referring to. In Form 843, the IRC Section Code you should enter is 6654 (estimated tax). For more, see the IRC Section 6654 (note, however, that if you already received a CP14 notice from the IRS, you should cross-check that this section code is listed on the notice under the part that covers the estimated tax penalty). If your request is accepted, the IRS should issue you Notice 746, item 17 Penalty Removed: You can get more general information about the tax collection process, and how to challenge it, from the pages linked from Understanding your CP14 Notice\""}
{"id": "568255", "text": "Welcome to the working world.  I will answer these a bit out of order. C)  Your withholding has almost zero chance of being correct.  Just about everyone has to pay or gets a refund.  I typically shoot for +- of $1000, and that is tough. A)  Your W-2 is where you adjust the amount of tax that is withheld.  You should fill out a new one as soon as possible.  You can use a paycheck calculator to figure out the proper tax that should be withheld.   B) No. D)  Yes you will owe Utah state tax.  See this site. The rub of this all is that you may have to pay Idaho tax prior to being refunded your Federal.  If you want to avoid this file your federal return as soon as possible (Goal:  File by 7 Feb).  You should have the return in 3 weeks or less (presuming you are owed one).  That will give you plenty of time to file and pay any Idaho tax owed.   I say all of this because you may be tempted to go to a tax preparation shop and take an advance on your income tax return.  Those loans are for people that hate money and are designed to tempt the foolish.  They are only slightly better than payday loans."}
{"id": "568324", "text": "Because the question puts moral obligations aside, I'll answer from the practical point of view. There are two reasons for declaring side income, even cash income. If you buy a house in a year or two, the additional income will help qualify you for a mortgage.  The IRS has ways to discover that you earned the money.  a. A client might be audited. If the client deducts the cost of your services from their income, they could be asked for proof that they paid you. Suppose they saved ATM receipts that show the withdrawals of cash used to pay you, and kept records that document the dates they paid you. The IRS might want to ask you if you were paid by the client on those dates, and how much. The asking might be in the form of an audit, and you'd have to lie to the IRS to avoid penalty. b. A client might develop a grudge against you and report you to the IRS. Someone could do this even if they don't know for sure that you don't declare the income. If you were interviewed or audited, you'd have to lie to the IRS to avoid penalty. c. You could fall prey to an algorithm. There might be one that compares deductions and income. If you run a crazy-high ratio year after year, you could be flagged for audit. Once again, you'd have to lie to avoid penalty."}
{"id": "568518", "text": "\"Another important commodity necessary to life is money, which is why when vast sums of it go missing or get locked into long-term investments into which one was grossly misled, it's very upsetting.  One such long-term investment is Zurich Vista, which the OP is intimately familiar with. Another type of fund into which money can strangely disappear, is the now ubiquitous \"\"off-shore fund\"\". One should also be very wary of land-banking schemes that boast of high rates of return (15%-20%) and short maturation dates (4-5 years).\""}
{"id": "568771", "text": "Not as you suggest. Since you are sole prop, you are taxed on a cash basis. Within reason, you can prepay vendors - so temp to hire through an agency might appear more attractive than direct hire. But there needs to be a justification other than avoidance of taxes. So pre-paying 100k on 12/25 would look fishy as fuck. Plus your quality of candidate will suffer if you need anything other than low skill labor.  Look at your other fully deductible expenses - anything you can prepay-prepay. For example, I set my liability insurance renewal January 15 to provide optionality. But it just shifts one year into another .. Means fuckall if you are in the same marginal bracket next year.  The IRS has also relaxed depreciation on office technology. Computers are now fully deductible rather than being capitalized.  @ 500k revenue you should have a CPA and legal counsel. Simply incorporating isn't tax magic. The purpose is to limit yourersonal liability, not a tax shelter - but shitty things happen once you have employees, don't create the potential for a disgruntled employee lawsuit put your shelter at risk of court judgment.  That said, assuming you aren't dumping a hypothetical on the Internet, congrats - for all the headaches, having employees is the ultimate leverage .. it's like a xerox machine for your labor (including loss of fidelity with each copy) .."}
{"id": "568784", "text": "\"Can is fine, and other answered that. I'd suggest that you consider the \"\"should.\"\" Does your employer offer a matched retirement account, typically a 401(k)? Are you depositing up to the match?  Do you have any higher interest short term debt, credit cards, car loan, student loan, etc?  Do you have 6 months worth of living expenses in liquid funds?  One point I like to beat a dead horse over is this - for most normal mortgages, the extra you pay goes to principal, but regardless of how much extra you pay, the next payment is still due next month. So it's possible that you are feeling pretty good that for 5 years you pay so much that you have just 10 left on the 30 year loan, but if you lose your job, you still risk losing the house to foreclosure. It's not like you can ask the bank for that money back.  If you are as disciplined as you sound, put the extra money aside, and only when you have well over the recommended 6 months, then make those prepayments if you choose.  To pull my comment to @MikeKale into my answer - I avoided this aspect of the discussion. But here I'll suggest that a 4% mortgage costs 3% after tax (in 25% bracket), and I'd bet cap gain rates will stay 15% for non-1%ers. So, with the break-even return of 3.5% (to return 3 after tax) and DVY yielding 3.33%, the questions becomes - do you think the DVY top yielders will be flat over the next 15 years? Any return over .17%/yr is profit. That said, the truly risk averse should heed the advise in original answer, then pre-pay. Update - when asked,in April 2012, the DVY I suggested as an example of an investment that beats the mortgage cost, traded at $56. It's now $83 and still yields 3.84%. To put numbers to this, a lump sum $100K would be worth $148K (this doesn't include dividends), and giving off $5700/yr in dividends for an after-tax $4800/yr. We happened to have a good 4 years, overall. The time horizon (15 years) makes the strategy low risk if one sticks to it.\""}
{"id": "569056", "text": "I feel like this has nothing to do with income, and as such RMDs will not really help or harm you. After a person passes, credit card companies are unlikely to collect any outstanding balance.  Debts cannot be inherited, however, assets can be made to stand for debts.  Many assets pass to heirs without the probate process and in some cases all of them pass this way.  This leaves creditors with nothing and having to write off the balance. Even if assets do pass through probate heirs may dispute the creditors.  In that case credit card balances may not be high enough justify hiring a lawyer to fight for payment; or, if they do the judge may be unsympathetic and offer nothing or pennies on the dollar.    The bottom line is that they probably see you, or your demographic, as a poor credit risk and reduced their exposure by lowering your limit.  While that is not what they told you, they probably have to carefully structure what they say to avoid any discrimination claims."}
{"id": "569157", "text": "The regulatory environment here is the main driver. In Australia, where I spent 10 years developing software for lenders/banks you can operate the same way as described in the original question (overnight transfer to anyone) and cheques are not only never used, if you try, people will laugh at you. In Australia 4 banks control > 90% of the market, they realize that overnight transfers that involve them 0% is more efficient (read: costs less) for all of them.  This will change in the next 1 - 2 years in the US I believe however, as pressures from technologies like bitcoin and technology providers like dwolla and venmo start to get a foothold and broader visibility."}
{"id": "569179", "text": "It is pretty simple to avoid risk in home ownership: Do those things and your risk of home ownership is about nil."}
{"id": "569206", "text": "\"I would let them get their hands dirty, learn by practicing. Below you can find a simple program to generate your own efficient frontier, just 29 lines' python. Depending on the age, adult could help in the activity but I would not make it too lecturing. With child-parent relationship, I would make it a challenge, no easy money anymore -- let-your-money work-for-you -attitude, create the efficient portfolio!  If there are many children, I would do a competition over years' time-span or make many small competitions. Winner is the one whose portfolio is closest to some efficient portfolio such as lowest-variance-portfolio, I have the code to calculate things like that but it is trivial so build on the code below. Because the efficient frontier is a good way to let participants to investigate different returns and risk between assets classes like stocks, bonds and money, I would make the thing more serious. The winner could get his/her designed portfolio (to keep it fair in your budget, you could limit choices to index funds starting with 1EUR investment or to ask bottle-price-participation-fee, bring me a bottle and you are in. No money issue.). Since they probably don't have much money, I would choose free software.  Have fun! Step-by-step instructions for your own Efficient Frontier Copy and run the Python script with $ python simple.py > .datSimple Plot the data with $ gnuplot -e \"\"set ylabel 'Return'; set xlabel 'Risk'; set terminal png; set output 'yourEffFrontier.png'; plot '.datSimple'\"\" or any spreadsheet program. Your first \"\"assets\"\" could well be low-risk candies and some easy-to-stale products like bananas -- but beware, notice the PS.  Simple Efficient-frontier generator P.s. do not stagnate with collectibles, such as candies and toys, and retailer products, such as mangos, because they are not really good \"\"investments\"\" per se, a bit more like speculation. The retailer gets a huge percentage, for further information consult Bogleheads.org like here about collectible items.\""}
{"id": "569283", "text": "Information is useless in this case.  IR is useful when you are trying to replicate the risk exposures of an index and beat it. I.E.If I am a tech fund, I would compare myself to the tech S&amp;P.  IR is useless in this case as it is just the ratio of excess returns over the benchmark to vol.  From a trading sense he needs a rate of wins to losses, so a sharpe like construct of R/SemiDeviation. Essentially his avg return divided by negative volatility.  Going further on that is omega which introduces a threshold as in trading you care more about the equity curve so MAXDD is probably more relevant."}
{"id": "569421", "text": "When I have had background/credit checks, I have had to fill out a form first.  You may be able to attach your proof that the debts are paid to your form.    I had a friend that bombed his background check because his birth certificate and passport didn't have matching names (two variations on the same name, but it spooked the securitiy company).  He had a chance to contest the finding and was still hired."}
{"id": "569528", "text": "Savings accounts with 8% APY? Unheard of these days. You're lucky if you find one at 1%. You should use checking and savings accounts only to hold an emergency fund (6 to 12 months of living expenses), or money that you will need in 2 years or so. The rest, invest in stocks and bonds."}
{"id": "569539", "text": "Yes your basic math is correct. If your tax bracket never changes, then either type of retirement account will end up in the same place. Assuming that there are no income restrictions that will limit your ability to contribute to the type of account you want. Now your job is to guess what your tax bracket will be each and every year for the next 3 or 4 decades. Events that will influence your bracket: getting married; having children; buying a house; selling a house; paying for college; the cost of medical care; moving to a state with a different state tax structure. Of course that assumes that you don't get a big bonus one year or that congress changes the tax brackets. That is why many people have both types of retirement accounts: Roth and non-Roth."}
{"id": "569565", "text": "\"I thought the other answers had some good aspect but also some things that might not be completely correct, so I'll take a shot. As noted by others, there are three different types of entities in your question:  The ETF SPY, the index SPX, and options contracts. First, let's deal with the options contracts.  You can buy options on the ETF SPY or marked to the index SPX.  Either way, options are about the price of the ETF / index at some future date, so the local min and max of the \"\"underlying\"\" symbol generally will not coincide with the min and max of the options.  Of course, the closer the expiration date on the option, the more closely the option price tracks its underlying directly.  Beyond the difference in how they are priced, the options market has different liquidity, and so it may not be able to track quick moves in the underlying. (Although there's a reasonably robust market for option on SPY and SPX specifically.) Second, let's ask what forces really make SPY and SPX move together as much as they do.  It's one thing to say \"\"SPY is tied to SPX,\"\" but how?  There are several answers to this, but I'll argue that the most important factor is that there's a notion of \"\"authorized participants\"\" who are players in the market who can \"\"create\"\" shares of SPY at will.  They do this by accumulating stock in the constituent companies and turning them into the market maker.  There's also the corresponding notion of \"\"redemption\"\" by which an authorized participant will turn in a share of SPY to get stock in the constituent companies. (See http://www.spdrsmobile.com/content/how-etfs-are-created-and-redeemed and http://www.etf.com/etf-education-center/7540-what-is-the-etf-creationredemption-mechanism.html) Meanwhile, SPX is just computed from the prices of the constituent companies, so it's got no market forces directly on it.  It just reflects what the prices of the companies in the index are doing. (Of course those companies are subject to market forces.) Key point: Creation / redemption is the real driver for keeping the price aligned.  If it gets too far out of line, then it creates an arbitrage opportunity for an authorized participant.  If the price of SPY gets \"\"too high\"\" compared to SPX (and therefore the constituent stocks), an authorized participant can simultaneously sell short SPY shares and buy the constituent companies' stocks.  They can then use the redemption process to close their position at no risk.  And vice versa if SPY gets \"\"too low.\"\" Now that we understand why they move together, why don't they move together perfectly.  To some extent information about fees, slight differences in composition between SPY and SPX over time, etc. do play.  The bigger reasons are probably that (a) there are not a lot of authorized participants, (b) there are a relatively large number of companies represented in SPY, so there's some actual cost and risk involved in trying to quickly buy/sell the full set to capture the theoretical arbitrage that I described, and (c) redemption / creation units only come in pretty big blocks, which complicates the issues under point b. You asked about dividends, so let me comment briefly on that too.  The dividend on SPY is (more or less) passing on the dividends from the constituent companies. (I think - not completely sure - that the market maker deducts its fees from this cash, so it's not a direct pass through.)  But each company pays on its own schedule and SPY does not make a payment every time, so it's holding a corresponding amount of cash between its dividend payments.  This is factored into the price through the creation / redemption process.  I don't know how big of a factor it is though.\""}
{"id": "569691", "text": "\"Interest rates are at a record low and the government is printing money. You can get a fixed rate loan at a rate equal to inflation in a healthy economy. Unless you know that you are moving in < 5 years, why would you expose yourself to interest rate risk when rates are about as close to zero as they can be? If your thought with respect to mitigating interest rate risk is: \"\"What's the big deal, I'll just refinance!\"\", think again, because in a market where rates are climbing, you may not be able to affordably refinance at the LTV that you'll have in 5-7 years.  From 1974-1991, 30 year mortgages never fell below 9%, and were over 12% from 1979 to 1985. Think about what those kinds of rates -- which reduce a new homeowner's buying power by over 40%, would do to your homes value.\""}
{"id": "569953", "text": "According to Publication 590, broker's commissions for stock transactions within an IRA cannot be paid in addition to the IRA contribution(s), but they are deductible as part of the contribution, or add to the basis if you are making a nondeductible contribution to a Traditional IRA. (Top of Page 10, and Page 12, column 1, in the 2012 edition of Pub 590). On the other hand, trustees'  administrative fees can be paid from outside the IRA if they are billed separately, and are even deductible as a Miscellaneous Deduction on Schedule A of your income tax return (subject to the 2% of AGI threshold).  A long time ago, when my IRA account balances were much smaller, I used to get a bill from my IRA custodian for a $20 annual administrative fee which I paid separately (but never got to deduct due to the 2% threshold). My custodian also allowed  the option of doing nothing in which case the $20 would be collected from (and thus reduce) the amount of money in my IRA.  Note that this does not apply to the expenses charged by the mutual funds that you might have in your IRA; these expenses are treated the same as brokerage commissions and must be paid from within the IRA."}
{"id": "570046", "text": "An option gives you the legal right to buy stock. However, you cannot exercise a stock option unless you have the ability to buy the stock. In the United States, securities not fully registered with the SEC for public sale cannot be purchased except by qualified investors."}
{"id": "570112", "text": "\"I've bought ISO stock over they years -- in NYSE traded companies.  Every time I've done so, they've done what's called \"\"sell-to-cover\"\".  And the gubmint treats the difference between FMV and purchase price as if it's part of your salary.  And for me, they've sold some stock extra to pay estimated taxes. So, if I got this right...  20,000 shares at $3 costs you 60,000 to buy them.  In my sell-to-cover at 5 scenario: did I get that right?  Keeping only 4,000 shares out of 20,000 doesn't feel right.  Maybe because I've always sold at a much ratio between strike price and FMV. Note I made some assumptions:  first is that the company will sell some of the stock to pay the taxes for you.  Second is your marginal tax rate.  Before you do anything check these. Is there some reason to exercise immediately?  I'd wait, personally.\""}
{"id": "570178", "text": "At the most basic level of financing a business -- you are trying to acquire capital as cheaply as you can to invest in your projects.  The measure for how expensive your capital is to acquire is Weighted Average Cost of Capital.    The formula for WACC:  Equity Ratio * Cost of Equity + Debt Ratio * Cost of Debt * (1 - Tax Rate) This is also your discount rate when you're making a DCF model.  Debt tends to be cheaper than equity when you don't already have any, and is also advantaged by tax rates since you don't pay taxes on interest.  In the real world, banks and lenders will ratchet up rates the more debt you acquire, or shut you out once you've taken on too much and your debt service coverage is too low for them.  In a classroom though, most teachers are too lazy to make a curvilinear formula for borrowing and will just state a rate for borrowing so you can load up on debt so long as you don't fall below being able to service your debt (cash flow to make your debt payments).  This will ultimately juice the returns on equity.  Realistically, you would find lenders would let you have ~20% equity in the business and ~80% debt without raising your teacher's eyebrow.  If you haven't taken accounting yet; be careful about the difference between cash and revenue in your analyses.  Revenue is recognition for work done; not cash in hand.  You can have all the revenue in the world but if no one's paid you for it yet, you can't pay anyone."}
{"id": "570226", "text": "\"I figured that there must be some people in a corporate office somewhere who sign $100M loans for lunch. :)  The banks have that experience (but I'm not interested in asking them for a sample), and our consultants definitely have that experience, but I'm looking to evaluate the consultants with this exercise. If they provide the sample, then deliver to that sample, I'm still blind as to whether that sample is \"\"good\"\" as compared to something that the corporate world would use on the daily.  I'd take your advice for the $1M loan, but I can't help but think as the factors of 10 increase, the data required to properly negotiate also increases. I don't want to go in blind, and provide a proposal that looks like a high school project.\""}
{"id": "570247", "text": "Barclays offers an iPath ETN (not quite an ETF), DJP, which tracks the total return of the Dow Jones-AIG Commodity Index."}
{"id": "570292", "text": "One thing to keep in mind is that with Roth accounts, there are different withdrawal considerations based on your contributions. For example, you can withdraw Roth IRA contributions whenever you want in the future.  However this really has nothing to do with your cost basis and purely to do with the contribution amount vs balance."}
{"id": "570453", "text": "Making or losing income (via selling shares) is the taxable event, not moving the income you made to and from an account.  The only exception would be a special account such as an IRA, and then there would be rules specific to that account structure about when you can withdraw money and what the tax consequences are."}
{"id": "570466", "text": "\"When \"\"people say\"\", each person is referring to whatever he/she is looking at.  Interest rates tend to move roughly the same, but often there is a bias regarding long vs. short term.  In the US right now, short term interest rates are very low but there is a lot of chatter saying they will rise in the future.  The differential between long term rates and short term rates is high compared to historical norms, suggesting that the market believes this chatter.  You can also look at the differences in rates between different quality levels.  If the economy is improving, the difference in rate for lower rated debt vs. higher rated debt decreases as people think the chance of businesses failing is decreasing. Right now, any interest rate you look at is well below long term historical averages, so asserting that interest rates are low is quite safe.\""}
{"id": "570680", "text": "I would suggest to buy your own printer, and calculate the cost for a page including the wear to the printer. Then either deduce these printing expenses, or ask the charity to reimburse you. This is not much different than when you would go to a copyshop, those easily charge 10-30c per page, with your own printer you can probably get it around 5-10c per page, including paper, toner, drum, and amortization. The advantage is that when you do use the printer for other purposes, you wont get into any problems with who owns the printer or deductions."}
{"id": "571015", "text": "The quote price is simply the last price at which a trade completed."}
{"id": "571062", "text": "If this is a business expense - then this is what is called reimbursement. Reimbursement is usually not considered as income since it is money paid back to you for an expense you covered for your employer with your after-tax money. However, for reimbursement to be considered properly executed, from income tax stand point, there are some requirements. I'm not familiar with the UK income tax law specifics, but I reason the requirements would not differ much from places I'm familiar with: before an expense is reimbursed to you, you should usually do this:  Show that the expense is a valid business expense for the employer benefit and by the employer's request. Submit the receipt for reimbursement and follow the employer's procedure on its approval. When income tax agent looks at your data, he actually will ask about the \u00a31500 tab. You and you'll employer will have to do some explaining about the business activity that caused it. If the revenue agent is not satisfied, the \u00a3750 that is paid to you will be declared as your income. If the required procedures for proper reimbursement were not followed - the \u00a3750 may be declared as your income regardless of the business need. Have your employer verify it with his tax accountant."}
{"id": "571124", "text": "\"According to Wikipedia this is still a wash sale: In the USA wash sale rules are codified in \"\"26 USC \u00a7 1091 - Loss from   wash sales of stock or securities.\"\" Under Section 1091, a wash sale occurs when a taxpayer sells or trades   stock or securities at a loss, and within 30 days before or after the   sale:\""}
{"id": "571218", "text": "Congratulations! You're making enough money to invest. There are two easy places to start: I recommend against savings accounts because they will quite safely lose your money: the inflation rate is usually higher than the interest rate on a savings account. You may have twice as much money after 50 years, but if everything costs four times as much, then you've lost buying power. If, in the course of learning about investing, you'd like to try buying individual stocks, do it only with money you wouldn't mind losing. Index funds will go down slightly if one of the companies in that index fails entirely, but the stock of a failed company is worthless."}
{"id": "571246", "text": "To confirm: you say you have credit card debt of $18,000 with min. repayment of $466.06, plus on top of this you are also paying off a car loan and another personal loan. From my calculations if your monthly interest on your credit card is $237, the interest on your credit card should be about 15.8% p.a. Is this correct? Balance Transfer If you did a balance transfer of your $18,000 to a new credit card with 0% for 14 months and keep your repayments the same ($466) you would have saved yourself a bit over $3020 in interest over those 14 months. Your credit card balance after 14 months would be about $11,471 (instead of $14,476 with your current situation). If your interest after the 14 months went back to 15.8%  you would be able to pay the remaining $11,471 in 2.5 more years (keeping repayments at $466), saving 10 months off your repayments and a total of $4,781 in interest over 3 years and 8 months. The main emphasis here is that you are able to keep your repayments at least the same so you are able to pay off the debt quicker, and that your interest rate on the new credit card after the 14 months interest free is not more than your current interest rate of 15.8%. Things you should be careful about if you take this path: Debt Consolidation In regards to a Debt Consolidation for your personal loan and credit card (and possibly your car loan) into a single lower interest rate loan can be a good idea, but there are some pitfalls you should consider. Manly, if you are taking out a loan with a lower interest rate but a longer term to pay it off, you may end up paying less in monthly repayments but will end up paying more interest in the long run. If you do take this course of action try to keep your term to no longer than your current debt's terms, and try to keep your repayments as high as possible to pay the debt off as soon as possible and reduce any interest you have to pay. As you already have you credit card and personal loan with CBA talk to them to see what kind of deal they can give you. Again be wary of the fine print and read the PDS of any products you are thinking of getting. Refer to ASIC - Money Smart website for more valuable information you should consider before taking out any debt consolidation. Other Action You Can Take If you are finding that the repayments are really getting out of hand and no one will help you with any debt consolidation or reducing your interest rates on your debts, as a last resort you can apply for a Part 9 debt agreement. But be very careful as this is an alternative to bankruptcy, and like bankruptcy a debt agreement will appear on your credit file for seven years and your name will be listed on the National Personal Insolvency Index forever. Further Assistance and Help If you have trouble reading any PDS, or want further information or help regarding any issues I have raised or any other part of your financial situation you can contact Centrelink's Financial Information Service. They provide a free and confidential service that provides education and information on financial and lifestyle issues to all Australians."}
{"id": "571412", "text": "Get a checking account with Ally Bank. They refund all ATM fees from within the US, so effectively, every ATM transaction will have no surcharge."}
{"id": "571430", "text": "It also depends on where you work. If you move your home and your job then the date you establish residency in the new state is the key date. All income before that date is considered income for state 1, and all income on or after that date is income for state 2.  If there is a big  difference in income you will want to clearly establish residency because it impacts your wallet. If they had the same rates moving wouldn't impact your wallet, but it would impact each state. So make sure when going from high tax state to low tax state that you register your vehicles, register to vote, get a new drivers license... It becomes more complex if you move your home but not your job. In that case where you work might be the deciding factor. Same states have agreed that where you live is the deciding factor; in other cases it is not. For Virginia, Maryland, and DC you pay based on where you live if the two states involved are DC, MD, VA. But if you Live in Delaware and work in Virginia Virginia wants a cut of your income tax.  So before you move you need to research reciprocity for the two states. From Massachusetts information for Nonresident and Part-Year Resident Income, Exemptions, Deductions and Credits Massachusetts gross income includes items of income derived from   sources within Massachusetts. This includes income: a few questions later: Massachusetts residents and part-year residents are allowed a credit   for taxes due to any other jurisdiction. The credit is available only   on income reported and taxed on a Massachusetts return. Nonresidents   may not claim the taxes paid to other jurisdiction credit on their   Massachusetts Form 1-NR/PY. The credit is allowed for income taxes paid to: The credit is not allowed for: taxes paid to the U.S. government or a   foreign country other than Canada; city or local tax; and interest and   penalty paid to another jurisdiction. The computation is based on comparing the Massachusetts income tax on   income reported to the other jurisdiction to the actual tax paid to   the other jurisdiction; the credit is limited to the smaller of these   two numbers. The other jurisdiction credit is a line item on the tax form but you   must calculate it on the worksheet in the instruction booklet and also   enter the credit information on the Schedule OJC. So if you move your house to New Hampshire, but continue to work in Massachusetts you will owe income tax to Massachusetts  for that income even after you move and establish residency in New Hampshire."}
{"id": "571711", "text": "I'm not an expert, but here's my $0.02. Deductions for business expenses are subject to the 2% rule. In other words, you can only deduct that which exceeds 2% of your AGI (Adjusted Gross Income). For example, say you have an AGI of $50,000, and you buy a laptop that costs $800. You won't get a write-off from that, because 2% of $50,000 is $1,000, and you can only deduct business-related expenses in excess of that $1,000. If you have an AGI of $50,000 and buy a $2,000 laptop, you can deduct a maximum of $1,000 ($2,000 minus 2% of $50,000 is $2,000 - $1,000 = $1,000). Additionally, you can write off the laptop only to the extent that you use it for business. So in other words, if you have an AGI of $50,000 and buy that $2,000 laptop, but only use it 50% for business, you can only write off $500. Theoretically, they can ask for verification of the business use of your laptop. A log or a diary would be what I would provide, but I'm not an IRS agent."}
{"id": "572097", "text": "Never loan money to family or friends with the intention of getting it back.  If you take him/her to court, and the claim is valid, sure you get your money back, you lose a friend/family member."}
{"id": "572451", "text": ""}
{"id": "572563", "text": "There are two fundamental flaws to your plan: Supposing that you can get a loan with an interest rate that is less than the profit you are likely to get from an investment. Historically, the U.S. stock market goes up by 6 to 7% per year. I just did a quick check and found rates for unsecured loans of 10 to 15%. Of course interest rates vary depending on your credit rating and all sorts of other factors, but that's probably a reasonable ball park. Borrowing money at 15% so you can invest it at 6% is not a good plan. Of course you could invest in things that promise higher returns, but such investments have higher risks. If there was a super safe investment that was virtually guaranteed to give 20% profit, the bank wouldn't loan you money at 10 or 15%: they'd put their money in this 20% investment. I don't know what your income is, but unless it's substantial, no one is going to give you an unsecured loan for $250,000.  In your question you say you'll use $2,000 of your profits to make payments on the loan. That's less than 0.8% of the loan amount. If you really know a bank that will loan money at 0.8%, I'm sure we'd all like to hear about it. That would be an awesome rate for a fully secured loan, never mind for a signature loan. $250,000 for 10 years at 10% would mean payments of $3,300 per MONTH, and that's about the most optimistic terms I can imagine for a signature loan. You say you plan to lie to the bank. What are you going to tell them? A person doesn't get to be a bank loan officer with authority to make $250,000 loans if he's a complete idiot. They're going to want to know what you intend to do with the money and how you plan to pay it back. If you're making a million dollars a year, sure, they'll probably loan you that kind of money. But if you were making a million dollars a year I doubt you'd be considering this scheme. As TripeHound said in the comments, if it was really possible to get bigger returns on an investment than you would have to pay in interest on an unsecured loan, then everybody would be doing it all the time. Sorry, if you want to be rich, the realistic choices are, (a) arrange to be born to rich parents; (b) win the lottery; (c) get a good job and work hard."}
{"id": "572822", "text": "If they short the contract, that means, in 5 months, they will owe if the price goes up (receive if the price goes down) the difference between the price they sold the future at, and the 3-month Eurodollar interbank rate, times the value of the contract, times 5. If they're long, they receive if the price goes up (owe if the price goes down), but otherwise unchanged. Cash settlement means they don't actually need to make/receive a three month loan to settle the future, if they held it to expiration - they just pay or receive the difference.  This way, there's no credit risk beyond the clearinghouse. The final settlement price of an expiring three-month Eurodollar futures (GE) contract is equal to 100 minus the three-month Eurodollar interbank time deposit rate."}
{"id": "573143", "text": "\"This is fraud, the related legal code is \"\"11 USC 548 - Fraudulent transfers and obligations\"\"; also see the wiki page for Fraudulent Conveyance in the United States.  Highly suggest cutting off contact with this person, and speaking with a lawyer as soon as possible to make sure you have not already broken the law.\""}
{"id": "573158", "text": "The limits for 2011 and 2012 are $5000 or $6000 if you are 50 or older. The 2011 income limit is $169K, but that's MAGI, not gross. With a $180K income, your MAGI is likely below $169, but you can only tell by looking at your return. If you are this close, you might have to convert to a non-deducted IRA, or withdraw the money. Else, you can fund the 2011 IRA when you file the return in 2012 to be sure."}
{"id": "573239", "text": "The SEC 30-Day Yield you're seeing is a standardized yield calculation set out by the Securities & Exchange Commission.  It can be useful for comparing bond funds, but it doesn't guarantee what you'll actually earn from a fund. IMPORTANT: The SEC 30-day yield represents a bond fund's returns from the previous 30 days expressed as an annual percentage of the current fund price \u2014 yes, an annual percentage. In other words, don't expect 1.81% return on your money every 30 days!  Such a return is too-good-to-be-true return in today's low rate environment.  1.81% per year?  More reasonable. Even then, the 1.81% you see is merely an estimate, one based on assumptions, of what you might expect to earn if you keep your money in place for the next year.  The estimate is based on the assumptions that: These aren't reliable assumptions.  BIV's price does fluctuate.  You are not promised to get your principal back with a bond fund.  Only an individual bond promises your principal back, and only at maturity. So, earning $181 on $10,000 invested for a full year while taking on interest-rate and other risks might not be worth the trouble of putting your money in a brokerage account. You'll need to transfer the money in and out, and there are potential trading fees to take into account.  (How much to buy/sell units?) An FDIC-insured high interest savings account makes more sense."}
{"id": "573290", "text": "Once again. You're taking your finance experience and cross applying it. Very technical degrees like CS often require less gen Ed classes. UIC only allows for 50 gen Ed in their CS program compared to 60 in finance. Stop thinking the degree requirements and paths are the same. They're not."}
{"id": "573600", "text": "The first moment of trading usually occurs even later than that. It may take a few hours to balance the current buy/sell orders and open the stock. Watch CNBC when a hot IPO is about to open and you'll see the process in real time. If you miss it, look at a one day Yahoo chart to see when the open occurred."}
{"id": "573713", "text": "If you ever need the money in three years, imagine that today is 2006 and you need the money in 2009.  Keep it in savings accounts, money-markets, or CDs maturing at the right time."}
{"id": "573935", "text": "There is nothing wrong with self directed IRA's the problem is that most of the assets they specialize in are better done in other ways. Real estate is already extremely tax advantaged in the US. Buying inside a Traditional IRA would turn longterm capital gains (currently 15%) into ordinary income taxed at your tax rate when you withdraw this may be a plus or minus, but it is more likely than not that your ordinary income tax rate is higher. You also can't do the live in each house for 2 years before selling plan to eliminate capital gains taxes (250k individual 500k married couple). The final problem is that you are going to have problems getting a mortgage (it won't be a conforming loan) and will likely have to pay cash for any real estate purchased inside your IRA. Foreign real estate is similar to above except you have additional tax complexities. The key to the ownership in a business is that there are limits on who can control the business (you and maybe your family can't control the business). If you are experienced doing angel investing this might be a viable option (assuming you have a really big IRA you want to gamble with). If you want to speculate on precious metals you will probably be better offer using ETF's in a more traditional brokerage account (lower transactions costs more liquidity)."}
{"id": "573974", "text": "The proper answer is that you run the numbers and see whether what you'll save in interest exceeds the closing costs by enough to be interesting.  Most lenders these days have calculations that can help with this on their websites and/or would be glad to help if asked. Rule of thumb: if you can reduce interest rate by 1% or more it's worth investing."}
{"id": "574037", "text": "\"(Insert usual disclaimer that I'm just a random guy on the Internet, not any kind of certified tax professional.) But once I withdraw the money, how is that money taxable? If I'm understanding your situation correctly, you want to look at the instructions for form 8889, under Excess Employer Contributions. It simply says, \"\"If the excess was not included in income on Form W-2, you must report it as 'Other income' on your tax return.\"\" There doesn't look to be any particular wording beyond that, so I'd just put it on Form 1040 Line 21 Other Income, and label the line really specifically like \"\"Excess Employer Contributions distributed from HSA\"\". Also there is no mention of whether any FICA taxes (social security and Medicare) apply to these amounts. You say that this was entirely contributed by the employer. But even for cases where one contributes directly through payroll with an optional pre-tax deduction, this is usually implemented as a \"\"salary reduction agreement\"\" where the company is actually paying less money in salary (and thus less showing up on the W-2) and just contributing to the HSA account instead. It's listed on the 8889 as an \"\"Employer Contribution\"\", even if in fact one sees it as a deduction on one's pay stub. In either case, since the company didn't pay you the money as salary (and merely contributed to the HSA instead), I wouldn't expect any FICA taxes to be owed on it. The fact that the IRS wants it listed under \"\"Other income\"\" instead of \"\"Wages\"\" also implies to me that it doesn't count as salary that needs FICA taxes. Presumably, if people abused this in some way (like getting their employer to deliberately over-contribute each year and getting a refund in some sort of crazy scheme to try to reduce their SS taxes) the government would get rather upset and probably call it some sort of tax evasion. But for the amounts involved here, particularly as you're following the instructions listed, I just wouldn't worry about it. Assuming that I withdraw excess contribution and report everything on Form 8889 and Form 1040, is there any further action required from my previous employer? It's your HSA, so I wouldn't think so. Since the eligibility for HSAs is based on what you do, and not what they do (you could, for instance, get covered by a different HDHP and they wouldn't be notified nor really care), I don't think they have anything more to do with it. Also I am not sure how to calculate amount of interest attributable to excess contribution. I have only around $0.20 of total interest this year. The bank holding the HSA could probably help with that, as I'd expect it to be a normal part of the excess contribution withdrawal process. If not, I'd just make a reasonable effort based on the interest rate, amount involved, and number of days that the excess was in the account. Also keep in mind that in general when filing taxes, anything under $0.49 can round to $0. At some point, one can only be \"\"as honest as the law allows\"\".\""}
{"id": "574383", "text": "Mutual funds are a collection of other assets, such as stocks, bonds and property. Unless the fund is a type that is traded on an exchange, you will only be able to buy into the fund by applying for units with the fund manager and sell out by contacting the fund manager. These type of non-traded funds are usually updated at the end of the day once the closing prices of all the assets in it are known."}
{"id": "574438", "text": "\"It's a decision that only you can make. What are the chances that you'll want to take another loan (any loan - car, credit card, installment plan for new fridge, whatever else)? What are the chances that with the bad credit you'll find it hard to rent a place (and in Cali it's hard to rent a place right now, believe me, I bought a place just to save on the rent)? What are the chances that the prices will bounce and your \"\"on-paper\"\" loss will be recovered by the time you actually need/want to sell the house? You have to check all these and make a wise decision considering all the pros and cons in your personal case.\""}
{"id": "574678", "text": "I'm not a 'rule of thumb' guy, but here, I'd suggest that if you can set aside 10% of your income each year for college, that would be great. That turns out to be $900/mo.  In 15 years, if you saw an 8% CAGR, you'd have $311K which happens to be in your range of expenses. And you'd still have time to go as the baby won't graduate for 22(?) years. (Yup, 10% is a good rule of thumb for your income and 3 kids) Now, on the other hand, I'd research what grants you'd be able to get if you came up short. If instead of saving a dime, you funded your own retirement and the spouse's IRA if she's not working, and time the mortgage to pay it off in 15 years from now, the lack of liquid funds actually runs in your favor. But, I'm not an expect on this, just second guessing my own fully funded college account for my daughter."}
{"id": "574954", "text": "\"The problem here can be boiled down to that fact you are attempting to obtain a loan without collateral.  There are times it can be done, but you have to have a really good relationship with a banker.  Your question suggests that avenue has been exhausted. You are looking for an investor, but you are offering something very speculative.  Suppose an investor gives you 20K, what recourse does he have if you do not pay the terms of the loan?  From what income will this be paid from?  What event will trigger the capability to make a balloon payment?    Now if you can find a really handy guy that really needs a place to live could you swap rent for repairs?  Maybe.  Perhaps you buy the materials, and he does the roof in exchange for 6 months worth of rent or whatever. If you approached me with this \"\"investment\"\", the thing that would raise a red flag is why don't you have 20K to do this yourself?  If you don't how will you be able to make payments?  For example of the items you mentioned: That is a weekend worth of work and some pretty inexpensive materials.  Why does money need to be borrowed for this? A weekend worth of demo, and $500 worth of material and another weekend to build something serviceable for a rental.  Why does money need to be borrowed for this? 2K?  Why does money need to be borrowed for this? This can be expensive, but most roofing companies offer financing.  Also doing some of the work yourself can save a ton of money.  Demoing an old roof is typically about 1/3 of the roofing cost and is technically simple, but physically difficult. So besides the new roof, you could have a lot of your list solved for less than 3K and three weekends worth of work.  You are attempting to change this into a rental, not the Taj Mahal.\""}
{"id": "575495", "text": "Money, like anything else, is subject to the demands of people.  There are times when money is in high demand.  This drives up its value. People in Japan want cash because they have an immediate need to buy emergency supplies as well as rebuild and replace damaged items.  This is why the yen strengthened.  This is probably why the market plummeted as people liquidated some of their stocks to get cash. The Bank Of Japan (BOJ) will not stand for a rising yen, however.  It is pulling a Bernanke and printing yen in an effort to keep it weak."}
{"id": "575869", "text": "\"Basically, you either borrow money, or get other people to invest in your business by buying stock or something analogous.  Sometimes you can get people to \"\"park\"\" money with you. For example, many people deposit money in a bank checking account. They don't get any interest or other profit from this, they just do it because the bank is a convenient place to store their money. The bank then loans some percentage of this money out and keeps the interest. I don't doubt that people have come up with more clever ways to use other people's money. Borrowing money for an investment or business venture is risky because if you lose money, you may be unable to pay it back. On the other hand, investors expect a share of the profit, not just a fixed interest rate.\""}
{"id": "576004", "text": "Pay down cc debt asap, take your time on your student debt, it's low and you can write the interest off related to it. If your a teacher maybe you can get it forgiven.   But you borrowed from your future self when you younger so ya you gotta start living reasonable."}
{"id": "576008", "text": "Buying the right shares gives higher return. Buying the wrong ones gives worse return, possibly negative. The usual recommendation, even if you have a pro advising you, is to diversify most of your investments to reduce the risk, even though that may reduce the possible gain. A mutual fund is diversification-in-a-can. It requires little to no active maintenance. Yes, you pay a management fee, but you aren't paying per-transaction fees every time you adjust your holdings, and the management costs can be quite reasonable if you pick the right funds; minimal in the case of computer-managed (index) funds. If you actively enjoy playing with stocks and bonds and are willing/able to accept your failures and less-than-great choices as part of the game, and if you can convince yourself that you will do better this way, go for it. For those of us who just want to deposit out money, watch it grow, and maybe rebalance once a year if that, index funds are a perfectly good choice. I spend at least 8 hours a day working for my money; the rest of the time, I want my money to work for me.  Risk and reward tend to be proportional to each other; when they aren't, market prices tend to move to correct that. You need to decide how much risk you're comfortable with, and how much time and effort and money you're willing to spend managing that risk. Personally, I am perfectly happy with the better-than-market-rate-of-return I'm getting, and I don't have any conviction that I could do better if I was more involved. Your milage will vary. If folks didn't disagree, there wouldn't be a market."}
{"id": "576156", "text": "I have never attempted to take out a loan, but I mean any kind of loan or lease based contract.  Also I am a lifer that will never return to my home country.  I have accepted the xenophobia attitude but that doesn't mean I saw screw what they think and make it worse."}
{"id": "576185", "text": "The answer to your question is governed by the structure of the company and your ownership or lack thereof in the business.  Australian business can be structured the same way U.S. ones are, as a sole proprietorship, partnership, LLC, or company.  If you are only on the board and have no equity, you cannot be affected.  You must have some amount of equity in the business to have any chance of being affected. If the business is a sole proprietorship, then the single individual running the business is personally responsible for all debt and the inability to pay obligations would result in personal bankruptcy which would in all likelihood affect your credit score (it would in the U.S.). If it is a partnership, then anyone holding stock in the company is likewise personally responsible for a portion of the debt, and can be subject to bankruptcy and credit score implications. If the business is structured as a limited liability company or a corporation, a stakeholder's personal finances are separate from the business's and their credit score cannot be affected."}
{"id": "576362", "text": "Before answering specific question, you are liable to pay tax as per your bracket on the income generated. I work with my partner and currently we transfer all earning on my personal bank account. Can this create any issue for me? If you are paying your partner from your account, you would need to maintain proper paperwork to show the portion of money transferred is not income to you. Alternatively create a join Current Account. Move funds there and then move it to your respective accounts. Which sort off account should be talk and by whose name? Can be any account [Savings/Current]. If you are doing more withdrawls open Current else open Savings. It does not matter on whos name the account is. Paperwork to show income matters from tax point of view. What should we take care while transfering money from freelance site to bank? Nothing specific Is there any other alternative to bank? There is paypal etc. However ultimately it flows into a Bank Account. What are other things to be kept in mind? Keep proper record of actual income of each of you, along with expenses. There are certain expenses you can claim from income, for example laptop, internet, mobile phone etc. Consult a CA he will be able to guide and it does not cost much."}
{"id": "576391", "text": "You should be saving as much money as you can afford in your 401k up to the maximum allowed. If you don't contribute at least 6%, then you are essentially throwing away the match money that your employer is offering. Start out with the target date fund. You can always change your investment option later once you learn more about investing, but get started saving right away and get that match!"}
{"id": "576503", "text": "\"An option without the vesting period and the price at which one can exercise the option is of not much value. If vesting is determined by board, then at any given point in time they can change the vesting period to say 3, 5, 10 years any number. The other aspect is at what price you are allowed to exercise the option, ie if the stock is of value 10, you may be given an option to buy this at 10, 20 or 100. This has to be stated upfront for you to know the real value. On listing if the value is say 80, then if you have the option to exercise at 10, or 20 you would make money, else at 100 you loose money and hence choose not to exercise the option. However your having stuck around the company for \"\"x\"\" years in anticipation of making money would go waste. Without a vesting period or the price to exercise the option, they are pretty much meaningless and would depend on the goodwill of the founders\""}
{"id": "576569", "text": "About the inflation or low interest rates in both the countries is out of the equation especially since rupee is always a low currency compared to Euro. You cannot make profit in Euros using rupee or vice-versa. It all depends on where you want to use the money, in India or Europe? If you want use the money from fixed deposit in Europe, then buy fixed deposit in euros from Europe. If you want to use the money in India, then convert the euros and buy FD in India."}
{"id": "576621", "text": "\"It sounds like \"\"gross receipt tax\"\" is essentially the same thing most states call \"\"sales tax\"\", which is always handled this way -- prices displayed are pre-tax, tax is added when the final price is calculated.  One reason for doing it that way is that most prices result in taxes that involve fractions of pennies, and calculating from the total produces a more accurate result than calculating tax on each item individually. It is theoretically possible to set prices so the numbers come out evenly when tax is added. But that requires that the prices be in fractional cents,  potentially to many decimal places. And in fact in some places it is illegal to display (only) the with-tax price. Otherwise I'm sure some stores and restaurants would be willing to deal with the mils and micros, purely on principle or as a marketing gimmick. Since customers have learned to expect sales tax, it really isn't worth the effort to fight it. The closest I've seen has been occasional \"\"we'll pay your sales tax\"\" offers, or statewide sales-tax holidays once a year.\""}
{"id": "576673", "text": "You have to consider a case where you just cannot sell it. Think of it as a bad piece of real estate in Detroit. If there are absolutely no buyers, you cannot sell it (until a buyer shows up)"}
{"id": "576976", "text": "\"Am I getting it right that in India in terms of short selling in F&O market its what in the rest of the world is called naked short and you actually make promise to depositary that you will deliver that security you sold on settlement without actually owning the security or going through SLB mechanism? In Future and Options; there is no concept of short selling. You buy a future for a security / index. On the settlement day; the exchange determines the settlement price. The trade is closed in cash. i.e. Based on the settlement price, you [and the other party] will either get money [other party looses money] or you loose money [other party gets the money]. Similarly for Options; on expiry, the all \"\"In Money\"\" [or At Money] Options are settled in cash and you are credit with funds [the option writer is debited with funds]. If the option is \"\"out of money\"\" it expires and you loose the premium you paid to exercise the option.\""}
{"id": "577189", "text": "No.    Net profit is calculated after taxes. Loan interest is an expense, so it will result in the company paying less taxes (it acts as a tax shield), so net profit should still be positive. How much will depend on tax and interest rate.    Only the portion of the $1.000.000 that correspond to interest is an expense. Principal payments are not."}
{"id": "577381", "text": "This is a question of how does someone value a business.   Typically, it is some function of how much the company owns, how much the company owes, how risky is the company's business, and how much the company makes in profit. For example if a company (or investment) make $100/year, every year no matter what, how much would you pay for that?   If you pay $1,000 you'll make 10% each year on your investment.  Is that a good enough return?   If you think the risk of the company requires a 20% payoff, you shouldn't pay more than $500 for the company."}
{"id": "577475", "text": "In short, I suggest you take a look at your W-4 form and adjust it properly. And yes you can claim your self as a dependent, unless someone else is claiming you. But here is a more detailed explanation of how it works. How Income Tax Works. While most people tend to only think about the tax system and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as the month of April approaches, it's actually a never-ending process. For our purposes, a good way to explain how the system works is to give an example of one American income earner, we will call him Joe. The tax process begins when Joe starts his new job. He and his employer agree on his compensation, which will be figured into his gross income at the end of the year. One of the first things he has to do when he's hired is fill out all of his tax forms, including a W-4 form. The W-4 form lists all of Joe's withholding allowance information, such as his number of dependents and child care expenses. The information on this form tells your employer just how much money it needs to withhold from your paycheck for federal income tax. The IRS says that you should check this form each year, as your tax situation may change from year to year. Once Joe is hired and given a salary, he can estimate how much he will pay in taxes for the year. Here's the formula: At the end of each pay period, Joe's company takes the withheld money, along with all of withheld tax money from all of its employees, and deposits the money in a Federal Reserve Bank. This is how the government maintains a steady stream of income while also drawing interest on your tax dollars. Toward the end of the tax year, Joe's company has to send him a W-2 form in the mail. This happens by January 31. This form details how much money Joe made during the last year and how much federal tax was withheld from his income. This information can also be found on Joe's last paycheck of the year, but he'll need to send the W-2 to the IRS for processing purposes. At some point between the time Joe receives his W-2 and April 15, Joe will have to fill out and return his taxes to one of the IRS service and processing centers. Once the IRS receives Joe's tax returns, an IRS employee keys in every piece of information on Joe's tax forms. This information is then stored in large magnetic tape machines. If Joe is due a tax refund, he is sent a check in the mail in the next few weeks. If Joe uses e-File or TeleFile, his refund can be direct-deposited into his bank account."}
{"id": "577605", "text": "From my perspective I suspect that if the government use the paid price, people will start to buy at very low nominal prices in order to pay less taxes, and will repay the seller by other means."}
{"id": "577729", "text": "\"Dawn Bennett For over thirty years, Dawn J. Bennett has provided expert financial guidance and insight to her numerous clients as a Wharton School of Business Certified Management Investment Analyst. Dawn\u2019s financial expertise and passion for politics has culminated in the \"\"Financial Myth Busting with Dawn Bennett\"\" radio program, a nationally-syndicated weekly show on which Dawn covers a range of current political and financial issues.\""}
{"id": "577832", "text": "Your question seems to be making assumptions around \u201cinvesting\u201d, that investing is only about stock market and bonds or similar things. I would suggest that you should look much broader than that in terms of your investments. Investment Types Your should consider (and include) some or all of the following for your investments, depending on your age, your attitude towards risk, the number of dependents you have, your lifestyle, etc. I love @Blackjack\u2019s explanation of diversification into other asset classes producing a lower risk portfolio. Excellent! All the above need to be considered in this spread of risk, depending as I said earlier on your age, your attitude towards risk, the number of dependents you have, your lifestyle, etc. Stock Market Investment I\u2019ll focus most of the rest of my post on the stock markets, as that is where my main experience lies. But the comments are applicable to a greater or lesser extent to other types of investing. We then come to how engaged you want to be with your investments. Two general management styles are passive investment management versus active investment management. @Blackjack says  That pretty much sums up passive management. The idea is to buy ETFs   across asset classes and just leave them. The difficulty with this idea is that profitability is very dependent upon when the stocks are purchased and when they are sold. This is why active investing should be considered as a viable alternative to passive investment.  I don\u2019t have access to a very long time frame of stock market data, but I do have 30 or so years of FTSE data, so let\u2019s say that we invest \u00a3100,000 for 10 years by buying an ETF in the FTSE100 index. I know this isn't de-risking across a number of asset classes by purchasing a number of different EFTs, but the logic still applies, if you will bear with me. Passive Investing I have chosen my example dates of best 10 years and worst 10 years as specific dates that demonstrate my point that active investing will (usually) out-perform passive investing. From a passive investing point of view, here is a graph of the FTSE with two purchase dates chosen (for maximum effect), to show the best and worst return you could receive. Note this ignores brokerage and other fees. In these time frames of data I have \u2026   These are contrived dates to illustrate the point, on how ineffective passive investing can be, depending if there is a bear/bull market and where you buy in the cycle.  One obviously wouldn\u2019t buy all their stocks in one tranche, but I\u2019m just trying to illustrate the point. Active Investing Let\u2019s consider now active investing. I use the following rules for selling and buying:- This is obviously a very simple technical trading system and I would not recommend using it to trade with, as it is overly simplistic and there are some flaws and inefficiencies in it. So, in my simulation,  These beat the passive stock market profit for their respective dates. Summary Passive stock market investing is dependent upon the entry and exit prices on the dates the transactions are made and will trade regardless of market cycles. Active stock market trading or investing engages with the market using a set of criteria, which can change over time, but allows one\u2019s investments to be in or out of the market at any point in time. My time frames were arbitrary, but with the logic applied (which is a very simple technical trading methodology), I would suggest that any 10 year time frame active investing would beat passive investing."}
{"id": "578022", "text": "\"You owe no tax on the option transaction in 2015 in this case.  How you ultimately get taxed depends on how you dispose of the position.  If it expires, then you will have a short-term capital gain on the option position at expiration.  If it is exercised, then the option is \"\"gone\"\" for tax purposes and your basis in the underlying is adjusted.  From IRS Publication 550: If a call you write is exercised and you sell the underlying stock, increase your amount realized on the sale of the stock by the amount you received for the call when figuring your gain or loss. The gain or loss is long term or short term depending on your holding period of the stock. In your case, this will be a long-term capital gain. For completeness, if you buy to cover the option back from the market before expiration or exercise, then it is also a short-term capital gain. Also, keep in mind that this all assumes that this covered call is \"\"qualified\"\" so that it does not count as a straddle.  You can find more about that in Pub 550. https://www.irs.gov/publications/p550/ch04.html#en_US_2014_publink100010630 All of this is for US tax purposes.\""}
{"id": "578046", "text": "\"You mean \"\"Greece has asked China for loans\"\" and China might've taken them seriously.    In no way does that transition into any sort of reasonable expectation that China buy up European debt.  Much less buy it up and then ignore it for a while, which is obviously what Europe is hoping for.\""}
{"id": "578223", "text": "Does gold's value decrease over time due to the fact that it is being continuously mined? Remember that demand increases and decreases - we've had seven years or so of strong demand increase and the corresponding price increase suggests there is a lack of gold coming into the market rather than too much. Also, bear in mind that mining the stuff on any scale is hazardous and requires massive investment in infrastructure and time. Large mines frequently take seven to ten years to come on-stream - hardly an elastic enterprise."}
{"id": "578314", "text": "\"You asked 3 questions here. It's best to keep them separate as these are pretty distinct, different answers, and each might already have a good detailed answer and so might be subject to \"\"closed as duplicate of...\"\" That said, I'll address the JAGLX question (1). It's not an apples to apples comparison. This is a Life Sciences fund, i.e. a very specialized fund, investing in one narrow sector of the market. If you study market returns over time, it's easy to find sectors that have had a decade or even two that have beat the S&P by a wide margin. The 5 year comparison makes this pretty clear. For sake of comparison, Apple had twice the return of JAGLX during the past 5 years. The advisor charging 2% who was heavy in Apple might look brilliant, but the returns are not positively correlated to the expense involved. A 10 or 20 year lookback will always uncover funds or individual stocks that beat the indexes, but the law of averages suggests that the next 10 or 20 years will still appear random.\""}
{"id": "578530", "text": "With a tax-sheltered account like an IRA, timing is irrelevant with respect to taxes. So enjoy your vacation. When you get back, don't invest in one lump sum -- break up your purchases over a period of weeks if possible. If you are investing in ETFs for your index funds, many brokers have no transaction fee ETF options now."}
{"id": "578597", "text": "You apparently assume that pouring money into a landlord's pocket is a bad thing. Not necessarily. Whether it makes sense to purchase your own home or to live in a rental property varies based on the market prices and rents of properties. In the long term, real estate prices closely follow inflation. However, in some areas it may be possible that real estate prices have increased by more than inflation in the past, say, 10 years. This may mean that some (stupid) people assume that real estate prices continue to appreciate at this rate in the future. The price of real estates when compared to rents may become unrealistically high so that the rental yield becomes low, and the only reasonable way of obtaining money from real estate investments is price appreciation continuing. No, it will not continue forever. Furthermore, an individual real estate is a very poorly diversified investment. And a very risky investment, too: a mold problem can destroy the entire value of your investment, if you invest in only one property. Real estates are commonly said to be less risky than stocks, but this applies only to large real estate portfolios when compared with large stock portfolios. It is easier to build a large stock portfolio with a small amount of money to invest when compared to building a large real estate portfolio. Thus, I would consider this: how much return are you going to get (by not needing to pay rent, but needing to pay some minor maintenance costs) when purchasing your own home? How much does the home cost? What is the annual return on the investment? Is it larger than smaller when compared to investing the same amount of money in the stock market? As I said, an individual house is a more risky investment than a well-diversified stock portfolio. Thus, if a well-diversified stock portfolio yields 8% annually, I would demand 10% return from an individual house before considering to move my money from stocks to a house."}
{"id": "578615", "text": "\"Ask yourself the same question for furniture making. Would you feel more comfortable sitting in a chair that you made yourself versus one that you bought from a furniture store?  How about one that you bought from IKEA and assembled? For an experienced, competent furniture maker, you might be able to make an equivalent chair for less money and be highly confident.  For a \"\"DIY\"\" builder, you might be less confident but be willing to take more of a risk with the possibility of making a good chair for less money (and gain experience on what not to do next time).   The same applies to investing - if you are highly confident in your own abilities, DIY investing may work better for you.  For the \"\"general population\"\", however, relying on experts to do the hard work (and paying a little more for their services) is probably a better option and gives you more confidence. As for the second quote, I'm note sure there's a causality there.  If anything, I think it's the other way around - people who have more money saved for retirement are more likely to use investment advisors.\""}
{"id": "578738", "text": "If you are in the U.S., without credit cards, you probably don't have a credit history. Without a credit history, you won't be able to get a loan/mortgage, and even if you do, you'll get it on very unfavorable terms. Depending on where you live you might even have great difficulty renting an apartment. So, the most important reason to have credit cards is to have a good credit score. People have already listed other advantages of having credit cards, but another thing that wasn't mentioned is fraud protection. Credit cards are better protected against fraud than debit cards. You probably shouldn't use debit cards online unless you must. Also, without a credit card or credit history, some simple and important liberties like renting a car while you are travelling might be denied to you. So, in conclusion, it's bizarre, but in modern America you need credit cards, and you need them bad."}
{"id": "578906", "text": "I would tell the former owner that you will sell him the house for you current loan balance. He wants the home, he may be willing to pay what you owe. You can't really do a short sale unless you are behind on your payments. Banks only agree to a short sale when they think they are going to have to foreclose on the property. Not to mention a short sale is almost as bad as a foreclosure and will wreck your credit. If the former buying is not willing to buy the house for what you owe your only real option is to come up with the difference. If he offers you say $50K less than you owe, you will have to give the mortgage holder the remaining balance $50K in this example for them to release the property.  Another problem you will face, if the former owner is willing to pay more than what the house is worth, and he is going to finance it, he will have to have enough cash to put down so that the loan amount is not more than the property is worth. Finally if none of that works you can just hold on to the property until the value comes up or you mortgage is payed down enough to make the balance of the mortgage less than the value of the house. Then offer the property to the former owner again."}
{"id": "578983", "text": "The yield on treasury bond indicates the amount of money anyone at can make at virtually zero risk.   So lets say banks have X [say 100] amount of money. They can either invest this in treasury bonds and get Y% [say 1%] interest that is very safe, or invest into mortgage loans [i.e. lend it to people] at Y+Z% [say at 3%]. The extra Z% is to cover the servicing cost and the associated risk. (Put another way, if you wanted only Y%, why not invest into treasury bonds, rather than take the risk and hassle of getting the same Y% by lending to individuals?) In short, treasury bond rates drive the rate at which banks can invest surplus money in the market or borrow from the market. This indirectly translates into the savings & lending rates to the banks' customers."}
{"id": "579557", "text": "\"From the Vanguard page -  This seemed the easiest one as S&P data is simple to find. I use MoneyChimp to get -  which confirms that Vanguard's page is offering CAGR, not arithmetic Average. Note: Vanguard states \"\"For U.S. stock market returns, we use the Standard & Poor's 90 from 1926 through March 3, 1957,\"\" while the Chimp uses data from Nobel Prize winner, Robert Shiller's site.\""}
{"id": "579763", "text": "4) Beef up my emergency fund, make sure my 401(k) or IRA was fully funded, put the rest into investments. See many past answers. A house you are living in is not an investment. It is a purchase, just as rental is a purchase. Buying a house to rent out is starting a business. If you want to spend the ongoing time and effort and cash running a business, and if you can buy at the right time in the right place for the righr price, this can be a reasonable investment. If you aren't willing to suffer the pains of being a landlord, it's less attractive; you can hire someone to manage it for you but that cuts the income significantly. Starting a business: Remember that many, perhaps most, small businesses fail. If you really want to run a business it can be a good investment, again assuming you can buy at the right time/price/place and are willing and able to invest the time and effort and money to support the business.  Nothing produces quick return with low risk."}
{"id": "580025", "text": "\"I don't know Canada very well, but can offer some general points when considering where to park your emergency fund. Savings rates are currently low, but then so is inflation. Always bear in mind that inflation decreases the value of your money, so if you're getting 4% interest and inflation is 2%, you're making 2% gross in real terms. If you're getting 2% and inflation is close to zero, you're actually earning a similar amount, it's just the numbers are going up more slowly. Obviously when and how much tax you pay affects the actual return, it's just worth bearing in mind that low interest and low inflation are actually not that bad a savings environment as they first appear. For an emergency fund the key thing is ease of access, consider keeping some portion of your savings in an instant access account for those emergencies that happen when the banks are closed. In the UK there are various tax-free savings options, I'm guessing Canada has a few too, if so you should explore those options. While these may not have attractive headline rates, you don't pay tax on the interest, this can make them much more competitive (4% tax free is the same as 5% gross if you would have to pay tax at 20%). Normally tax free investments have caps so once you've invested a set amount you can't add anymore. This may be a consideration if you regularly dip into your emergency fund as you might not easily be able to build it up again. My approach is to have about 90% of my \"\"rainy day\"\" fund in easily accessible but tax free savings. This discourages me from spending it unless I really need to. I then keep a slush fund sufficient to cover every day disasters (boiler packing up, needing a hire car for a week etc) in instant access accounts .\""}
{"id": "580056", "text": "Unless I'm misunderstanding something, you don't need to move your assets into a new type of account to accomplish your goal of letting your money grow in a low cost vanguard index fund. Simply reallocate your assets within the Inherited IRA. If the brokerage you're in doesn't meet your needs (high transaction fees, no access to the Vanguard funds you're interested in) you can always move to a low cost brokerage. The new brokerage can help you transfer your assets so that the Inherited IRA remains intact. You will not have a tax burden if you do this reallocation and you'll be able to feel good about your diversification with a low cost index fund. You will, however, have to pay taxes on your RMD. Since you're young I can't imagine that your RMD will be greater than the $5k you can invest in a Roth IRA. If it is, you can open a personal account and keep letting the the money grow."}
{"id": "580080", "text": "SpecKK's answer is excellent, I've only got two things to add: When your creditors change your account number, make sure to update your online information. You're not sending back a coupon, so it's up to you to make sure it has the new number and gets posted to the correct account. If your bank supports it, give the creditors good labels/nicknames. If you have names that are similar, it's easy to send a payment to the wrong place -- this may not be easy to detect and is a hassle to straighten out."}
{"id": "580122", "text": "You need to protect from two types of disasters. You need to set a goal. In 5 years I will have X months of emergency funds. Then start building it. You can also make sure that any found money (birthday check from your grandmother or bonus check at work) goes into building the fund.  While is seems a waste to pay all that interest for the student loans, you may decide that having an emergency fund is more important. Note: don't mix the two types of emergency funds. It is less confusing to have two sub accounts, because it avoids the double counting of the funds."}
{"id": "580400", "text": "The Explanation is correct. The Traders buys the 1st call and profits linearly form 40$ onwards. At at 45 the short call kick in and neutralizes any further profit on the first call."}
{"id": "580534", "text": "It is a very complex question to answer and it really depends. However, here are some points to consider and verify with your accountant or tax expert.  First, if you exercise now, the downside is that you may be subject to Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) based on the theoretical gain on the stock (current price minus your strike price) when you file your tax return.  The other obvious downside is that if the company goes nowhere, you are stuck with the stock and potentially lose money.  The benefit is that the clock starts ticking for long-term capital gains so if you sell after 1 year from the exercise date (or your company gets sold) then the gain would be taxed as long-term capital gain which is taxed at a lower rate. If your company were to get sold, the gains are not necessarily taxed as ordinary income.  If it is a cash transaction then most likely (unless you have exercised and held the stock for over a year).  However, if it is a stock sale, then you may end up getting stock of the company that acquires your company.  In that situation, the tax event would be when you sell the new shares vs. the time of company sale. Finally, whether to exercise or not also depends on how you feel about the prospects of the company.  If you think they will be sold or of more value down the road then exercising makes sense.  If you are not sure then you could hedge your bets by only exercising a portion of it. You should definitely consult with a financial advisor or a tax consultant regarding these matters."}
{"id": "580820", "text": "and seems to do better than the S&P 500 too. No, that's not true. In fact, this fund is somewhere between S&P500 and the NASDAQ Composite indexes wrt to performance. From my experience (I have it too), it seems to fall almost in the middle between SPY and QQQ in daily moves. So it does provide diversification, but you're basically diversifying between various indexes. The cost is the higher expense ratios (compare VTI to VOO)."}
{"id": "580963", "text": "\"I think the other answers raise good points.  But to your question, \"\"How do I find an honest financial adviser\"\" ask your friends and family.  See who they talk to and confide in.  Go meet that person, understand what they do and how they view things and if you gel, great.  Honesty and strong ethics exist in individuals regardless of laws. What is it you're trying to accomplish?  You just have some money you want to put aside?  You want to save for something?  You want to start a budget or savings plan?  Your first step may be talking to a tax person, not an investment adviser.  Sometimes the most significant returns are generated when you simply retain more of your earnings and tax people know how to accomplish that.  You're just graduating university, you're just going to get your first job.  You don't need to hunt for the right heavy hitter 30% gains generating financial adviser.  You need to establish your financial foundation.  Crawl, walk, then run. There are some basics (that transcend international borders).  If you don't know much about investing, most (if not all) retirement and individual brokerage type accounts will give you access to some kind of market index fund.  You don't need to multinationally diversify in to high fee funds because \"\"emerging markets are screaming right now.\"\"  Typically, over a few years the fees you pay in the more exotic asset classes will eat up the gains you've made compared to a very low fee market index fund. You can open free accounts at a number of financial institutions.  These free accounts at these banks all have a list of zero commission zero load funds, all have something resembling an index fund.  You can open your account for free, deposit your money for free, and buy shares in an index fund for free.\""}
{"id": "581204", "text": "The question regarding your snapshot is fine, but the real question is what are you doing to improve your situation?  As John offered, one bit of guidance suggests you have a full year's gross earnings as a saving target. In my opinion, that's on the low side, and 2X should be the goal by 35.  I suggest you look back, and see if you can account for every dollar for the prior 6-12 months. This exercise isn't for the purpose of criticizing your restaurant spending, or cost of clothes, but to just bring it to light. Often, there's some low hanging fruit in this type of budgeting exercise, spending that you didn't realize was so high.  I'd also look carefully at your debt. What rate is the mortgage and the student loans? By understanding the loans' rates, terms, and tax status (e.g. whether any is a deduction) you can best choose the way to pay it off. If the rates are low enough you might consider funding your 401(k) accounts a bit more and slow down the loan payments.  It seems that in your 30's you have a negative net worth, but your true asset is your education and future earning potential.  From a high level view, you make $180K. Taking $50K off the top (which after taxes gives you $30K) to pay your student loan, you are still earning $130K, putting you at or near top 10% of families in this country. This should be enough to afford that mortgage, and still live a nice life.  In the end there are three paths, earn more (why does hubby earn half what you do, in the same field?), spend less, or reallocate current budget by changing how you are handling that debt."}
{"id": "581251", "text": "Real Estate is all local. In the United States, I can show you houses so high the rent on them is less than 1/3% of their value per month, eg. $1M House renting for less than $3500. I can also find 3 unit buildings (for say $200K) that rent for $3000/mo total rents. I might want to live in that house, but buy the triplex to rent out. You need to find what makes sense, and not buy out of impulse.  A house to live in and a house to invest have two different sets of criteria. They may overlap, but if the strict Price/Rent were universal, there would be no variation. If you clarify your goal, the answers will be far more valuable."}
{"id": "581380", "text": "You continue with this form. The fact that the trade in value is less than market value doesn't mean that you don't have taxable income from the sale. Since you depreciated the car before selling it, you need to compare the trade in value not to the market value, but to your cost basis, which may be lower."}
{"id": "581418", "text": "Your first home can be up to \u00a3450,000 today. But that figure is unlikely to stay the same over 40 years. The government would need to raise it in line with inflation otherwise in 40 years you won't be able to buy quite so much with it. If inflation averages 2% over your 40 year investment period say, \u00a3450,000 would buy you roughly what \u00a3200,000 would today. Higher rates of inflation will reduce your purchasing power even faster. You pay stamp duty on a house. For a house worth \u00a3450,000 that would be around \u00a312,500. There are also estate agent's fees (typically 1-2% of the purchase price, although you might be able to do better) and legal fees. If you sell quickly you'd only be able to access the balance of the money less all those taxes and fees. That's quite a bit of your bonus lost so why did you tie your money up in a LISA for all those years instead of investing in the stock market directly? One other thing to note is that you buy a LISA from your post tax income. You pay into a pension using your pre-tax income so if you're investing for your retirement then a pension will start with a 20% bonus if you're a lower rate taxpayer and a whopping 40% bonus if you're a higher rate taxpayer. If you're a higher rate taxpayer a pension is much better value."}
{"id": "581493", "text": "Sony has been doing this for years and nobody complains. But I do see the point, it keeps companies like WalMart and Best Buy from destroying small businesses.  Ohio does the same thing with beer and cigarrette prices."}
{"id": "581579", "text": "\"For any large company, there's a lot of activity, and if you sell at \"\"market\"\" your buy or sell will execute in seconds within a penny or two of the real-time \"\"market\"\" price.  I often sell at \"\"limit\"\" a few cents above market, and those sell within 20 minutes usually.  For much smaller companies, obviously you are beholden to a buyer also wanting that stock, but those are not on major exchanges.  You never see whose buy order you're selling into, that all happens behind the curtain so to speak.\""}
{"id": "581591", "text": "\"One occastion where \"\"will not be quoted ex\"\" is used is when a corporate action is occurring such as a spin-off.  In such a case, the rights to, and the spin-off itself may be quoted separately on the home country exchange.  However, if the company is based abroad, it may not be worth the expense for them to have an additional securities listing on the local (US) exchange. For example:  In November 2016, Yamana Gold (TSX: YRI, NYSE: AUY) announced it will have an initial public offering of a spin-off (Brio Gold, to be listed on TSX as BRIO).  Existing shareholders received a right to one share of the spin-off for every 16 shares they held of YRI (or AUY).  These rights were separately traded in advance of the IPO of the spin-off on TSX under \"\"YRI.RT\"\", but the prospectus they stated that the rights \"\"will not be quoted ex\"\" on NYSE, i.e. there was no separate listing on NYSE for these rights. The wording seems counter-intuitive, but I suspect that is the attorneys who were preparing the prospectus used those specific words as they may have a very specific meaning (e.g. from a statute or previous case).\""}
{"id": "581657", "text": "I'm NMLS with a bank, won't name it, but you can buy and sell points up to .5 if I remember right.  Might be 1% but it's the difference between 1300 and 1700 if I remember right for monthly payments."}
{"id": "581672", "text": "Here is the answer from my brokerage: Regular equity monthly options expire on the 3rd Friday of every month. The last time to trade them is by market close at 4 PM Eastern time. The weekly options will expire on the Friday of that week, also with a last trading time of 4 PM Eastern time. Options that expire in the money by .01 or more are automatically exercised. If you are long an option that is out of the money at expiration, it will expire worthless. If you are short an option, even if it expires out of the money, you are still at risk for possible assignment since the long option holder always has the right to exercise an option prior to expiration.*"}
{"id": "581780", "text": "\"As Dilip said, if you want actual concrete, based in tax law, answers, please add the country (and if applicable, state) where you pay income tax. Also, knowing what tax bracket you're in would help as well, although I certainly understand if you're not comfortable sharing that. So, assuming the US... If you're in the 10% or 15% tax bracket, then you're already not paying any federal tax on the $3k long term gain, so purposely taking losses is pointless, and given that there's probably a cost to taking the loss (commission, SEC fee), you'd be losing money by doing so. Also, you won't be able to buy back the loser for 31 days without having the loss postponed due to the wash sale that would result. State tax is another matter, but (going by the table in this article), even using the highest low end tax rate (Tennessee at 6%), the $50 loss would only save you $3, which is probably less than the commission to sell the loser, so again you'd be losing money. And if you're in a state with no state income tax, then the loss wouldn't save you anything on taxes at the state level, but of course you'll still be paying to be able to take the loss. On the high end, you'd be saving 20% federal tax and 13.3% state tax (using the highest high end tax state, California, and ignoring (because I don't know :-) ) whether they tax long-term capital gains at the same rate as regular income or not), you'd be saving $50 * (20% + 13.3%) = $50 * 33.3% = $16.65. So for taxes, you're looking at saving between nothing and $16.65. And then you have to subtract from that the cost to achieve the loss, so even on the high end (which means (assuming a single filer)) you're making >$1 million), you're only saving about $10, and you're probably actually losing money. So I personally don't think taking a $50 loss to try to decrease taxes makes sense. However, if you really meant $500 or $5000, then it might (although if you're in the 10-15% brackets in a no income tax state, even then it wouldn't). So the answer to your final question is, \"\"It depends.\"\" The only way to say for sure is, based on the country and state you're in, calculate what it will save you (if anything). As a general rule, you want to avoid letting the tax tail wag the dog. That is, your financial goal should be to end up with the most money, not to pay the least taxes. So while looking at the tax consequences of a transaction is a good idea, don't look at just the tax consequences, look at the consequences for your overall net worth.\""}
{"id": "581793", "text": "If you buy for $1 and sell $1 when the price goes to $2, you would have sold only half of your initial investment. So your investment would now be worth $2 and you sell $1 leaving $1 still in the market.  This means you would have sold half your initial investment, making a profit of $0.50 on this half of your initial investment, and having to pay CGT on this amount."}
{"id": "581866", "text": "To try to answer the three explicit questions: Every share of stock is treated proportionately: each share is assigned the same dollar amount of investment (1/176th part of the contribution in the example), and has the same discount amount (15% of $20 or $25, depending on when you sell, usually). So if you immediately sell 120 shares at $25, you have taxable income on the gain for those shares (120*($25-$17)). Either selling immediately or holding for the long term period (12-18 mo) can be advantageous, just in different ways.   Selling immediately avoids a risk of a decline in the price of the stock, and allows you to invest elsewhere and earn income on the proceeds for the next 12-18 months that you would not otherwise have had.  The downside is that all of your gain ($25-$17 per share) is taxed as ordinary income.   Holding for the full period is advantageous in that only the discount (15% of $20 or $25) will be taxed as ordinary income and the rest of the gain (sell price minus $20 or $25) will be taxed at long-term capital gain tax rates, which generally are lower than ordinary rates (all taxes are due in the year you do sell).  The catch is you will sell at different price, higher or lower, and thus have a risk of loss (or gain). You will never be (Federally) double taxed in any scenario.  The $3000 you put in will not be taxed after all is sold, as it is a return of your capital investment.  All money you receive in excess of the $3000 will be taxed, in all scenarios, just potentially at different rates, ordinary or capital gain.  (All this ignores AMT considerations, which you likely are not subject to.)"}
{"id": "581973", "text": "I've rolled mine over into IRAs, and once you have one rollover account you can roll further 401ks into it-- I've done that."}
{"id": "582553", "text": "Very rarely would an investor be happy with a 4% yield independent of anything else that might happen in the future. For example, if in 3 years for some reason or other inflation explodes and 30 year bond yields go up to 15% across the board, they would be kicking themselves for having locked it up for 30 years at 4%. However, if instead of doing that the investor put their money in a 3 year bond at 3% say, they would have the opportunity to reinvest in the new rate environment, which might offer higher or lower yields. This eventually leads fixed income investors to have a bond portfolio in which they manage the average maturity of their bond portfolio to be somewhere between the two extremes of investing it all in super short term/ low yield money market rates vs. super long term bonds. As they constantly monitor and manage their maturing investments, it inevitably leads them to managing interest rate risk as they decide where to reinvest their incremental coupons by looking at the shape of the yield curve at the time and determining what kind of risk/reward tradeoffs they would have to make."}
{"id": "583062", "text": "\"Emotion aside, you can calculate the cost of the funds you have tied up at the bank.  If I can earn 5% in a CD, my \"\"free\"\" checking with minimum $5000 balance really costs me $250/yr. You have money tied up, I understand, but where would you place it otherwise, and at what return?  The subject of frequent trading even at zero cost is worth addressing, but not the real subject of your question. So, I'll leave it for elsewhere.\""}
{"id": "583080", "text": "As yet another explanation of why it does not really matter, you can look at this from the valuation point of view. Stock price is the present value of its future cash flows (be it free cash flow of the firm or dividends, depending on the model). Let's have a look at the dividends case. Imagine, the price of the stock is based on only three dividends streams $5 dollars each: dividend to be paid today, in year 1, and in year 2. Each should be discounted back to today (say, at 10%), except today's dividend, since today is now.  Once that dividend is paid, it is no longer in the stream of cash flows. So if we just delete that first $5 from the formula, the price will adjust itself down by the amount of the dividend to $8.68. NOTE that this is a very simple example, since in reality cash flows streams are arguably infinite and because there are many other factors affecting stock price. But simply for your understanding, this example should provide you with the reason simply from the valuation perspective."}
{"id": "583165", "text": "\"It is called \"\"Opportunity Cost.\"\"   Opportunity cost is the value you lose because of a decision you made.   This is the book definition from Investopedia. The difference in return between a chosen investment and one that is necessarily passed up. Say you invest in a stock and it returns a paltry 2% over the year. In placing your money in the stock, you gave up the opportunity of another investment - say, a risk-free government bond yielding 6%. In this situation, your opportunity costs are 4% (6% - 2%).\""}
{"id": "583203", "text": "You did something that you shouldn't have done; you bought a dividend.  Most mutual fund companies have educational materials on their sites that recommend against making new investments in mutual funds in the last two months of the year because most mutual funds distribute their earnings (dividends, capital gains etc) to their shareholders in December, and the share price of the funds goes down in the amount of the per share distribution. These distributions can be taken  in cash or can be re-invested in the fund; you most likely chose the latter  option (it is often the default choice if you ignored all this because you are a newbie). For those who choose to reinvest, the number of shares in the mutual fund increases, but since the price of the shares has decreased, the net amount remains the same. You own more shares at a lower price than the day before when the price was higher but the total value of your account is the same (ignoring normal market fluctuations in the price of the actual stocks held by the fund. Regardless of whether you take the distributions as cash or re-invest in the fund, that money is taxable income to you (unless the fund is owned inside a 401k or IRA or other tax-deferred investment program).  You bought 56 shares at a price of $17.857 per share (net cost $1000). The fund distributed its earnings shortly thereafter and gave you 71.333-56= 15.333 additional shares. The new share price is $14.11. So, the total value of your investment is $1012, but the amount that you have invested in the account is the original $1000 plus the amount of the distribution which is (roughly) $14.11 x 15.333 = $216.  Your total investment of $1216 is now worth $1012 only, and so you have actually lost money. Besides, you owe income tax on that $216 dividend that you received.  Do you see why the mutual fund companies recommend against making new investments late in the year?  If you had waited till after the mutual fund had made its distribution, you could have bought $1000/14.11 = 70.871 shares and wouldn't have owed tax on that distribution that you just bought by making the investment just before the distribution was made. See also my answer to this recent question about investing in mutual funds."}
{"id": "583230", "text": "In a traditional IRA (or 401k or equivalent), income tax is not taken on the money when it is deposited or when dividends are reinvested, but money you take out (after you can do do without penalty) is taxed as if it were ordinary income. (I believe that's true; I don't think you get to take the long-term investment rate.) Note that Roth is the opposite: you pay income tax up front before putting money into the retirement account, but you will eventually withdraw without paying any additional  tax at that time. Unlike normal investments, neither of these requires tracking the details to know how much tax to pay. There are no taxes due on the reinvested dividends, and you don't need to track cost basis."}
{"id": "583359", "text": "A bank or credit card agency can deny your application for pretty much any reason. That said, it's extremely unlikely they'd do so for a secured credit card. This is because the credit is secured. If your sister is to get a card with, say, a $1000 limit, she will have to provide $1000 in security. This means the banks risk practically nothing. That said, I have found one reference that claims you need a score of above 600 to qualify for a secured credit card, though this is hard to believe. Secured credit cards are a reasonable way of building your credit back up. Just about the only other way for her credit rating to improve is for her history of bad debt to fall off the credit report, but that's going to take quite some time. She should be working hard to provide positive credit history to replace the old negative history, assuming her credit rating is important to her. It may not be; it's only important if she plans on taking on debt in the future. Honestly, a credit rating of around 500 is so bad that I wouldn't even worry much about lowering it. It's already low enough as to make it all but impossible to qualify for (unsecured) credit or loans. A single denial is unlikely to significantly affect the score, except in the very short term. With two bankruptcies, I encourage credit counselling for your sister. There are a number of good books available, too. Credit counselling should go into detail on credit scores, unsecured credit, proper budgeting, and all that sort of useful information."}
{"id": "583666", "text": "Wikipedia has a nice definition of financial literacy (emphasis below is mine): [...] refers to an   individual's ability to make informed   judgments and effective decisions   about the use and management of their   money. Raising interest in personal   finance is now a focus of state-run   programs in countries including   Australia, Japan, the United States   and the UK. [...]  As for how you can become financially literate, here are some suggestions: Learn about how basic financial products works: bank accounts, mortgages, credit cards, investment accounts, insurance (home, car, life, disability, medical.) Free printed & online materials should be available from your existing financial service providers to help you with your existing products.  In particular, learn about the fees, interest, or other charges you may incur with these products.  Becoming fee-aware is a step towards financial literacy, since financially literate people compare costs.  Seek out additional information on each type of product from unbiased sources (i.e. sources not trying to sell you something.) Get out of debt and stay out of debt. This may take a while. Focus on your highest-interest loans first. Learn the difference between good debt and bad debt.   Learn about compound interest.  Once you understand compound interest, you'll understand why being in debt is bad for your financial well-being. If you aren't already saving money for retirement, start now.  Investigate whether your employer offers an advantageous matched 401(k) plan (or group RRSP/DC plan for Canadians) or a pension plan.  If your employer offers a good plan, sign up.  If you get to choose your own investments, keep it simple and favor low-cost balanced index funds until you understand the different types of investments.  Read the material provided by the plan sponsor, try online tools provided, and seek out additional information from unbiased sources. If your employer doesn't offer an advantageous retirement plan, open an individual retirement account or IRA (or personal RRSP for Canadians.)  If your employer does offer a plan, you can set one of these up to save even more.  You could start with access to a family of low-cost mutual funds (examples: Vanguard for Americans, or TD eFunds for Canadians) or earn advanced credit by learning about discount brokers and self-directed accounts. Understand how income taxes and other taxes work.  If you have an accountant prepare your taxes, ask questions.  If you prepare your taxes yourself, understand what you're doing and don't file blind.  Seek help if necessary.  There are many good books on how income tax works.  Software packages that help you self-file often have online help worth reading \u2013 read it. Learn about life insurance, medical insurance, disability insurance, wills, living wills & powers of attorney, and estate planning.  Death and illness can derail your family's finances.  Learn how these things can help. Seek out and read key books on personal finance topics.  e.g. Your Money Or Your Life, Why Smart People Make Big Money Mistakes, The Four Pillars of Investing, The Random Walk Guide to Investing, and many more. Seek out and read good personal finance blogs.  There's a wealth of information available for free on the Internet, but do check facts and assumptions. Here are some suggested blogs for American readers and some suggested blogs for Canadian readers. Subscribe to a personal finance periodical and read it.  Good ones to start with are Kiplinger's Personal Finance Magazine in the U.S. and MoneySense Magazine in Canada.  The business section in your local newspaper may sometimes have personal finance articles worth reading, too. Shameless plug: Ask more questions on this site. The Personal Finance & Money Stack Exchange is here to help you learn about money & finance, so you can make better financial decisions.  We're all here to learn and help others learn about money. Keep learning!"}
{"id": "583912", "text": "A few points to consider - Welcome to Money.SE. This is not a discussion board, but rather, a site to ask and answer personal finance questions that are factual in nature. Your question is great, in my opinion, but it's a question that has no answer, it's opinion-based. So I'm slipping this in to help you, and suggest you visit the site to see the great Q&A we've accumulated over the years."}
{"id": "583913", "text": "\"Month to date For the month to date (MTD), the price on Feb 28th is $4.58 and the price on March 16th is $4.61 so the return is which can be written more simply as The position is 1000 shares valued at $4580 on Feb 28th, so the profit on the month to date is Calendar year to date For the calendar year to date (YTD), the price on Dec 31st is $4.60 and the price on Feb 28th is $4.58 so the return to Feb 28th is The return from Feb 28th to March 16th is 0.655022 % so the year to date return is or more directly So the 2011 YTD profit on 1000 shares valued at $4600 on Dec 31st is Year to date starting Dec 10th For the year to date starting Dec 10th, the starting value is and the value on Dec 31st is 1000 * $4.60 = $4600 so the return is $4600 / $4510 - 1 = 0.0199557 = 1.99557 % The year to date profit is therefore Note - YTD is often understood to mean calendar year to date.  To cover all the bases state both, ie \"\"calendar YTD (2011)\"\" and \"\"YTD starting Dec 10th 2010\"\". Edit further to comment For the calendar year to date, with 200 shares sold on Jan 10th with the share price at $4.58, the return from Dec 31st to Jan 10th is The return from Jan 10th to Feb 28th is The return from Feb 28th to March 16th is The profit on 1000 shares from Dec 31st to Jan 10th is $4600 * -0.00434783 = -$20 The profit on 800 shares from Jan 10th to Feb 28th is zero. The profit on 800 shares from Feb 28th to March 16th is So the year to date profit is $4.\""}
{"id": "584090", "text": "An alternative options strategy to minimize loss of investment capital is to buy a put, near the money around your original buy price, with a premium less than the total dividend. The value of the put will increase if the stock price falls quickly. Likely, a large portion of your dividend will go towards paying the option premium, this will however ensure that your capital doesn't drop much lower than your buy price. Continued dividend distributions will continue to pay to buy future put options. Risks here are if the stock does not have a very large up or down movement from your original buy price causing most of the dividend to be spent on insuring your position. It may take a few cycles, but once the stock has appreciated in value say 10% above buying price, you can consider either skipping the put insurance so you can pocket the dividend, or you can bu ythe put with a higher strike price for additional insurance against a loss of gains. Again, this sacrifices much of the dividend in favor of price loss, and still is open to a risk of neutral price movement over time."}
{"id": "584170", "text": "just FYI i have a simple account where you can generate a check to a person and they will send it via regular mail. this is not getting away from check but it makes process simpler of not writing a check and sticking a stamp and then putting it in a mailbox"}
{"id": "584218", "text": "To be honest I don't know how any of this work in the US so my answer will be of very limited value to yourself, I suspect, but when it comes to the UK if you're going to get the same pay gross either way than being independent makes very little sense.  Running your own business is hassle, is generally more risky (although possibly not in your case) and costs money. Some of the most obvious costs are the added NI, probably the need for an accountant, at around \u00a31200 p/a for basic accountancy service, you are obliged by law to have liability insurance and you probably want professional indemnity insurance, this will be around \u00a3600 p/a minmum, and so on and so forth.  On top of that, oficially anyway, as a contractor, you really shouldn't be getting any benefits from the client, and so health insurance, company car, even parking are all meant to be arranged by, and paid by, your company, and can't (or rather - shouldn't) be charged to the client. So - I would say - if you're seriously thinking about setting up a consultancy company, and this client is first of many - set up a company, but take into account the sums you need to earn. If you're really thinking about employment - be an employee."}
{"id": "584238", "text": "\"the state of New Mexico provides guidance in this exact situation. On page 4: Gross receipts DOES NOT include: Example: When the seller passes tax to the buyer, the seller should   separate, or \u201cback out\u201d, that tax from the total income to arrive at   \"\"Gross Receipts,\"\" the amount reported in Column D of the CRS-1 Form.   (Please see the example on page 48.) and on page 48: How do I separate (\u201cback out\u201d) gross receipts tax from total gross receipts?  See the following examples of how to separate the gross   receipts tax:  1) To separate (back out) tax from total receipts at the   end of the report period, first subtract deductible and exempt   receipts, and then divide total receipts including the tax for the   report period by one plus the applicable gross receipts tax rate.  For example, if your tax rate is 5.5% and your total receipts    including tax are $1,055.00 with no deductions or exemptions, divide   $1,055.00 by 1.055. The result is your gross receipts excluding tax   (to enter in Column D of the CRS-1 Form) or $1,000.  2) If your tax   rate is 5.5%, and your total gross receipts including tax are   $1,055.00, and included in that figure are $60 in deductions and   another $45 in exemptions:  a) Subtract $105 (the sum of your   deductions and exemptions) from $1,055. The remainder is $950. This   figure still includes the tax you have recovered from your buyers.  b) Divide $950 by 1.055 (1 plus the 5.5% tax rate). The result is   $900.47.  c) In Column D enter the sum of $900.47 plus $60 (the amount   of deductible receipts)*, or $960.47. This figure is your gross   receipts excluding tax.\""}
{"id": "584258", "text": "Yes this is a huge security loophole and many banks will do nothing to refund if you are scammed.  For example for business accounts some Wells Fargo branches say you must notify within 24 hours of any check withdrawal or the loss is yours.  Basically banks don't care - they are a monopoly system and you are stuck with them.  When the losses and complaints get too great they will eventually implement the European system of electronic transfers - but the banks don't want to be bothered with that expense yet.   Sure you can use paypal - another overpriced monopoly - or much better try Dwolla or bitcoin."}
{"id": "584273", "text": "By the phrasing of your question it seems that you are under the mistaken impression that countries are borrowing money from other countries, in which case it would make sense to question how everyone can be a borrower with no one on the other side of the equation. The short answer is that the debt is owed mostly to individuals and institutions that buy debt instruments. For example, you know those US savings bonds that parents are buying to save for their children's education? Well a bond is just a way to loan money to the Government in exchange for the original money plus some interest back later. It is as simple as that. I think because the debt and the deficit are usually discussed in the context of more complex macroeconomic concerns people often mistakenly assume that national debts are denominated in some shadow banking system that is hidden from the common person behind some red-tape covered bureaucracy. This is not the case here. Why did they get themselves into this much debt? The same reason the average person does, they are spending more than they bring in and are enabled by access to easy credit. Like many people they are also paying off one credit card using another one."}
{"id": "584278", "text": "Sorry, I don't think a bounty is the issue here. You seem to understand LTV means the bank you are talking to will lend you 60% of the value of the home you wish to purchase. You can't take the dollars calculated and simply buy a smaller house.  To keep the numbers simple, you can get a $600K mortgage on a $1M house. That's it. You can get a $540K mortgage on a $900K house, etc.  Now, 60% LTV is pretty low. It might be what I'd expect for rental property or for someone with bad or very young credit history. The question and path you're on need to change. You should understand that the 'normal' LTV is 80%, and for extra cost, in the form of PMI (Private Mortgage Insurance) you can even go higher. As an agent, I just sold a home to a buyer who paid 3% down.  The way you originally asked the question has a simple answer. You can't do what you're asking."}
{"id": "584304", "text": "\"You don't state a long term goal for your finances in your message, but I'm going to assume you want to retire early, and retire well. :-) any other ideas I'm missing out on? A fairly common way to reach financial independence is to build one or more passive income streams.  The money returned by stock investing (capital gains and dividends) is just one such type of stream.  Some others include owning rental properties, being a passive owner of a business, and producing goods that earn long-term royalties instead of just an immediate exchange of time & effort for cash.    Of these, rental property is probably one of the most well-known and easiest to learn about, so I'd suggest you start with that as a second type of investment if you feel you need to diversify from stock ownership.  Especially given your association with the military, it is likely there is a nearby supply of private housing that isn't too expensive (so easier to get started with) and has a high rental demand (so less risk in many ways.)   Also, with our continued current low rate environment, now is the time to lock-in long term mortgage rates.  Doing so will reap huge benefits as rates and rents will presumably rise from here (though that isn't guaranteed.) Regarding the idea of being a passive business owner, keep in mind that this doesn't necessarily mean starting a business yourself.  Instead, you might look to become a partner by investing money with an existing or startup business, or even buying an existing business or franchise.  Sometimes, perfectly good business can be transferred for surprisingly little down with the right deal structure. If you're creative in any way, producing goods to earn long-term royalties might be a useful path to go down.  Writing books, articles, etc. is just one example of this.  There are other opportunities depending on your interests and skill, but remember, the focus ought to be on passive royalties rather than trading time and effort for immediate money.  You only have so many hours in a year.  Would you rather spend 100 hours to earn $100 every year for 20 years, or have to spend 100 hours per year for 20 years to earn that same $100 every year? .... All that being said, while you're way ahead of the game for the average person of your age ($30k cash, $20k stocks, unknown TSP balance, low expenses,) I'm not sure I'd recommend trying to diversify quite yet. For one thing, I think you need to keep some amount of your $30k as cash to cover emergency situations.  Typically people would say 6 months living expenses for covering employment gaps, but as you are in the military I don't think it's as likely you'll lose your job!  So instead, I'd approach it as \"\"How much of this cash do I need over the next 5 years?\"\"  That is, sum up $X for the car, $Y for fun & travel, $Z for emergencies, etc.  Keep that amount as cash for now. Beyond that, I'd put the balance in your brokerage and get it working hard for you now.  (I don't think an average of a 3% div yield is too hard to achieve even when picking a safe, conservative portfolio.  Though you do run the risk of capital losses if invested.)  Once your total portfolio (TSP + brokerage) is $100k* or more, then consider pulling the trigger on a second passive income stream by splitting off some of your brokerage balance.  Until then, keep learning what you can about stock investing and also start the learning process on additional streams.  Always keep an eye out for any opportunistic ways to kick additional streams off early if you can find a low cost entry.   (*) The $100k number is admittedly a rough guess pulled from the air.  I just think splitting your efforts and money prior to this will limit your opportunities to get a good start on any additional streams.  Yes, you could do it earlier, but probably only with increased risk (lower capital means less opportunities to pick from, lower knowledge levels -- both stock investing and property rental) also increase risk of making bad choices.\""}
{"id": "584350", "text": "\"When there is a trade the shares were both bought and sold. In any trade on the secondary market there has to be both a buyer and a seller for the trade to take place. So in \"\"lasttradesize\"\" a buyer has bought the shares from a seller.\""}
{"id": "584523", "text": "Well, my experience says otherwise.  I ran a micro hedge fund with just 100k... my prime broker and at least one other offered me information (what is the freakin term they used?  Uggh).  I heard from another micro hedge fund that they received good info from him.  As stated earlier, I would never trade on such info though."}
{"id": "584788", "text": "\"**Protected class**  In United States federal anti-discrimination law, a protected class is a group of people with a common characteristic who are legally protected from discrimination on the basis of that characteristic. The following characteristics are \"\"protected\"\" by federal law:  Race \u2013 Civil Rights Act of 1964  Color \u2013 Civil Rights Act of 1964  Religion \u2013 Civil Rights Act of 1964  National origin \u2013 Civil Rights Act of 1964  Age (40 and over) \u2013 Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967  Sex \u2013 Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Civil Rights Act of 1964  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission interprets 'sex' to include discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity     Pregnancy \u2013 Pregnancy Discrimination Act  Citizenship \u2013 Immigration Reform and Control Act  Familial status \u2013 Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII: Housing cannot discriminate for having children, with an exception for senior housing  Disability status \u2013 Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990  Veteran status \u2013 Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act  Genetic information \u2013 Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act  Individual states can and do create other classes for protection under state law.  ***  ^[ [^PM](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=kittens_from_space) ^| [^Exclude ^me](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiTextBot&amp;message=Excludeme&amp;subject=Excludeme) ^| [^Exclude ^from ^subreddit](https://np.reddit.com/r/business/about/banned) ^| [^FAQ ^/ ^Information](https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiTextBot/wiki/index) ^| [^Source](https://github.com/kittenswolf/WikiTextBot)   ^] ^Downvote ^to ^remove ^| ^v0.24\""}
{"id": "584801", "text": "I use StockCharts for spread charting. To take your question as an example, here is the chart of Apple against Nasdaq."}
{"id": "584998", "text": "You can explore the scenarios in which it is better to rent or to buy using this application: http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/BuyOrRentInvestmentReturnCalculator/ In the possibly unlikely scenario shown below, at the term of the mortgage (20 years) the tenant and the buyer have practically the same return on investment.  At this point the tenant's savings would be sufficient to buy a house equivalent to the buyer's, and this would be the advisable course of action (based on the figures alone)."}
{"id": "585405", "text": "Sure, but as a retail client you'd be incurring transaction fees on entry and exit. Do you have the necessary tools to manage all the corporate actions, too? And index rebalances?   ETF managers add value by taking away the monstrous web of clerical work associated with managing a portfolio of, at times, hundreds of different names. With this comes the value of institutional brokerage commissions, data licenses, etc. I think if you were to work out the actual brokerage cost, as well as the time you'd have to spend doing it yourself, you'd find that just buying the ETF is far cheaper.  Also a bit of a rabbit hole, but how would you (with traditional retail client tools) even coordinate the simultaneous purchase of all 500 components of something like SPY? I would guess that, on average, you're going to have significantly worse slippage to the index than a typical ETF provider. Add that into your calculation too."}
{"id": "585422", "text": "\"The different things in each calculator are showing you a bunch of different things. In the \"\"Roth IRA calculator\"\", it is comparing what you would have in the end after contributing and withdrawing from a Roth IRA, with what you would have in the end with a taxable account (i.e. an investment outside of any IRAs). In the \"\"Traditional IRA calculator\"\", the \"\"IRA after taxes\"\" shows you what you would have in the end after contributing and withdrawing from a pre-tax Traditional IRA. The \"\"IRA before taxes\"\" simply shows the same amount before you pay the taxes on withdrawal, which is not a useful number. So if you want to compare Roth IRA vs. Traditional IRA, you want to compare the \"\"Roth IRA\"\" from the Roth IRA Calculator and the \"\"IRA after taxes\"\" from the Traditional IRA calculator, but there are some things you need to be aware of to make a fair comparison, because if you just plug in the same numbers you are going to get a very unfair comparison (it will look like Roth IRA is a lot \"\"better\"\" even though it's not). The Roth IRA contribution is after-tax, whereas a (pre-tax) Traditional IRA contribution is pre-tax, and an after-tax dollar is much more than a pre-tax dollar, so if you put in the same nominal contribution amount, you are actually contributing much \"\"more\"\" from your wallet in the Roth IRA case. To make a fair comparison, you would need to start with the same pre-tax amount, and put in a Roth IRA contribution amount that corresponds to the equivalent amount after taxes. So for example, a $5000 pre-tax amount with 25% taxes is equivalent to $5000 * 0.75 = $3750, so you would put in $5000 for Traditional IRA contribution vs. $3750 for Roth IRA contribution. Note that if you have the same flat tax rate at contribution and at withdrawal, (pre-tax) Traditional IRA and Roth IRA are exactly the same, and you can see this by putting in 25% for the \"\"Retirement tax rate\"\" in the Traditional IRA calculator (we already assumed 25% tax rate for Roth IRA when calculating the contribution). You will see that Traditional IRA would be better in a lower retirement tax rate (e.g. 15%), whereas Roth IRA would be higher in a higher retirement tax rate.\""}
{"id": "585578", "text": "The approval of a drug is the culmination of many years of hard work... supported throughout by major investments with no guarantee of return. \u2014 Gilead Executive Chairman John Martin  I'm wondering how this is different from the auto industry, or the chip industry, or....any industry except those which are granted cost-plus contracts."}
{"id": "585706", "text": "Some employers offer commuter benefits that allow you to pay some commuter costs (trains, parking, bikes, vansharing, etc) with pre-tax money (up to $120ish a month). Employers commonly use companies such as WageWorks to provide this benefit. This would lower your taxable income by over $1000 per year."}
{"id": "585823", "text": "When discussing buying a home I often hear people say they like having   a mortgage because they get the benefit of writing off the interest. I assume this is the United States.  You need to also consider that many people can take the standard deduction of about $12k for married couples filing jointly, so even if they itemize the interest, it would only make sense to 'write it off' if you are able to itemize deductions greater than the standard deduction:  Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/10/31/irs-announces-2014-tax-brackets-standard-deduction-amounts-and-more/ So some people will input the mortgage interest and other related deductions into the computer only to find out that their itemized deductions don't add up. Where it benefits people sometimes is if they have medical bills which are greater than 10% of their income in addition to the mortgage interest. So it benefits them to itemize. There are other major sources of itemization but medical bills are very common. Other common items are auto registration taxes or interest from student loans. It is going to be situation dependent, but if you are within a few years of paying off the mortgage it would make sense to make micropayments to accelerate the payoff date. If you have 30 years to go, it would make more sense to generate an emergency fund, pay off a car, or save up for other things in life than worry about paying off a mortgage. Take the benefit of deducting the mortgage interest if you can, but I imagine that many people would be surprised to hear that it's not always black and white."}
{"id": "586007", "text": "A confined agency is a prison entity on its personal, separate from the company\u2019s owner. VALIS Group Inc is recognized as having ownership in a constrained business enterprise thru the purchase of stocks. Limited corporations, then How to incorporate on their internet income. As you intend how your enterprise will grow, there are a number of business structures to take into account. While the method may be specified and country-precise, this article outlines the general steps and concerns for incorporation."}
{"id": "586029", "text": "I agree with others here that suggest that you should be taking higher risk since it is repaid with higher returns. You have 40 years or so to go before you might switch to safer but lower return funds. I suggest that you look at the Morningstar rating for the funds you are considering: http://www.morningstar.com/ A fund rated five stars means that the fund performs in the top 20% compared to all similar funds. I prefer five star funds. Next, check the management fees. Here is an example from one of the funds you mentioned; https://www.google.com/finance?cid=466533039917726 Next, I suggest you compare how each fund has performed compared to a benchmark. Here are some common indices:  Compare an equity fund to, for example, the S&P 500. Has your fund beat or closely matched the S&P for 1, 5 and 10 years? If not, you may as well buy an index fund, such as SPY."}
{"id": "586061", "text": "I know a few people who got &gt;100% mortgages at that time. A friend of my dad's got a 120% mortgage, i.e. the full price of the house plus extra for moving and furniture etc. And then the banks were surprised that people like that couldn't make the repayments."}
{"id": "586289", "text": "\"You should pay for grad school without taking loans if your circumstances permit. There is the possibility of a tax write off for interest paid on student loans, but it's slightly complicated and it's very much a \"\"give me $10, and I'll give you $5 back\"\" kind of deal. You're better off not borrowing the money to begin with, even though I tend to think that borrowing for things which appreciate-- e.g., a house-- or which can significantly increase your earning capability-- e.g., the right kind of graduate school-- is generally better/wiser/more permissible than borrowing for something which depreciates, like a car. Having no student loan debt after graduation means you have greater freedom than someone who is laboring to pay student loan debt in addition to all of their other bills. My $0.02\""}
{"id": "586326", "text": "I agree that double taxation makes no sense regardless of individual or corporation.  Having said that, it's my understanding that Murca offers corporations tax credits on foreign taxes paid to avoid double taxation.  I'm pretty sure that a similar vehicle exists for individuals as well.  My issue is entirely with corporations paying off legislators to avoid taxes that they have an obligation to pay in the country that they operate."}
{"id": "586336", "text": "\"With every caveat that Rick said plus many many more lets have some fun.  One common way to measure risk is volatility of returns roughly how much the value of your asset jumps around.  Interestingly, the following ordering is fairly similar for many other common measures of risk. The first three on the list would be mostly interchangeable.  Generally, putting your money in \"\"cash\"\" investments has no real day-to-day price variability and the main risk is that the bank won't give you your money back at the end.  Money market funds are last as they can \"\"Break the buck\"\". To get a feel for the next few on the list I'm using previous 360 day volatility numbers for representative broad indices (asof 2014-10-27).  While these volatility values can move around quite a bit, the order is actually remarkably stable. Hedge funds might seem out of place here, but remember that hedge funds can hold be long and short at the same time and this can cancel out daily variation.  However, Hedge funds do have plenty of risks that may not be well accounted for by this measure.   For derivatives I'll refer to back to Rick's answer. This is a measure for broad investment in these categories your particular investment in Long-term Capital Management or Argentine Bonds may vary. It is important to note that your return on your investment generally grows as you go toward more risky investments down this list as people generally expect to be rewarded  in the long term for risky investments.\""}
{"id": "586502", "text": "\"This is a really bad idea. You are asking to be forced to pay for something at a time when you most likely NOT want to buy it. Why? There is no stability (much less any degree of predictability) to give up the right to control when and for how much you would be willing to own the S&P500. Just don't do it.....\"\"generate stable income\"\" and \"\"selling puts\"\" is an oxymoron.  ===retired investment advisor\""}
{"id": "586647", "text": "\"Your headline question \"\"How do you find best mortgage without damaging credit score?\"\" has a simple answer. If you have all your ducks in a row, and know what you are doing, you will get qualified. If you are like a recent client of mine, low FICO, low downpayment, random income, you might have issues. If your self-prequalification is good, you are in control, go find the best rate/ total cost, no need to put in multiple applications. If, for some reason you do, FICO sees that you are shopping for a single loan, and you are not dinged.\""}
{"id": "586759", "text": "Your understanding is incorrect.  The date of record is when you have to own the stock by.  The ex-dividend date is calculated so that transaction before that date settles in time to get you listed as owner by the date of record. If you buy the stock before the ex-dividend date, you get the dividend.  If you buy it on or after the ex-dividend date, the seller gets the dividend."}
{"id": "586851", "text": "@JoeTaxpayer gave a great response to your first question. Here are some thoughts on the other two... 2) Transaction fees for mutual funds are tied to the class of shares you're buying and will be the same no matter where you buy them. A-shares have a front-end 'load' (the fee charged), and the lowest expenses, and can be liquidated without any fees. B-shares have no up-front load, but come with a 4-7 year period where they will charge you a fee to liquidate (technically called Contingent Deferred Sales Charge, CDSC), and slightly higher management fees, after which they often will convert to A-shares. C-shares have the highest management fees, and usually a 12- to 18-month period where they will charge a small percentage fee if you liquidate. There are lots of other share classes available, but they are tied to special accounts such as managed accounts and 401-K plans. Not all companies offer all share classes. C-shares are intended for shorter timeframes, eg 2-5 years. A and B shares work best for longer times. Use a B share if you're sure you won't need to take the money out until after the fee period ends. Most fund companies will allow you to exchange funds within the same fund family without charging the CDSC. EDIT: No-load funds don't charge a fee in or out (usually). They are a great option if they are available to you. Most self-service brokerages offer them. Few full-service brokerages offer them. The advantage of a brokerage versus personal accounts at each fund is the brokerage gives you a single view of things and a single statement, and buying and selling is easy and convenient. 3) High turnover rates in bond funds... depending on how actively the portfolio is managed, the fund company may deliver returns as a mix of both interest and capital gains, and the management expenses may be high with a lot of churn in the underlying portfolio. Bond values fall as interest rates rise, so (at least in the USA) be prepared to see the share values of the fund fall in the next few years. The biggest risk of a bond fund is that there is no maturity date, so there is no point in time that you have an assurance that your original investment will be returned to you."}
{"id": "586930", "text": "Possibly but not necessarily, though that can happen if one looks at the US interest rates in the late 1970s which did end with really high rates in the early 1980s. Generally interest rates are raised when inflation picks up as a way to bring down inflation."}
{"id": "587120", "text": "\"What you're talking about is called \"\"tax gain harvesting,\"\" and it is considered good tax management. From The Oblivious Investor, investors in the 10% or 15% bracket pay 0% tax on long-term capital gains. For an interesting take on never paying income taxes again, check out Go Curry Cracker. You can claim up to $70,000 or so in capital gains before paying any taxes if you are the 10% or 15% tax bracket.\""}
{"id": "587267", "text": "Credit risk and insurance risk are highly correlated for a single legal party.  Trouble with one could indicate trouble with another. Any increase in credit risk such as new borrowing will be perceived to be an increased likelihood of insurance risk, manifested as a fraudulent or subconsciously induced claim.  Any claim of insurance will be perceived to be an increased likelihood of default, manifested as a default, voluntary or not. To a creditor/insurer, only the law applies; therefore, private arrangements between the borrower/insured and third parties do not factor because the creditor/insurer has no hope of recourse against such third parties in most places around the world. Regardless of whether there is a price ceiling on compensation for damages to assets, limiting an insurers costs, if a risk is realized then it can be presumed through sequential sampling as well as other reliable statistical techniques that future risk has risen.  The aforementioned risk dominoes subsequently fall. Generally speaking, the lower one's financial variance, the lower the financial costs.  In other words, uncertainty can be mostly quantified with variance and other mathematical moments as well.  Any uncertainty is a cost to a producer thus a cost to the consumer.  A consumer who is perfectly predictable with good outcomes will pay much lower costs on average than not, so one who keeps a tight financial ship, not exposing oneself to financial risks and better yet not realizing financial risks, will see less financial variance, thus will enjoy lower costs to financing, which includes insuring."}
{"id": "587587", "text": "The dynamics of different contracts and liquidity can be quite different on the last day on the month and for intraday trade make sure you use bid-ask data as opposed to historical trades.  I'm not saying whether it works or not, but im just giving you ideas to improve your testing."}
{"id": "587667", "text": ""}
{"id": "588080", "text": "Yes, many people want to be solo operators.  Being an employee sucks, but having employees of your own also takes away a lot of your freedom.    Thing is, I know a lot of freelancers who make great money.  His math isn't totally wrong, but you can reduce a lot of those expenses depending on what you do- working remotely and cutting out the time and money of a commute helps a lot.  Also, you can charge more than $100 an hour if you're providing a really valuable service- a lot more."}
{"id": "588086", "text": "A UK based organization had an end buyer who urgently required Steam Coal. The UK Company found a good supplier in Indonesia with competitive prices and struck a lucrative deal with them on payments terms by Standby Letter of Credit aka SBLC (MT760) with support of Bronze Wing Trading LLC."}
{"id": "588134", "text": "Anybody can contribute to a traditional ira up to the maximum limit.  Does it make sense to contribute to a non-deductible IRA?  There are a couple of cases where it does:  If you're 59 1/2 or older, you're old enough to make IRA withdrawals without penalty. If you choose investments that maximize the value of tax deferral, you can use the nondeductible IRA to manage your tax burden. If you're aware of an upcoming change in tax law that will benefit high earning individuals, it might be beneficial to use a nondeductible IRA. For example - you know that income limits for converting a traditional to a Roth are going to change in the coming year. You set up a nondeductible IRA with the intention of converting it the next year, so you can get around Roth contribution rules.  Beyond these cases, the main argument for contributing to a non-deductible IRA is -- compounded returns. If your IRA has a strong, steady growth rate, compounded returns can work wonders for your contributions. Let's take a hypothetical... You are 35. You contribute the max amount of $5,500 every year until you retire at 70. With a modest growth rate of 9.5%, your total contribution of 193K would become 1.46M. The compounded returns are 7.6 times your contributions."}
{"id": "588247", "text": "You make the investment in Jan 2016. Assuming the SEIS certificate is issued before 5th April 2016, then you will enter the SEIS investment on your 2015-2016 tax return and claim the relief in that year. If the certificate is not issued in time then you will enter it in the 2016-2017 tax return and get the relief then. Note: I am assuming that the startup is already registered with the SEIS scheme by someone else - because if you are asking about how to go about that, I don't think that is an issue of personal finance."}
{"id": "588253", "text": "I'm not a tax advisor, but I've done freelance work, so... If any of your side-business revenue is reported on a 1099, you're now a business owner, which is why Schedule C must be filled out. As a business owner, minimum wage doesn't apply to you. All revenue is income to you, and you owe taxes on the profit, after subtracting legitimate (verifiable) business expenses. You'll want to talk to a real tax advisor if you're going to start expensing mileage, part of your house (if you use a home office), etc. Don't forget that you'll owe self-employment tax (the employer's half of your payroll tax).  You can't save money on business taxes by paying yourself a wage and then counting it as an expense to the business. You'll definitely want to talk to a tax expert if you start playing around with finances as an (the) owner of the business. Income that is not reported on a 1099 should be reported as hobby income."}
{"id": "588398", "text": "You wouldn't want to trade with too small amount of capital - it becomes harder and more expensive to diversify with a small account. Also, the bigger the account the more discounts and special may be offered by your broker (especially if you are a frequent trader).  You are also able to trade more often, and have a buffer against a few losses in a row not wiping out your entire account."}
{"id": "588574", "text": "Is this the time of year this board attracts question regarding the law and how to skirt it?  I've done as you suggested. I happened to have a month that I was going to blow through the $12000 limit I had on my credit card. So as the balance crossed $8000, I paid that amount, and when the bill was cut, it was just $4000 or so. Scrutiny would show the reason for partial payments was obvious, I wanted to avoid going over limit. I wouldn't have done so just to avoid the $10,000 transaction. Since then, I've asked that the limit be raised in case I have another wild month."}
{"id": "588591", "text": "Unfortunately, you are required, but most states do have agreements with neighboring states that let the states share the collected taxes without the person having to pay double taxes. So being as this is your first tax return in your current situation, you might be wise to have a professional fill it out for you this year and then next year you can use it as a template. Additionally, I really would like to see someone challenge this across state lines taxation in court. It sure seems to me that it is a inter-state tariff/duty, which the state's are expressly forbidden from doing in the constitution."}
{"id": "589088", "text": "\"Some of the other answers recommended peer-to-peer lending and property markets. I would not invest in either of these. Firstly, peer-to-peer lending is not a traditional investment and we may not have enough historical data for the risk-to-return ratio. Secondly, property investments have a great risk unless you diversify, which requires a huge portfolio. Crowd-funding for one property is not a traditional investment, and may have drawbacks. For example, what if you disagree with other crowd-funders about the required repairs for the property? If you invest in the property market, I recommend a well-diversified fund that owns many properties. Beware of high debt leverage used to enhance returns (and, at the same time, risk) and high fees when selecting a fund. However, traditionally it has been a better choice to invest in stocks than to invest in property market. Beware of anyone who says that the property market is \"\"too good to not get into\"\" without specifying which part of the world is meant. Note also that many companies invest in properties, so if you invest only in a well-diversified stock index fund, you may already have property investments in your portfolio! However, in your case I would keep the money in risk-free assets, i.e. bank savings or a genuine low-cost money market fund (i.e. one that doesn't invest in corporate debt or in variable-rate loans which have short duration but long maturity). The reason is that you're going to be unemployed soon, and thus, you may need the money soon. If you have an investment horizon of, say, 10 years, then I would throw stocks into the mix, and if you're saving for retirement, then I would go all in to stocks. In the part of the world where I live in, money market funds generally have better return than bank savings, and better diversification too. However, your 2.8% interest sounds rather high (the money market fund I have in the past invested in currently yields at 0.02%, but then again I live in the eurozone), so be sure to get estimates for the yields of different risk-free assets. So, my advice for investing is simple: risk-free assets for short time horizon, a mixture of stocks and risk-free assets for medium time horizon, and only stocks for long time horizon. In any case, you need a small emergency fund, too, which you should consider a thing separate from your investments. My emergency fund is 20 000 EUR. Your 50 000 AUD is bit more than 30 000 EUR, so you don't really have that much money to invest, only a bit more than a reasonably sized emergency fund. But then again, I live in rental property, so my expenses are probably higher than yours. If you can foresee a very long time horizon for part of your investment, you could perhaps invest 50% of your money to stocks (preference being a geographically diversified index fund or a number of index funds), but I wouldn't invest more because of the need for an emergency fund.\""}
{"id": "589139", "text": "\"Debits' and \"\"Credits\"\" are terms used in double-entry bookkeeping. Each transaction is entered in two different places to be able to double-check accuracy. The total debits and total credits being equal is what makes the balance sheet balance. For explaining debits and credits, wikiversity has a good example using eggs that I found helpful as a student.  Debits and Credits  When a financial transaction is recorded, the Debits (Dr) and Credits (Cr) need to balance in order to keep the accounts in balance.  An easy rule to remember is, \"\"Debit the Asset that Increases\"\"  For example, if you want to practice accounting for cooking a simple breakfast, you might proceed as follows:  To record breaking the eggs and putting the eggs in the frying pan  In this transaction, an asset, (the egg) is split into parts and some of the asset goes in the pan and some in the trash. A Debit (Dr) is used to show that the assets in the pan and the trash both increase. A balancing Credit (Cr) is used to show that the amount of assets (whole eggs) in the egg carton has decreased.  This transaction is in balance because the total Credits equal the total Debits. Everything that is covered by the Debits (yolk, white and shell) is also covered by the Credits (one whole egg)\""}
{"id": "589416", "text": "Any deductable expense will reduce your taxable income not your tax payable. Your Example 1 above is correct and gives you 100% deduction. It is like having a business where your sales are $100,000 and your expenses in making the sales is $40,000. The expenses are your tax deductions and reduce your profits on which you pay tax on to $60,000. If your Example 2 was correct then the situation above would change that you would pay say $30,000 tax on $100,000 sales, then apply your deductions (or expenses) of $40,000 so that you would pay no tax at all and in fact get $10,000 back in your return. In this case the government would not be collecting any taxes but paying out returns to everyone. Your Example 2 is absolutly incorrect."}
{"id": "589476", "text": "\"In the end, this is really not a finance question. It's about changing one's habits. (One step removed, however, since you are helping a friend and not seeking advice for yourself).  I've learned a simple cause & effect question - Does someone who wants (goal here) do (this current bad habit)? For example, someone with weight to lose is about to grab the chips to sit and watch TV. They should quickly ask themselves \"\"Does a healthy, energetic person sit in front of the TV eating chips?\"\"  The friend needs to make a connection between the expense he'd like to save up for and his current actions. There's a conscious decision in making the takeout purchase, he'd rather spend the money on that meal than to save .5% (or whatever percent) of the trip's cost.   If he is clueless in the kitchen, that opens another discussion, one in which I'd remark that on the short list of things parents should teach their kids, cooking is up there. My wife is clueless in the kitchen, I taught our daughter how to be comfortable enough to make her own meals when she wants or when she's off on her own. If this is truly your friend's issue, you might need to be a cooking spirit guide to be successful.\""}
{"id": "589487", "text": "Are you looking for the best Currency Counting Machine In Delhi , then visit Maxime Impex which offers the best Loose Note counting Machine, Fake Note Detector, Maxime 2829 Speaker in wide range of variety at very cost effective prices. To know more Explore the full blog or visit: http://www.maximeimpex.in/"}
{"id": "589543", "text": "Really basic Revolving credit for individuals. Use a credit card to pay for a purchase. You pay the card off completely before you pay interest and get 30 days free money. Your cash balance is for that 30 days doing you some good instead."}
{"id": "589544", "text": "If such an investment existed, then why would the banks be parking their overnight funds with the Federal Reserve at an interest rate of pretty much nothing?"}
{"id": "589950", "text": "\"The Euro is not the reason for the debt crisis. It is only preventing those countries affected from using the easy way out. The fault is entirely that of those countries.  They were given billions and billions in structural aid, to put the \"\"convergence criteria\"\" into reality. Instead they chose bubble economies. And no, this is not the same all around Europe. I don't see France or Germany having a giant property bubble.\""}
{"id": "589970", "text": "\"If you're really a part-time worker, then there are some simple considerations.... The remote working environment, choice of own hours, and non-guarantee of work availability point to your \"\"part-time\"\" situation being more like a consultancy, and that would normally double or triple the gross hourly rate. But if they're already offering or paying you a low hourly figure, they are unlikely to give you consultant rates.\""}
{"id": "590010", "text": "What JoeTaxpayer means is that you can sell one ETF and buy another that will perform substantially the same during the 30 day wash sale period without being considered substantially the same from a wash sale perspective more easily than you could with an individual stock. For example, you could sell an S&P 500 index ETF and then temporarily buy a DJIA index ETF. As these track different indexes, they are not considered to be substantially the same for wash sale purposes, but for a short term investing period, their performance should still be substantially the same."}
{"id": "590102", "text": "When a business asks me to make out a cheque to a person rather than the business name, I take that as a red flag. Frankly it usually means that the person doesn't want the money going through their business account for some reason - probably tax evasion. I'm not saying you are doing that, but it is a frequent issue. If the company makes the cheque out to a person they may run the risk of being party to fraud. Worse still they only have your word for it that you actually own the company, and aren't ripping off your employer by pocketing their payment. Even worse, when the company is audited and finds that cheque, the person who wrote it will have to justify and document why they made it out to you or risk being charged with embezzlement. It's very much in their interests to make the cheque out to the company they did business with. Given that, you should really have an account in the name of your business. It's going to make your life much simpler in the long run."}
{"id": "590218", "text": "Theoretically, it could be daily, but depending upon the number of companies in the index, it could be anywhere between daily or once a month or so. Apart from that, there is a periodic index review that happens once every quarter. The methodology for each index is also different, and you need to be aware of it (we had positions on literally hundreds of indices, and I knew the methodology of almost each of them).  If you have say, 2 billion dollars tracking a certain index, even a miniscule change in the composition would be substantial for you. But for certain others, you may just need to buy and sell $10k worth of stocks, and we would not even bother."}
{"id": "590232", "text": "To determine how much you can contribute to a regular and roth IRA you have to calculate your compensation: What Is Compensation?  Generally, compensation is what you earn from   working. For a summary of what compensation does and does not include,   see Table 1-1. Compensation includes all of the items discussed next   (even if you have more than one type).Wages, salaries, etc. Wages,   salaries, tips, professional fees, bonuses, and other amounts you   receive for provid-ing personal services are compensation. The IRS   treats as compensation any amount properly shown in box 1 (Wages,   tips, other compensation) of Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement,   provided that amount is reduced by any amount properly shown in box 11   (Nonqualified plans). Scholarship and fellowship payments are   compen-sation for IRA purposes only if shown in box 1 of Form   W-2. It a also includes commissions, self-employment income, and alimony an non-taxable combat pay. For most people it is what i in box 1 of the W-2. For the example in the question. If the sum of Box 1's equals $3,200 that is the maximum you can contribute to all your IRAs (regular and Roth). The funds can come from anywhere. It is not related to your net check. The money can be from savings, gifts, parents, grandparents... The IRS doesn't care about the source of the funds, only that you don't over contribute. Of course the calculation is more complex if the person is married, and if they have access to a retirement account."}
{"id": "590234", "text": "In how much trouble can I get exactly if the IRS finds out? I   understand that there's a 6 year statute of limitations on criminal   charges and no limitation at all on fraud. Is this considered fraud?   I'm assuming not. There's no statute of limitations for fraud (which is a criminal charge). The statute of limitations is for failure to report income which is not fraud. In your case, since you willingly decided to not report it knowingly that you should, it can most definitely account for fraud, so I wouldn't count on statute of limitations in this case. I should amend my taxes for those years That would be the easiest way to go. would the IRS go all the way and file criminal charges considering the amount of money I owe They have the legal right to, and if you do get caught - likely they will. Easy money for them, since you obviously have income and can pay all the fines and penalties. Practically speaking, what's the worst case scenario? Theoretically - can be jail as well. Being charged in a criminal court, even if the eventual punishment is just a penalty, is a punishment of its own. You'll have troubles finding jobs, passing security checks, getting loans approved, etc. For $3200, when you're in 25% bracket as an individual for years, I'd say not worth it."}
{"id": "590276", "text": "\"Warren Buffett: 'Investing Advice For You--And My Wife' (And Other Quotes Of The Week): What I advise here is essentially identical to certain instructions   I\u2019ve laid out in my will. One bequest provides that cash will be   delivered to a trustee for my wife\u2019s benefit\u2026My advice to the trustee   could not be more simple: Put 10% of the cash in short-term government   bonds and 90% in a very low-cost S&P 500 index fund. (I suggest   Vanguard\u2019s.) I believe the trust\u2019s long-term results from this policy   will be superior to those attained by most investors\u2026 Similarly from Will Warren Buffett's investment advice work for you?: Specifically, Buffett wants the trustee of his estate to put 10   percent of his wife's cash inheritance in short-term government bonds   and 90 percent in a low-cost S&P index fund - and he tips his hat   specifically to Bogle's Vanguard in doing so. Says Buffett: \"\"I believe   the trust's long-term results from this policy will be superior to   those attained by most investors - whether pension funds, institutions   or individuals.\"\"\""}
{"id": "590310", "text": "Alright, team!   I found answers to part 1) and part 2) that I've quote below, but still need help with 3).  The facts in the article below seem to point to the ability for the LLC to contribute profit sharing of up to 25% of the wages it paid SE tax on.  What part of the SE tax is that?  I assume the spirit of the law is to only allow the 25% on the taxable portion of the income, but given that I would have crossed the SS portion of SE tax, I am not 100%.  (From http://www.sensefinancial.com/services/solo401k/solo-401k-contribution/) Sole Proprietorship Employee Deferral The owner of a sole proprietorship who is under the age of 50 may make   employee deferral contributions of as much as $17,500 to a Solo 401(k)   plan for 2013 (Those 50 and older can tack on a $5,500 annual catch-up   contribution, bringing their annual deferral contribution to as much   as $23,000). Solo 401k contribution deadline rules dictate that plan   participant must formally elect to make an employee deferral   contribution by Dec. 31. However, the actual contribution can be made   up until the tax-filing deadline.  Pretax and/or after-tax (Roth)   funds can be used to make employee deferral contributions. Profit Sharing Contribution A sole proprietorship may make annual profit-sharing contributions to   a Solo 401(k) plan on behalf of the business owner and spouse.   Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(3) states that employer   contributions are limited to 25 percent of the business entity\u2019s   income subject to self-employment tax. Schedule C sole-proprietors   must base their maximum contribution on earned income, an additional   calculation that lowers their maximum contribution to 20 percent of   earned income. IRS Publication 560 contains a step-by-step worksheet   for this calculation. In general, compensation can be defined as your   net earnings from self-employment activity.  This definition takes   into account the following eligible tax deductions: (1) the deduction   for half of self-employment tax and (2) the deduction for   contributions on your behalf to the Solo 401(k) plan.  A business   entity\u2019s Solo 401(k) contributions for profit sharing component must   be made by its tax-filing deadline. Single Member LLC Employee Deferral The owner of a single member LLC who is under the age of 50 may make   employee deferral contributions of as much as $17,500 to a Solo 401(k)   plan for 2013 (Those 50 and older can tack on a $5,500 annual catch-up   contribution, bringing their annual deferral contribution to as much   as $23,000). Solo 401k contribution deadline rules dictate that plan   participant must formally elect to make an employee deferral   contribution by Dec. 31. However, the actual contribution can be made   up until the tax-filing deadline.  Pretax and/or after-tax (Roth)   funds can be used to make employee deferral contributions. Profit Sharing Contribution A single member LLC business may make annual profit-sharing   contributions to a Solo 401(k) plan on behalf of the business owner   and spouse. Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(3) states that   employer contributions are limited to 25 percent of the business   entity\u2019s income subject to self-employment tax. Schedule C   sole-proprietors must base their maximum contribution on earned   income, an additional calculation that lowers their maximum   contribution to 20 percent of earned income. IRS Publication 560   contains a step-by-step worksheet for this calculation. In general,   compensation can be defined as your net earnings from self-employment   activity. This definition takes into account the following eligible   tax deductions: (i) the deduction for half of self-employment tax and   (ii) the deduction for contributions on your behalf to the Solo   401(k).  A single member LLC\u2019s Solo 401(k) contributions for profit   sharing component must be made by its tax-filing deadline."}
{"id": "590364", "text": "Bonds released at the same time have different interest rates because they have different levels of risks and liquidity associated.  Risk will depend on the company / country / municipality that offers the bond: their financial position, and their resulting ability to make future payments & avoid default. Riskier organizations must offer higher interest rates to ensure that investors remain willing to loan them money. Liquidity depends on the terms of the loan - principal-only bonds give you minimal liquidity, as there are no ongoing interest payments, and nothing received until the bond's maturity date. All bonds provide lower liquidity if they have longer maturity dates. Bonds with lower liquidity must have higher returns to compensate for the fact that you will have to give up your cash for a longer period of time. Bonds released at different times will have different interest rates because of what the general 'market rate' for interest was in those periods. ie: if a bond is released in 2016 with interest rates approaching 0%, even a high risk bond would have a lower interest rate than a bond released in the 1980s, when market rates were approaching 20%. Some bonds offer variable interest tied to some market indicator - those will typically have higher interest at the time of issuance, because the bondholder bears some risk that the prevailing market rate will drop. Note regarding sale of bonds after market rates have changed: The value of your bonds will fluctuate with the market. If a bond was offered with 1% interest, and next year interest rates go up and a new identical bond is offered for 2% interest, when you sell your old bond you will take a loss, because the market won't want to pay full price for it anymore. Whether you should sell lower-interest rate bonds depends on how you feel about the factors above - do you want junk bonds that have stock-like levels of returns but high risks of default, maturing in 30 years? Or do you want AAA+ Bonds that have essentially 0% returns maturing in 30 days? If you are paying interest on debt, it is quite likely that you could achieve a net income benefit by selling the bonds, and paying off debt [assuming your debt has a higher interest rate than your low-rate bonds]. Paying off debt is sometimes referred to as a 'zero risk return', because essentially there is no real risk that your lender would otherwise go bankrupt. That is, you will owe your bank the car loan until you pay it, and paying it is the only thing you can do to reduce it.  However, some schools of thought suggest that maintaining savings + liquid investments makes sense even if you have some debt, because cash + liquid investments can cover you in some emergencies that credit cards can't help you with. ie: if you lose your job, perhaps your credit could be pulled and you would have nothing except for your liquid savings to tide you over. How much you should save in this way is a matter of opinion, but often repeated numbers are either 3 months or 6 months worth [which is sometimes taken as x months of expenses, and sometimes as x months of after-tax income]. You should look into this issue further; there are many questions on this site that discuss it, I'm sure."}
{"id": "590390", "text": "\"This change doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Interest is an expense. Expenses are deductible. Yes, there are loopholes, but no matter what happens there will be loopholes. Seems like any easy \"\"no\"\" vote.     Sometimes it worries me that we have financially incompetent people in power.\""}
{"id": "590453", "text": "If you're into math, do this thought experiment: Consider the outcome X of a random walk process (a stock doesn't behave this way, but for understanding the question you asked, this is useful): On the first day, X=some integer X1. On each subsequent day, X goes up or down by 1 with probability 1/2. Let's think of buying a call option on X. A European option with a strike price of S that expires on day N, if held until that day and then exercised if profitable, would yield a value Y = min(X[N]-S, 0). This has an expected value E[Y] that you could actually calculate. (should be related to the binomial distribution, but my probability & statistics hat isn't working too well today) The market value V[k] of that option on day #k, where 1 < k < N, should be V[k] = E[Y]|X[k], which you can also actually calculate. On day #N, V[N] = Y. (the value is known) An American option, if held until day #k and then exercised if profitable, would yield a value Y[k] = min(X[k]-S, 0).  For the moment, forget about selling the option on the market. (so, the choices are either exercise it on some day #k, or letting it expire) Let's say it's day k=N-1.  If X[N-1] >= S+1 (in the money), then you have two choices: exercise today, or exercise tomorrow if profitable. The expected value is the same. (Both are equal to X[N-1]-S). So you might as well exercise it and make use of your money elsewhere. If X[N-1] <= S-1 (out of the money), the expected value is 0, whether you exercise today, when you know it's worthless, or if you wait until tomorrow, when the best case is if X[N-1]=S-1 and X[N] goes up to S, so the option is still worthless. But if X[N-1] = S (at the money), here's where it gets interesting. If you exercise today, it's worth 0. If wait until tomorrow, there's a 1/2 chance it's worth 0 (X[N]=S-1), and a 1/2 chance it's worth 1 (X[N]=S+1). Aha! So the expected value is 1/2. Therefore you should wait until tomorrow. Now let's say it's day k=N-2.  Similar situation, but more choices: If X[N-2] >= S+2, you can either sell it today, in which case you know the value = X[N-2]-S, or you can wait until tomorrow, when the expected value is also X[N-2]-S. Again, you might as well exercise it now. If X[N-2] <= S-2, you know the option is worthless. If X[N-2] = S-1, it's worth 0 today, whereas if you wait until tomorrow, it's either worth an expected value of 1/2 if it goes up (X[N-1]=S), or 0 if it goes down, for a net expected value of 1/4, so you should wait. If X[N-2] = S, it's worth 0 today, whereas tomorrow it's either worth an expected value of 1 if it goes up, or 0 if it goes down -> net expected value of 1/2, so you should wait. If X[N-2] = S+1, it's worth 1 today, whereas tomorrow it's either worth an expected value of 2 if it goes up, or 1/2 if it goes down (X[N-1]=S) -> net expected value of 1.25, so you should wait. If it's day k=N-3, and X[N-3] >= S+3 then E[Y] = X[N-3]-S and you should exercise it now; or if X[N-3] <= S-3 then E[Y]=0.  But if X[N-3] = S+2 then there's an expected value E[Y] of (3+1.25)/2 = 2.125 if you wait until tomorrow, vs. exercising it now with a value of 2; if X[N-3] = S+1 then E[Y] = (2+0.5)/2 = 1.25, vs. exercise value of 1; if X[N-3] = S then E[Y] = (1+0.5)/2 = 0.75 vs. exercise value of 0; if X[N-3] = S-1 then E[Y] = (0.5 + 0)/2 = 0.25, vs. exercise value of 0; if X[N-3] = S-2 then E[Y] = (0.25 + 0)/2 = 0.125, vs. exercise value of 0. (In all 5 cases, wait until tomorrow.) You can keep this up; the recursion formula is E[Y]|X[k]=S+d = {(E[Y]|X[k+1]=S+d+1)/2 + (E[Y]|X[k+1]=S+d-1) for N-k > d > -(N-k), when you should wait and see} or {0 for d <= -(N-k), when it doesn't matter and the option is worthless} or {d for d >= N-k, when you should exercise the option now}. The market value of the option on day #k should be the same as the expected value to someone who can either exercise it or wait. It should be possible to show that the expected value of an American option on X is greater than the expected value of a European option on X. The intuitive reason is that if the option is in the money by a large enough amount that it is not possible to be out of the money, the option should be exercised early  (or sold), something a European option doesn't allow, whereas if it is nearly at the money, the option should be held, whereas if it is out of the money by a large enough amount that it is not possible to be in the money, the option is definitely worthless. As far as real securities go, they're not random walks (or at least, the probabilities are time-varying and more complex), but there should be analogous situations. And if there's ever a high probability a stock will go down, it's time to exercise/sell an in-the-money American option, whereas you can't do that with a European option. edit: ...what do you know: the computation I gave above for the random walk isn't too different conceptually from the Binomial options pricing model."}
{"id": "590632", "text": "\"So here's the sad truth. He might actually be making a return on his investment. Not because it's right or because the system works, but in all these schemes there are a range of people that actually do make money.  In addition to that, there is that fact that he \"\"believes\"\" that he is doing a good thing, and is unwilling to discuss it.  So, if he is making, even a tiny return, and really believes that he is making a large return, or that that large return is just around the bend, your never going to convince him otherwise.  You have two real options; If he will listen, go though and look at money in v.s. money out. If money out is larger then money in, your screwed.  Make sure to point out that he should look at real money in (left a bank account) and real money out (deposited to a bank account). Again be prepared for the fact that he is actually making money. Some people in the pyramid will make money, it's just never as much, or as many people as they make it out to be.  Don't attack the system, attack other aspects. Try and argue liquidity, or FDIC insurance. Again not trying to show why the system is bad, but why a investment in foo instead may be better. If nothing else, go with diversify. Never put all your money in one spot, even if it's a really good spot. At least in that case he will have some money left over in the end. That said, your friend may not go for it. May just put on blinders, and may just stick finger in ears. Move to option two. Respect his wishes, and set boundaries. \"\"Ok, I hear you, you like system X, I won't bring it up again. Do me a favor, don't you bring it up again either. Let's just leave this with religion and politics.\"\" If he continues to bring it up, then when he does, just point out you agreed not to discuss the issue, and if he continues to push it, rethink your friendship. If you both respect one another, you should be able to respect each others' decisions.  If you can't then, sadly, you may need to stop spending time with one another.\""}
{"id": "590744", "text": "\"This is a classic correlation does not imply causation situation.  There are (at least) three issues at play in this question: If you are swing- or day-trading then the first and second issues can definitely affect your trading.  A higher-price, higher-volume stock will have smaller (percentage) volatility fluctuations within a very small period of time. However, in general, and especially when holding any position for any period of time during which unknowns can become known (such as Netflix's customer-loss announcement) it is a mistake to feel \"\"safe\"\" based on price alone. When considering longer-term investments (even weeks or months), and if you were to compare penny stocks with blue chip stocks, you still might find more \"\"stability\"\" in the higher value stocks.  This is a correlation alone \u2014 in other words, a stable, reliable stock probably has a (relatively) high price but a high price does not mean it's reliable. As Joe said, the stock of any company that is exposed to significant risks can drop (or rise) by large amounts suddenly, and it is common for blue-chip stocks to move significantly in a period of months as changes in the market or the company itself manifest themselves. The last thing to remember when you are looking at raw dollar amounts is to remember to look at shares outstanding.  Netflix has a price of $79 to Ford's $12; yet Ford has a larger market cap because there are nearly 4 billion shares compared to Netflix's 52m.\""}
{"id": "590836", "text": "Did a little bit of digging, and found this article, from Staples High School in Westport, Connecticut.  Hopefully this will be a growing trend.  They say: A personal financial management class will now be offered at the beginning of the upcoming school year (2011-2012). According to the course catalogue, the focus of this course will be using mathematics as a tool in developing financial literacy skills. Topics covered in the course will include: earnings, banking, credit cards, loans, taxes, insurance, investing, loans, budgeting, and buying personal property. \u201cIn a perfect world, everyone would be required to take a personal finance course,\u201d Principal John Dodig said."}
{"id": "591007", "text": "The reason is governments print extra money to cause inflation (hopefully reasonable) so that people don't just sit comfortably but do something to make money work. Thus inflation is an artificial measure which leads to money value gradually decreasing and causing people invest money in one way or another to beat inflation or maybe even gain some more money. Printing money is super cheap unlike producing any kind of commodity and that makes money different from commodities - commodities have their inherent value, but money has only nominal value, it's an artificial government-controlled product."}
{"id": "591344", "text": "Yeah true that. Counseling people to avoid the negatives has been more beneficial in my life than great recommendations. Even one mistake and you're up shit's creek. And I will say I have the knowledge to help people to avoid mistakes, but sometimes it devolves into mud slinging (unfortunately). If this wasn't a new account then it might give you an indication of how I've done this in the past. Most of the time it takes too much explaining to get people up to speed though.  A word to the wise: I'd recommend being open to switching industries. Everyone in finance is pretty toxic and all ended up there because of money. End up chasing the CFA (cancer distilled into three exams), grad school, nonsense corporate jobs, or the dream in high finance/small shops where the founders don't think they need another smart hard-working person. Even if if it's obvious they do.  I remember reaching out and counseling a firm on selling a position that I felt was really stupid. It was not at all in line with their investing objectives and also was one I would never touch. The guy actually agreed with me, didn't hire me (I was after a job), didn't sell the position, and lost them approx. $12 million within 12 months with my math on their 13-F's.  I only reach out to firms I respect, which works out to about 1 firm per 100k people in population from what I've seen (in a city like Pittsburgh this was only 4 shops). That means there are maybe 200 people in the US who would make a hiring decision on me for what I like to do. But I've stopped playing that game.  I now run a healthcare business I started. It was hard as hell to open but I now run circles around people because nobody actually is in the business of the industry. The doctors, nurses, etc. are all extremely bright - just not in my area. Makes for a much more fun workday."}
{"id": "591377", "text": "\"For the USA part of the equation the \"\"fair market value\"\" is the value at the time you inherited it (time of death), and thus there is no capital gain.\""}
{"id": "591461", "text": "\"I recommend you take a look at this lecture (really, the whole series is enlightening), from Swenson. He identifies 3 sources of returns: diversification, timing and selection. He appears to discard timing and selection as impossible. A student kinda calls him out on this. Diversification reduces risk, not increase returns. It turns out they did time the market, by shorting .com's before the bubble, and real estate just before the downturn. In 1990, Yale started a \"\"Absolute Return\"\" unit and allocated like 15 percent to it, mostly by selling US equities, that specializes in these sorts of hedging moves. As for why you might employ managers for specific areas, consider that the expense ratio Wall Street charges you or me still represent a very nice salary when applied to the billions in Yale's portfolio. So they hire internally to reduce expenses, and I'm sure they're kept busy. They also need people to sell off assets to maintain ratios, and figuring out which ones to sell might take specialized knowledge. Finally, in some areas, you functionally cannot invest without management. For example, Yale has a substantial allocation in private equity, and by definition that doesn't trade on the open market. The other thing you should consider is that for all its diversification, Yale lost 25 percent of their portfolio in 2009. For a technique that's supposed to reduce volatility, they seem to have a large range of returns over the past five years.\""}
{"id": "591558", "text": "Generally, the answer to the availability of holdings of a given mutual fund on a daily basis is no. Thus, an API is non-existent. The reasons for the lack of transparency on a daily basis is that it could/would impact the portfolio managers ability to trade. While this information would not necessarily permit individuals from front running the fund manager's trades, it does give insight in to the market outlook and strategy the fund is employing. The closest you'll be able to get to obtaining a list of holdings is by reading the most recent annual report and the quarterly filings each fund is required to file with the SEC."}
{"id": "591636", "text": "Yes. There are a number of reasons for this, most notably some form of tax credits transfer over from year to year IF you file your taxes, and the CRA will only pay you deductions if all your taxes have been filed. If you don't owe them anything you won't necessarily get in trouble, but don't expect to get any money back from them until you file! Also, while it's probably much too late for this, if you have a partner, you can transfer a certain amount of tax deductions to them, and save them some money. The site is here: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/formspubs/t1gnrl/llyrs-eng.html"}
{"id": "591785", "text": "There's no reason for the employer not to deduct the whole amount before you leave. The FSA salary deduction has to be periodical, but it doesn't have to be calculated over a year. It just means that an equal amount will be deducted from your every paycheck, and if the employer (and you) know that your last paycheck is on June 30th even before the year starts - there's nothing to stop the employer from calculating the periodic payments so that it will cover your full FSA amount before you leave. That is, of course, other than mere convenience (it may be easier/cheaper to just give you the extra $1275 than to deal with the special case deduction calculation). This is different from unexpected termination/resignation, where the employer couldn't have made such an assumption and thus the periodic payments were calculated over a year. See pub. 969. The selection is annual - the deductions are periodical."}
{"id": "592032", "text": "Direct answers to your questions: contribute 6%, and put it in the Target Date Fund (probably Target Date Fund 2050)."}
{"id": "592192", "text": "My advice is that if you've got the money now to pay off your student loans, do so.  You've saved up all of that money in one year's time.  If you pay it off now, you'll eliminate all of those monthly payments, you'll be done paying interest, and you should be able to save even more toward your business over the next year. Over the next year, you can get started on your business part time, while still working full time to pile up cash toward your business.  Neither you nor your business will be paying interest on anything, and you'll start out in a very strong position.   The interest on your student loans might be tax deductible, depending on your situation. However, this doesn't really matter a whole lot, in my opinion. You've got about $22k in debt, and the interest will cost you roughly $1k over the next year. Why pay $1k to the bank to gain maybe $250 in tax savings? Starting a business is stressful. There will be good times and bad. How long will it take you to pay off your debt at $250 a month? 5 or 6 years, probably. By eliminating the debt now, you'll be able to save up capital for your business even faster. And when you experience some slow times in your business, your monthly expenses will be less."}
{"id": "592510", "text": "However, if you are employed by a company that exists in a tax haven and your services are provided to an employer by that tax haven company, it is the tax haven company that gets paid, not you. Under various schemes that company need not pay you at all. For example it may make you a loan which is not taxed (ie you don't pay tax on a loan, just as you don't pay tax on the money lent you by a mortgage company). You are bound by the terms of the loan agreement to repay that loan at a rate that the company finds acceptable. Indeed the company may find eventually that it is simply convenient to write off the loan as unrecoverable. if the owners/officers of he company write off your loans, how much tax will you have paid on the money you have had as   loans? The taxman can of course state that this was simply set up to avoid tax (which is illegal) so you should have a balancing scheme to show that that the loans were taken to supplement income,just as one might take a bank loan / mortgage, not replace it entirely as a tax scam. Hiring tax counsel to provide this adequate proof to HMRC has a price.  Frequently this kind of loophole exists because the number of people using it were sufficiently low not to warrant policing ( if the policing costs more than the tax recovered, then it is more efficient to ignore it) or because at some stage the scheme has been perfectly legal (as in the old offshore'education' trust recommended by the government a few decades ago). When Gordon Brown set out a 75% tax rate (for his possibly ideological reasons rather than financially based ones)for those who had these accounts , he encountered opposition from MPs who were going to be caught up paying high tax bills for what was effctively retrospective taxation, so there was a built in 'loophole' to allow the funds to be returned without undue penalty.  If you think that is morally wrong, consider what the response would be if a future Chancellor was to declare all IAs the work of the devil and claim that retrospective tax would need to be paid on all ISA transactions over the last few decades.eg: tot up all the dividends and capital gains made on an ISA in any year and pay 40% tax on all of them, even if that took the ISA into negative territory because the value today was low/ underperfoming. Yet this has been sggested as a way of filling in the hole in the budget on the grounds that anyone with an ISA can be represented as 'rich' to a selected party of voters."}
{"id": "592709", "text": "If you can afford to put more money into the 401(k) -- which is what paying yourself back at a higher rate than you're earning would amount to -- why not just put more money into the 401(k)?  Or into an IRA, if you've maxed out what the 401(k) will allow. That would seem to have the same positive effects you're looking for, while avoiding the negative ones."}
{"id": "592915", "text": "Since you're coming out of college, you're probably a new investor and don't know too much about stocks, etc. I was in the same situation as well.  I wanted to keep my cash 'liquid' and wanted to make low risk investments. What I ended up doing was investing the majority of my money in higher interest GICs (Guaranteed Investment Certificate) and keeping the rest in my chequing/savings account. I understand that GICs aren't exactly the most liquid asset out there. However, instead of investing it all into 1 GIC, I put them in to smaller increments with varying lock-in times and roll-over options. I.e. for 15000 keep $3000 on hand in your account 2x$1000 invested for 2 years 4x$1000 invested for 1 year 3x$1000 invested for 180 days 3x$1000 invested for 90 days When you find that you run out of cash from your $3000, you'll have a GIC expiring soon.  The 'problem' with GICs is that redeeming them before the maturity period usually incurs a penalty in the form of no interest.  Keeping them in smaller increments allows you to redeem only the amount you need without losing too much interest.  At maturity, if you don't need the money, you can just have the GIC renew.   The other problem with GICs, is that interest rates, though better than savings accounts, aren't that much more.  You're basically just fighting off inflation.  The benefit is that on maturity, you are guaranteed your principal and the interest.   This plan is easy to implement if your bank/credit union allows you to create and manage GICs online."}
{"id": "593017", "text": "\"I understood everything until \"\"Party B gets $3 from A but still owes his bank $4.25.\"\" Doesn't B only owe $3 to his bank after the prime is now 2%?  I understand though that B is paying out $4.25 but only receiving $3, thus having a net of -$1.25\""}
{"id": "593045", "text": "\"If you don't want to do the deep research on each individual company, you might want to look at index funds and similar \"\"whole market\"\" investments.\""}
{"id": "593644", "text": "NSCC illiquid charges are charges that apply to the trading of low-priced over-the counter (OTC) securities with low volumes. Open net buy quantity represents the total unsettled share amount per stock at any given time during a 3-day settlement cycle. Open net buy quantity must be less than 5,000,000 shares per stock for your entire firm Basically, you can't hold a long position of more than 5 million shares in an illiquid OTC stock without facing a fee. You'll still be assessed this fee if you accumulate a long position of this size by breaking your purchase up into multiple transactions. Open net sell quantity represents the total unsettled share amount per stock at any given time during a 3-day settlement cycle. Open net sell quantity must be less than 10% percent of the 20-day average volume If you attempt to sell a number of shares greater than 10% of the stock's average volume over the last 20 days, you'll also be assessed a fee. The first link I included above is just an example, but it makes the important point: you may still be assessed a fee for trading OTC stocks even if your account doesn't meet the criteria because these restrictions are applied at the level of the clearing firm, not the individual client.  This means that if other investors with your broker, or even at another broker that happens to use the same clearing firm, purchase more than 5 million shares in an individual OTC stock at the same time, all of your accounts may face fees, even though individually, you don't exceed the limits. Technically, these fees are assessed to the clearing firm, not the individual investor, but usually the clearing firm will pass the fees along to the broker (and possibly add other charges as well), and the broker will charge a fee to the individual account(s) that triggered the restriction. Also, remember that when buying OTC/pink sheet stocks, your ability to buy or sell is also contingent on finding someone else to buy from/sell to. If you purchase 10,000 shares one day and attempt to sell them sometime in the future, but there aren't enough buyers to buy all 10,000 from you, you might not be able to complete your order at the desired price, or even at all."}
{"id": "593671", "text": "It seems too simple, but at the same time I feel that I'm over thinking/complicating things. My biggest fear is being sued or something. I feel like business ownership involves exposing yourself. It's like you're playing in the big leagues and every crooked person or competing business is out to get you. I'm not an expert on business law but I feel like that's something you largely acquire from business ownership and at the same time is something that you need to have an extremely firm grasp on or you'll get eaten alive. If I am over-complicating things and being overly cautious, what stops others from starting up small businesses? My second fear is getting busted for breaking some unknown law. In any case, I don't want to loose all of my hard-earned cash to anything accept a bad business plan."}
{"id": "593694", "text": "\"1. What forms do I need to file to receive money from Europe None. Your client can pay you via wire transfer. They need to know your name, address, account number, and the name of your bank, its SWIFT number and its associated address. The addresses and names are required to make sure there are no typos in the numbers. 2. What forms do I need to file to pay people in Latin America (or any country outside the US) None. 1099s only need to be filled out when the contractor has a US tax ID. Make sure they are contractors. If they work for you for more than 2 years, that can create a problem unless they incorporate because they might look like \"\"employees\"\" to the IRS in which case you need to be reporting their identitites to the IRS via a W-8BEN form. Generally speaking any foreign contractor you have for more than 2 years should incorporate in their own country and you bill that corporation to prevent employee status from occurring. 3. Can I deduct payments I made to contractors from other countries as company expense Of course.\""}
{"id": "593705", "text": "This is a big and complex topic, but it's one I think people get wrong a lot.  There's a lot of ways to treat a child's pocket money: Tell a kid that they're getting $10/week allowance.  Help them keep it safe, but don't give them access to it: Put it in a drawer in your office, or a piggie bank on a high shelf.  Encourage them to save up for a big purchase.  Help them decide what to spend it on.  When they find something they want, talk it over with them to make sure it's right for them. This seems like a good approach, because it encourages thrift, long term thinking, savings, and other important elements of real life.  But it's a TERRIBLE idea.  All it does is make the child think of it as if it wasn't really their money.  The child gets no benefits from this, and will certainly not learn anything about savings. Give the kid $10/week.  Full stop. This seems like a bad idea, because the kid is just going to waste it.  Which they will.  :)  That's the point!  There's NO way to learn except by experience. Try and shift control of discretionary spending to the child as and when appropriate.  Give them some money for clothes, or a present for their birthday, and let them spend it.  If they're going to be spending all day at some event, give them money for lunch.  And if they misspend it - tough!  No kid is going to starve in one day because the spend their lunch money at a video arcade, but they will learn a valuable lesson.  :) You have to be careful here of two mistakes.  First, only do this for truly discretionary spending.  If your kid needs clothes for school, then you better make sure they actually buy it.  Second, make sure that you don't end up filling in the gaps.  What you're teaching here is opportunity costs, and that won't work if your child gets to have his cake and eat it too.  (Or go to the movies and STILL get that new Xbox game.) Have them get a job.  And, it should go without saying, give them control of the money.  It's incredibly tempting to force them to save, be responsible, etc.  But all this does is force them to look responsible...for as long as their under your thumb.  Nothing will impart the lessons about why being responsible is important like being irresponsible.  And it's sure as hell better to learn that lesson with some paper route money when your 14 than with your rent money when your 24..."}
{"id": "593708", "text": "You are purchasing an Asset, I believe."}
{"id": "593850", "text": "\"You're right.  I did include \"\"is it reasonable\"\" in the title.  Therefore that brings in the acceptability of those taxes.  However I am making the case that I would like capital gains to be taxed most similarly to regular income (or at least in a parallel bracket), which is independent of the amount needed to be brought in.  I think parallel brackets would be the most productive since it would encourage people to both produce and invest, because you would get the lowest taxes by maximizing both.\""}
{"id": "593879", "text": "\"A diversified portfolio (such as a 60% stocks / 40% bonds balanced fund) is much more predictable and reliable than an all-stocks portfolio, and the returns are perfectly adequate. The extra returns on 100% stocks vs. 60% are 1.2% per year (historically) according to https://personal.vanguard.com/us/insights/saving-investing/model-portfolio-allocations To get those average higher stock returns, you need to be thinking 20-30 years (even 10 years is too short-term). Over the 20-30 years, you must never panic and go to cash, or you will destroy the higher returns. You must never get discouraged and stop saving, or you will destroy the higher returns. You have to avoid the panic and discouragement despite the likelihood that some 10-year period in your 20-30 years the stock market will go nowhere. You also must never have an emergency or other reason to withdraw money early. If you look at \"\"dry periods\"\" in stocks, like 2000 to 2011, a 60/40 portfolio made significant money and stocks went nowhere. A diversified portfolio means that price volatility makes you money (due to rebalancing) while a 100% stocks portfolio means that price volatility is just a lot of stress with no benefit. It's somewhat possible, probably, to predict dry periods in stocks; if I remember the statistics, about 50% of the variability in the market price 10 years out can be explained by normalized market valuation (normalized = adjusted for business cycle and abnormal profit margins). Some funds such as http://hussmanfunds.com/ are completely based on this, though a lot of money managers consider it. With a balanced portfolio and rebalancing, though, you don't have to worry about it very much. In my view, the proper goal is not to beat the market, nor match the market, nor is it to earn the absolute highest possible returns. Instead, the goal is to have the highest chance of financing your non-financial goals (such as retirement, or buying a house). To maximize your chances of supporting your life goals with your financial decisions, predictability is more important than maximized returns. Your results are primarily determined by your savings rate - which realistic investment returns will never compensate for if it's too low. You can certainly make a 40-year projection in which 1.2% difference in returns makes a big difference. But you have to remember that a projection in which value steadily and predictably compounds is not the same as real life, where you could have emergency or emotional factors, where the market will move erratically and might have a big plunge at just the wrong time (end of the 40 years), and so on. If your plan \"\"relies\"\" on the extra 1.2% returns then it's not a reasonable plan anyhow, in my opinion, since you can't count on them. So why suffer the stress and extra risk created by an all-stocks portfolio?\""}
{"id": "593951", "text": "\"You're correct that the trading costs would be covered by the expense ratio. Just to be clear here, the expense ratio is static and doesn't change very often. It's set in such a way that the fund manager *expects* it to cover *all* of their operational costs. It's not some sort of slider that they move around with their costs.  I'm not familiar with any ETF providers doing agreements which cover rent and equipment (hedge funds do - see \"\"hedge fund hotels\"\"). ETF providers do routinely enter into agreements with larger institutions that cover stuff like marketing. PowerShares, for a while, outsourced all of the management of the Qs to BNY and was responsible solely for marketing it themselves.\""}
{"id": "594122", "text": "If for every buyer, there's a seller, doesn't that also mean that there were $25B in outflows in the same time period? Yes for every buyer there is a seller. The inflows are not being talked in that respect. about there being $25B in inflows to US equity markets since the election...what does that mean? Lets say the index was at X. After a month the index is at X+100.  So lets say there are only 10 companies listed. So if the Index has moved X to X+100, then share price S1 has moved to S1+d1. So if you sum all such shares/trades that have increased in value, you will get what in inflow. In the same period there could be some shares that have lost value. i.e. the price or another share was S2 and has moved to S2-d2. The sum of all such shares/trades that have decreased in value, you will get outflow. The terms are Gross outflow, Gross inflow. In Net terms for a period, it can only be Inflow or outflow; depending on the difference between inflow and outflow. The stats are done day to day and aggregated for the time period required.  So generally if the index has increased, it means there is more inflow and less outflow. At times this analysis is also done on segments, FI's inflow is more compared to outflow or compared to inflow of NBFI or Institutional investors or Foreign participants etc."}
{"id": "594226", "text": "Edit: This is paywalled so I pasted it here.  LONDON\u2014The synthetic CDO, a villain of the global financial crisis, is back.  A decade ago, investors\u2019 bad bets on collateralized debt obligations helped fuel the crisis. Billed as safe, they turned out to be anything but. Now, more investors are returning to CDOs\u2014and so are concerns that excess is seeping into the aging bull market.  In the U.S., the CDO market sunk steadily in the years after the financial crisis but has been fairly flat since 2014. In Europe, the total size of market is now rising again\u2014up 5.6% annually in the first quarter of the year and 14.4% in the last quarter of 2016, according to the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.  Collateralized debt obligations package a bunch of assets, such as mortgage or corporate loans, into a security that is chopped up into pieces and sold to investors.  The assets inside a synthetic CDO aren\u2019t physical debt securities but rather derivatives, which in turn reference other investments such as loans or corporate debt.  During the financial crisis, synthetic CDOs became a symbol of the financial excesses of the era. Labelled an \u201catomic bomb\u201d in the movie \u201cThe Big Short,\u201d they ultimately were the vehicle that spread the risks from the mortgage market throughout the financial system.  Synthetic CDOs crammed with exposure to subprime mortgages\u2014or even other CDOs\u2014are long gone. The ones that remain contain credit-default swaps referencing a range of European and U.S. companies, effectively allowing investors to bet whether corporate defaults will pick up.  Desperate for something that pays better than basic government bonds, insurance companies, asset managers and high-net worth investors are scooping up investments like synthetic CDOs, bankers say, which had largely become the preserve of hedge funds after 2008.  Investment banks, which create and sell CDOs, are happy to oblige. Placid markets have made trading revenue weak this year, and such structured products are an increasingly important business line.  Synthetic CDOs got \u201cbad press,\u201d says Renaud Champion, head of credit strategies at Paris-based hedge fund La Fran\u00e7aise Investment Solutions. But \u201cthat market has never ceased to fully function,\u201d he added.  These days, Mr. Champion still trades synthetic CDOs, receiving a stream of income for effectively insuring against a sharp rise in European corporate defaults.  Many investors, though, still view the products as unnecessarily complex and are concerned they may be hard to offload when markets get choppy\u2014as they did in the last crisis. From the DepthsThe amount outstanding of European collateralized debt obligations has been growing again after years of shrinking.  \u201cWe don\u2019t see that demand from our clients and we wouldn\u2019t recommend it,\u201d said Markus Stadlmann, chief investment officer at Lloyds Private Banking, citing concerns over the products\u2019 lack of transparency and lack of liquidity, meaning it could be hard to offload a position when needed.  The return of synthetic CDOs could present other risks. Even if banks are currently less willing to loan money to help clients juice returns, credit default swaps can be very leveraged, potentially allowing investors to make outsize bets.  Structured products accounted for nearly all the $2.6 billion year-on-year growth in trading-division revenue at the top 12 global investment banks in the first quarter, according to Amrit Shahani, research director at financial consultancy Coalition.  \u201cThere has been an uptick in interest in any kind of yield-enhancement structure,\u201d said Kokou Agbo-Bloua, a managing director in Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 G\u00e9n\u00e9rale SA\u2019s investment bank.  The fastest growth this year has come in credit\u2014the epicenter of the 2007-08 crisis. The top global 12 investment banks had around $1.5 billion in revenue in structured credit in the first quarter, according to Coalition, more than doubling since the first quarter of 2016. Structured equities are largest overall, a business dominated by sales of derivatives linked to moves in stock prices, with revenue of $5 billion in the first quarter.  \u201cThe low-yield environment hurts,\u201d said Lionel Pernias, a credit-fund manager at AXA Investment Managers. \u201cSo there are a lot of asset owners looking at structured credit.\u201d  These days, the typical synthetic CDO involves a portfolio of credit-default swaps on a range of companies. The portfolio is sliced into tranches, and investors receive payouts based on the performance of the swaps. Those investors owning lower tranches tend to get paid more but are subject to higher losses if the swaps sour. Structured GrowthBank revenues from structured products such as collateralized debt obligations are rising faster than conventionaltrading of stocks, bonds and currencies.  For instance, an investor can sell insurance against a pick-up in defaults in the lowest\u2014or \u201cequity\u201d\u2014tranche of the iTraxx Europe index, a widely traded CDS benchmark that tracks European investment-grade companies. In return, the investor will receive regular payments, but those will shrink with every company default and stop altogether once 3% of the portfolio has been wiped out through defaults.  During the financial crisis, synthetic CDOs based on standardized indexes like iTraxx Europe suffered losses as traders expected defaults to pick up. Investors who held on, though, have since done \u201cgreat,\u201d says Mr. Champion.  Investors who agreed to insure against a rise in defaults for 10 years on the equity tranche of the iTraxx Europe index in March 2008 have made roughly 10% a year, according to an analysis of data from IHS Markit . That\u2019s despite defaults from two companies in the index: Italian lender Monte dei Paschi di Siena and Portugal Telecom International Finance BV.  In contrast, investors who sold insurance on tailored CDOs packed with riskier credits\u2014such as Icelandic banks or monoline insurers\u2014would have been on the hook for losses.  Synthetic CDOs have evolved since the crisis, bankers say. For instance, most are shorter-dated, running up to around two to three years rather than seven to 10 years. Some banks will only slice and dice standardized CDS indexes that trade frequently in the market rather than craft tailored baskets of credits.  There are also fewer banks involved in arranging these trades. Those active include BNP Paribas SA, Citigroup Inc., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., J.P. Morgan Chase &amp; Co. and Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 G\u00e9n\u00e9rale.  Postcrisis regulations have forced banks to set aside more capital against these transactions and use less leverage. That has encouraged banks to parcel out the risk to clients rather than keeping it on their own books.  \u201cThere is a lot more regulation and scrutiny and a lot less leverage,\u201d said Mr. Agbo-Bloua.  Mr. Champion says he only trades tranches based on standardized CDS indexes, which he says are easier to buy and sell than more tailored products. Currently, he sees value in selling default protection on super-senior tranches.  Mr. Champion said he has to lay down only around $1 million in upfront margin costs on a $100 million trade of this kind.  \u201cThe cost of leverage in the derivatives space is very low,\u201d he said.  Any expectations of default rates picking up could inflict losses on synthetic CDOs, though at the moment analysts forecast they should decline. Still, the memory of how the market behaved in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis is likely to keep many investors on the sidelines.  \u201cIf you\u2019re the person responsible for buying the synthetic CDO that suddenly goes wrong, your career risk is bigger than if you\u2019d bought a plain vanilla bond that goes wrong. It has a bad name,\u201d said Ulf Erlandsson, a portfolio manager at start-up hedge fund Glacier Impact, who until recently oversaw credit for one of Sweden\u2019s public pension funds."}
{"id": "594414", "text": "\"Here's an excerpt from VISA's Card Acceptance Guidelines for Visa Merchants (PDF)  The merchant name is the single most important factor in cardholder   recognition of transactions. Therefore, it is critical that the   merchant name, while reflecting the merchant\u2019s \u201cDoing Business As\u201d   (DBA) name, also be clearly identifiable to the cardholder. This can   minimize copy requests resulting from unrecognizable merchant   descriptors. Merchant applications typically list the merchant name as the merchant   DBA. This may differ from the legal name (which can represent the   corporate owner or parent company), and may differ from the owner\u2019s   name which, for sole proprietorships, may reflect the business owner. I think that the key statement above is \"\"Therefore, it is critical that the merchant name [...] be clearly identifiable to the cardholder.\"\" Since this merchant was not clearly identifiable to the cardholder, they are in breach of a critical point in these guidelines. This is from VISA, but I would assume that all other major credit cards would have similar guidelines for their merchants. However keep in mind that these are \"\"guidelines\"\", and not (necessarily) rules.\""}
{"id": "594483", "text": "Because of the way checks are processed, you can't write a check for $100 million or more: http://www.bankingquestions.com/checksyoureceived/q_limitfunds.html The field used for 'amount' has 10 digits, so anything at/above 10^10 cents (which would require 11 digits) can't be processed, at least not by normal means."}
{"id": "594531", "text": "\"I am co-owner of a business, and we incorporated federally.  (Mostly to limit liability.)  There is some excellent information above, and most of my wisdom I got from a trusted lawyer and accountant (find experts you trust in these two areas, they will prove invaluable in so many areas.)   The one point I would add is that if you decide to incorporate, you can do so federally or provincially.  We were all set to go provincially, when our lawyer asked \"\"Is there any chance you might move the business?  Any chance you might want to do work in other provinces?  What about next year?  Five years?\"\"  If you are going through the expenses to set up a corporation, consider doing so federally, the extra costs were insignificant, but someday you might be glad you don't have to start from scratch.  In this day and age, many people end up moving out of province for work, family concerns, etc.\""}
{"id": "594652", "text": "The only way you will incur underpayment penalties is if you withhold less than 90% of the current year's tax liability or 100% of last years tax liability (whichever is smaller).  So as long as your total tax liability last year (not what you paid at filing, but what you paid for the whole year) was more than $1,234, you should not have any penalty. What you pay (or get back) when you file will be your total tax liability less what was withheld. For example, you had $1,234 withheld from your pay for taxes.  If after deduction and other factors, your tax liability is $1,345, you will owe $111 when you file.  On the other hand, if your tax liability is only $1,000, you'll get a refund of $234 when you file, since you've had more withheld that what you owe. Since your income was only for part of the year, and tax tables assume that you make that much for the whole year, I would suspect that you over-withheld during your internship, which would offset the lack of withholding on the other $6,000 in income."}
{"id": "594784", "text": "If you're a US citizen/resident - you pay taxes on your worldwide income regardless of where you live. The logic is that Americans generally don't agree to the view that there's more than one country in the world. If you're non-US person, not physically present in the US, and provide contract work for a US employer - you generally don't pay taxes in the US. The logic is that the US doesn't actually have any jurisdiction over that money, you didn't earn it in the US. That said, your employer might withheld tax and remit it to the IRS, and you'll have to chase them for refund. If you receive income from the US rental property or dividends from a US company - you pay income tax to the US on that income, and then bargain with your home tax authority on refunds of the difference between what you paid in the US and what you should have paid at home. You can also file non-resident tax return in the US to claim what you have paid in excess. The logic is that the money sourced in the US should be taxed in the US. You earned that money in the US. There are additional rules to more specific situation, and there are also bilateral treaties between countries (including a US-Canadian treaty) that supersede national laws. Bottom line, not only that each country has its own laws, there are also different laws for different situations, and if some of the international treaties apply to you - it further complicates the situation. If something is not clear - get a professional advice form a tax accountant licensed in the relevant jurisdictions (in your case - any of the US states, and the Canadian province where you live)."}
{"id": "594788", "text": "One could wish that. If you speak to Chinese in China even they don't trust Chinese businessses and don't want Chinese goods. Hiring top European and American design and engineering firms for large projects doesn't help if the guy putting the base down decides not to follow the specifications or the subcontractor doing the concrete tries to save a few bucks and does a shoddy job.    As far as coming up with new ideas? Do you know why so many  Chinese firms and the government hack and steal information?  Group think is a way of life and no one wants to stick out."}
{"id": "595029", "text": "This is an all too common problem and is not easy to resolve. Divorce agreements do not alter prior mortgage contracts. Most importantly, the bank is not required, and will not normally, remove the girlfriend from the mortgage even if she quitclaimed it to her Ex. If he has abandoned the property there is a good chance he will not make any more future payments. She should be prepared to make the payments if he doesn't or expect her credit to continue to deteriorate rapidly. She needs to contact her divorce attorney to review their mutual obligations. A court can issue orders to try to force the Ex to fulfill the divorce agreement.  However, a court cannot impose a change to the mortgage obligations the borrowers made to the bank. Focus on this. It's far more important than adding her to a car loan or credit card. Sorry for the bad news. As for the car loan, it's best to leave her off the loan. You will get better terms without her as a joint owner. You can add her as an additional driver for insurance purposes. Adding her to your credit cards will help her credit but not a lot if the mortgage goes to default or foreclosure."}
{"id": "595121", "text": "There are penalties for failure to file and penalties for failure to pay tax.  The penalties for both are based on the amount of tax due.  So you would owe % penalties of zero, otherwise meaning no penalties at all. The IRS on late 1040 penalties: Here are eight important points about penalties for filing or paying late. A failure-to-file penalty may apply if you did not file by the tax filing deadline. A failure-to-pay penalty may apply if you did not pay all of the taxes you owe by the tax filing deadline. The failure-to-file penalty is generally more than the failure-to-pay penalty. You should file your tax return on time each year, even if you\u2019re not able to pay all the taxes you owe by the due date. You can reduce additional interest and penalties by paying as much as you can with your tax return. You should  explore other payment options such as getting a loan or making an installment agreement to make payments. The IRS will work with you. The penalty for filing late is normally 5 percent of the unpaid taxes for each month or part of a month that a tax return is late. That penalty starts accruing the day after the tax filing due date and will not exceed 25 percent of your unpaid taxes. If you do not pay your taxes by the tax deadline, you normally will face a failure-to-pay penalty of \u00bd of 1 percent of your unpaid taxes. That penalty applies for each month or part of a month after the due date and starts accruing the day after the tax-filing due date. If you timely requested an extension of time to file your individual income tax return and paid at least 90 percent of the taxes you owe with your request, you may not face a failure-to-pay penalty. However, you must pay any remaining balance by the extended due date. If both the 5 percent failure-to-file penalty and the \u00bd percent failure-to-pay penalties apply in any month, the maximum penalty that you\u2019ll pay for both is 5 percent. If you file your return more than 60 days after the due date or extended due date, the minimum penalty is the smaller of $135 or 100 percent of the unpaid tax. You will not have to pay a late-filing or late-payment penalty if you can show reasonable cause for not filing or paying on time. If the IRS owes you a refund, April 15 isn't much of a deadline. I suppose the real deadline is April 15, three years later - that's when the IRS keeps your refund and it becomes property of the Treasury.  Of course, there's little reason to wait that long.  Don't let the Treasury get all your interest."}
{"id": "595287", "text": "I wouldn't be too concerned, yet.  You're young.  Many young people are living longer in the family home.  See this Guardian article: Young adults delay leaving family home.  You're in good company.  Yet, there will come a time when you ought to get your own place, either for your own sanity or your parents' sanity.  You should be preparing for that and building up your savings. Since you've got an income, you should \u2013 if you're not already \u2013 put away some of that money regularly.  Every time you get paid, make a point of depositing a portion of your income into a savings or investment account.  Look up the popular strategy called Pay Yourself First. Since you still live at home, it's possible you're a little more loose with spending money than you should be \u2013 at least, I've found that to be the case with some friends who lived at home as young adults.  So, perhaps pretend you're on your own.  What would your rent be if you had to find a place of your own?  If, say, \u00a3600 instead of the \u00a3200 you're currently paying, then you should reduce your spending to the point where you can save at least \u00a3400 per month.  Follow a budget. With respect to your car, it's great you recognize your mistake.  We're human and we can learn from our mistakes.  Plan to make it your one and only car mistake.  I made one too. With respect to your credit card debt, it's not an insurmountable amount.  Focus on getting rid of that debt soon and then focus on staying out of debt.  The effective way to use credit cards is to never carry a balance \u2013 i.e. pay it off in full each month.  If you can't do that, you're likely overspending. Also, look at what pensions your employer might offer. If they offer matching contributions, contribute at least as much to maximize the tax free extra pay this equates to. If you have access to a defined benefit plan, join it as soon as you are eligible. Last, I think it's important to recognize that at age 23 you're just starting out.  Much of your career income earning potential is ahead of you.  Strive to be the best at what you do, get promotions, and increase your income.  Meanwhile, continue to save a good portion of what you earn.  With discipline, you'll get where you want to be."}
{"id": "595455", "text": "I know you say you are aware of secured and unsecured debt and you've made your decision.  Did you do the numbers?  You will pay 44k over the life of the mortgage for that 24k (Based on 4.5% APR mortgage). Once you refinance your mortgage, do you plan on using credit for a while?  Lots of Americans are hyperfocused on credit scores.  The only times it affects your life are when you finance something, when you apply to rent a house or apartment, and sometimes when you apply for a job.  Credit score should not be a factor in this decision. You're borrowing the money at a lower rate to pay off the high rate cards because you want to pay less in interest.  Considering #1 is there any reason NOT to pay off the cards immediately, if not sooner?"}
{"id": "595605", "text": "\"Yes, you would pay no taxes at the time of purchase. In fact, this is not uncommon. Many early employees of startup companies are offered stock options that can be \"\"early-exercised\"\" (exercised before they vest). In such a case, an employee who exercises immediately upon grant (and assuming the exercise price of the option is the FMV at the time of grant) purchases the stock at FMV, and there no no tax paid when filing 83(b) election.\""}
{"id": "595765", "text": "When you take the self employed health care deduction on on Line 29 of form 1040 for 2010 it also will lower your self employment tax.  See line 3 of Schedule SE.  You report your net earnings from self employment less line 29 from 1040."}
{"id": "595822", "text": "Payroll taxes are only paid on salary, so you will be paying SS Tax and Medicare only on the $60,000 you pay yourself.  You will still pay income tax on the distribution, of course, but the payroll tax savings seem significant (~$13K according to the calculator below). While tinkering with a new web technology some time ago, I created this JsFiddle application.  I can't swear to its correctness, but I'm pretty sure it's solid (use the UI in the bottom right quadrant of the screen): http://jsfiddle.net/psandler/NKAZd/"}
{"id": "595897", "text": "Whoops, an obvious one there. So much for audit! We were doing a Basel liquidity report at a bank. One set of numbers in Oracle always balanced with SAP. We were told to use their corrections to apply to the rest. It turns out that they ignored the transactions in Oracle and had loaded the balance sheet data from SAP in Oracle. Of course the data will match!"}
{"id": "596429", "text": "I agree that to take the money from the defined benefit plan you are saying that you can get a better return than the plan. You are taking all the risk if you take the lump sum. But there are two more risks that you are taking by keeping the money in the plan even though you are decades from retirement. Funding risk: companies and state/city/county governments have underfunded their pension programs due to budget pressure. In some cases they have skipped payments when the market was good, because they felt they were ahead of their obligations. They also delayed or skipped contributions when they had a budget shortfall, and wanted to not end the government/company fiscal year in the red. The risk is that they can get so far behind that they change their promises to current and former employees. This was one of the issues with the city of Detroit this year. Bankruptcy: even though their are guarantees regarding pension benefits, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation does set a maximum benefit. If the company goes bankrupt or the plan is terminated  you might not get all the money you were expecting. While the chances of taking a haircut generally impacts people who have a long career, because they are entitled to a large benefit, it can impact people who don't expect it."}
{"id": "596473", "text": "it is possible that if you do not accept the offer, they will try offering you an even lower rate.  if they offered you close to 0%, you could start carrying a balance and find a better use for the cash you would have spent paying it off. there are plenty of investments with a guaranteed return of over 0%. personally, i am using a 0% offer from one of my cards to invest in the stock market.  i might lose that bet, but on average over the last 10 years, i have not. a pretty safe bet would be paying down your mortgage, or buying a cd that matures when the offer ends. that said, even a 10k$ balance might only pay you around 300$. is that worth the hassle to you?"}
{"id": "596664", "text": "\"If you have someplace to put the money which you think will yield significantly better returns, by all means sell and buy that. On the other hand, if you think this stock is likely to recover its value, you might want to hold it, or even buy more as a \"\"contrarian\"\" investment. Buy low, sell high, as much as possible. And diversify. You need to make a judgement call about the odds. We can point out the implications, but in the end whether to sell, buy, hold or hedge is your decision. (This also suggests you need to sit down and draw up a strategy. Agonizing over every decision is not productive. If you have a plan, you make this sort of decision before you ever put money into the stock in the first place.)\""}
{"id": "596665", "text": "LIBOR rate swaps are common most among an international bank and a with a branch in another country, so say Company A is located in Kenya and Company B is in the US, A can borrow $100M from the US and B the same from Kenya and agree to swap assuming that A borrowed at a fixed rate of say 5% and B borrowed for say a 6 month LIBOR rate of maybe 4.2% which increases at a rate of say 0.5% above the prior 6 moth libor rate for time t being 5 years.A is the fixed rate payer and B is the floating  rate payer."}
{"id": "596798", "text": "Does your family go to church?  I know reddit hates religion but churches have been a great source of support for small shops just starting off.  They are a great opportunity to network in your community.  If not, look for other things, toast masters, chamber of commerce.   Get something big on the truck, park it in a well lit-high traffic spot (empty).  I have heard SOME decent things about location based google  adwords.  You may want to check out advertising. Also, make sure he comes up in the google results when people look for plumbers.   Google is the not-so-new yellow pages and a lot of people just start at the top of the list and work their way down when they need someone in an emergency.    Get him to network with General Contractors and maybe the HBA in your area."}
{"id": "596914", "text": "There's two competing forces at work, and they are at work worldwide. Banks can get money from several sources: Through inter-bank borrowing and from raising capital. Capital can come from from selling assets, stock offerings, deposits, etc. The money the banks get from depositors is capital. In the United States, the Federal Reserve regulates the amount of capital that banks must maintain. If there was no requirement for capital then there would  be zero demand for capital at an interest rate above the inter-bank offering rate. As capital requirements have risen, banks are allowed to make less loans given a certain amount of capital. That has caused an increased demand for capital from depositors. As described in this Federal Reserve ruling, effective January 1st, 2014 the Federal Reserve is again raising capital requirements. As you can see here money can be borrowed, in the United States, at .0825% (100 - 99.9175). Currently interest rates paid to borrowers are quite high compared to prevailing inter-bank rates. They could see more upward pressure given the fact that banks will be forced to maintain an increased amount of capital for a given amount of loans."}
{"id": "597229", "text": "While r/finance has some great advice and posters who are well versed in their fields, this appears to be a legal question and if you're really concerned about the legality, I would strongly advise you to check in with a lawyer, not an online internet commenter. While there is a lot of good content on this site, you do see comments where the person is completely talking out of their ass.  It would suck for you to raise concerns at your job, based on faulty 'legal' advice."}
{"id": "597247", "text": "Millionaire, Shmillionaire! Let's do this calculation Bruno Mars style (I wanna be a Billionaire...) If my calculations are correct, in the above scenario, at age 80, you would have more than a billion in the bank, after taxes."}
{"id": "597265", "text": "My realtor told me that even though they're only asking for 1/2    the money and have excellent credit that the mortgage company may   not lend it to them if I'm over priced. Is this true? I've never heard of it before. It is a chance, but it is a red herring to the discussion. Having excellent credit has nothing to do with being eligible for a debt object of a specific size. Just because you have excellent credit, would you get approved for a property of $10,000,000 if you only made $35,000 a year (and had no other net worth)? But regarding your potential buyers, a chance vs a good chance is different. Your realtor just told you some basic always true lending fact that has nothing to do with your situation."}
{"id": "597351", "text": "It sounds for the most part you are a 'buy and hold' type investor and continue to contribute monthly.  I follow the same philosophy and continue to contribute monthly as well.  I use Questrade.com as my online broker. For trading it costs a penny per share with a minimum cost of $4.95 (so if you only buy 100 shares you will still pay $4.95) up to a maximum of $9.95 per trade (so if you buy 10,000 shares you only pay $9.95. Three trades at $4.95 per month across the year would be $178.20.  This is assuming you are trading less then 495 share each trade.  So switching to Questrade would save you an additional $111.80 per year!  Multiply over number of year before you retire plus compound interest which could accrue and that can quite a bit of extra savings. You pay nothing else to Questrade either.  No management fees, etc.  You manage the accounts."}
{"id": "597434", "text": "Keep in mind that the bond market is dominated by US Treasury securities... if there were an S&P 500 for bonds, the US would take positions 1-400. Be careful that you understand what's in your bond funds -- you may not be as diversified as you think."}
{"id": "597503", "text": "You're last paragraph sums up what I mean exactly. Businesses will continue to make investments that try think make sense. Taxes have an pact on what makes sense. This combo is what we should be discussing. Thanks for adding to the conversation."}
{"id": "597679", "text": "\"Leverage here is referring to \"\"financial leverage\"\". This is the practice of \"\"levering\"\" [ie increasing, like the use of a lever to increase the amount of weight you can lift] the value of your investment by taking on debt.  For example: if you have 100k in cash, you can buy a 100k rental property. Assume the property makes 10k a year, net of expenses [10%]. Now assume the bank will also give you a 100k mortgage, at 3%. You could take the mortgage, plus your cash, and buy a 200k rental property. This would earn you 20k from the rental property, less 3k a year in interest costs [the 3%]. Your total income would be 17k, and since you only used 100k of your own money, your rate of return would now be 17% instead of 10%. This is financial leveraging. Note that this increases your risk, because if your investment fails not only have you lost your own money, you now need to pay back the bank. \"\"Beta riders\"\" appears to be negative commentary on investors who use Beta to calculate the value of a particular stock, without regard to other quantitative factors. Therefore \"\"leveraged beta riders\"\" are those who take on additional risk [by taking on debt to invest], and invest in a manner that the author would perhaps considered \"\"blindly\"\" following Beta. However, I have never seen this term before, and it appears tainted by the author's views on Quants. A \"\"quant process driven discipline\"\" appears to be positive commentary on investors who use detailed quantitative analysis to develop rules which they rigorously follow to invest. I have never seen this exact phrasing before, and like the above, it appears tainted by the author's views on Quants. I am not providing any opinion on whether \"\"beta riding\"\" or \"\"quant processes\"\" are good or bad things; this is just my attempt to interpret the quote as you presented it. Note that I did not go to the article to get context, so perhaps something else in the article could skew the language to mean something other than what I have presented.\""}
{"id": "597699", "text": "I think your best bet would be commission-free ETFs, which have no minimum and many have a share price under $100. Most online brokerages have these now, e.g. Vanguard, Fidelity, etc. Just have to watch out for any non-trading fees brokerages may charge with a low balance."}
{"id": "597813", "text": "Yes this is possible. The most likely tool to use in this case would be a Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC). This is a line of credit for which the full amount is backed by home equity (difference between market and book prices). Most likely your financial institution will apply a factor to this collateral to account for various risks which will reduce the maximum amount that can be taken as a line of credit. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_equity_line_of_credit"}
{"id": "598159", "text": "First off, I'm very sorry for your loss.  Depending on when the money comes in I would park it and give it some time.  After that, one of the best investments is paying off debt.  Right now your net worth is less than 30K and that is really not even accessible until retirement.  If the money is there to pay off the house I would do that.  If there isn't enough to pay off the house then I would pay off the automobile and put all or a sizable portion of the remainder into the house.  Now you have very little risk in your life and most likely much more monthly income to invest in 401K, IRAs, college funds or any other investment. Life insurance is mostly to replace your income if there are people counting on that income (spouse, kids, etc).  Normally this would be invested to hopefully replace that income with the growth of the money.  In your case it doesn't sound like you were relying on your father's income, so this can go to clean up current debt. Finally, depending on your relationship, what kind of person your father was and how he was with financials, what do you think he would want you to do with it?"}
{"id": "598332", "text": "If it was me, I would withdraw money from savings and be debt free today.  I would then pour the $500 into building back your savings.  Then of course, never again carry a balance on your CC. At your age MSFRX is a losing game.  You can handle the volatility of better performing funds, I would have zero in there.   If it was me, I would do something totally different then you are doing: Keep in mind you are doing very good as is.  The best way to win with money is to make good moves overtime, and given your debt level, savings, and willingness to contribute to a 401K your moves are pretty darn good.   Keep in mind you will probably want to start saving a down payment for a house.  This should be done outside of your 401K. Overall good work!"}
{"id": "598460", "text": "Did you read what I wrote? I sold some stock for a gain, that's a taxable event.  Are you trying to say I just shouldn't have sold it? Do you understand investing at all?   And the second point is moot, I still had to pay the tax, having write offs doesn't change the fact that my taxes were higher(more importantly that they would have been much higher if I couldn't take advantage of capital gains.)"}
{"id": "598484", "text": "\"I hate to be the guy that says this but if you are indeed competing in the CFAI Research Challenge it is probably important. Remember you cannot use CFA as a noun (CFA's) you can only use it as an adjective ie a CFA charterholder.  As far as you question, what was provided below is pretty much all you need. Security Analysis, anything from the NYU professor and Greenwald stuff (although Greenwald, like someone already mentioned, is balance sheet focused) will get you where you need to go.  I am not sure what you mean by \"\"exotic valuation\"\" methods. As far as I know, the three most accepted and used valuation models by practitioners are the DCF model, the multiple model and the residual income model.  DCF uses short term cash flows and a terminal value discounted to today at some discount rate. The multiple model puts some multiple on earnings, book value, cash flow to arrive at a fair value. The residual model is the opposite of the DCF. One starts with the assets book value, then accrues all income generated in excess of WACC from all future periods.  Find some CFAI Level 2 books on equity and bond valuation. They pretty much cover it all.  And for a closing note, to perform well in investing and valuing companies it is not about what valuation model you use. Focus on WHY an asset should be worth what you think it is worth, not HOW you get to some valuation of that asset. Just my two cents.\""}
{"id": "598553", "text": "The payments might be on time, but the aren't made the same numbers of days apart: The percentage of the daily payment for interest is decreasing, but the numbers of days wasn't constant."}
{"id": "598802", "text": "\"I sort of do this with credit cards. I actually have 4 AMEX cards that I've accumulated over the years. Certain types of expenses go on each card (\"\"General expenses\"\", recurring bills, car-related and business-related) I use AMEX because they have pretty rich iPhone/Android applications to access your accounts and a rich set of alerts. So if we exceed our budget for gas, we get an email about it. Do whatever works for you, but you need to avoid the temptation to over-complicate.\""}
{"id": "598908", "text": "cash isn't part of changes in working capital calculation - dont include it in current assets.   *edit - Also to answer a question you didn't ask, subtracting cash doesn't skew the multiples.  If cash really is that excess, the market cap will reflect a large cash position, thus adding it all back into EV.  Think of apple as a good example.  If they theoretically would dividend out all the cash, market cap would drop and so would EV."}
{"id": "599075", "text": "I don't have a reference, but I think it depends on when you entered the workforce: If you finished school at age 24, your primary goals are to pay down expensive debt and to save up enough for a down payment.  So essentially not much.  Maybe $5k to $10k at the most. On the other hand if you entered the workforce at age 20, with no debts and no significant expenses, it should have been easy to sock away 20% of your income for 6 years, so $40k to $50k would be reasonable. The difference is that the first person's income earning potential should be higher, so eventually they'd be able to make up the difference and pass them."}
{"id": "599436", "text": "\"1. Interest rates What you should know is that the longer the \"\"term\"\" of a bond fund, the more it will be affected by interest rates. So a short-term bond fund will not be subject to large gains or losses due to rate changes, an intermediate-term bond fund will be subject to moderate gains or losses, and a long-term bond fund will be subject to the largest gains or losses. When a book or financial planner says to buy \"\"bonds\"\" with no other qualification, they almost always mean investment-grade intermediate-term bond funds (or for individual bonds, the equivalent would be a bond ladder averaging an intermediate term). If you want technical details, look at the \"\"average duration\"\" or \"\"average maturity\"\" of the bond fund; as a rough guide, if the duration is 10, then a 1% change in interest rates would be a 10% gain or loss on the fund. Another thing you can do is look at long-term (10 years or ideally longer) performance history on some short, intermediate, and long term bond index funds, and you can see how the long term funds bounced around more. Non-investment-grade bonds (aka junk bonds or high yield bonds) are more affected by factors other than interest rates, including some of the same factors (economic booms or recessions) that affect stocks. As a result, they aren't as good for diversifying a portfolio that otherwise consists of stocks. (Having stocks, investment grade bonds, and also a little bit in high-yield bonds can add diversification, though. Just don't replace your bond allocation with high-yield bonds.) A variety of \"\"complicated\"\" bonds exist (convertible bonds are an example) and these are tough to analyze. There are also \"\"floating rate\"\" bonds (bank loan funds), these have minimal interest rate sensitivity because the rate goes up to offset rate rises. These funds still have credit risks, in the credit crisis some of them lost a lot of money. 2. Diversification The purpose of diversification is risk control. Your non-bond funds will outperform in many years, but in other years (say the -37% S&P 500 drop in 2008) they may not. You will not know in advance which year you'll get. You get risk control in at least a few ways. There's also an academic Modern Portfolio Theory explanation for why you should diversify among risky assets (aka stocks), something like: for a given desired risk/return ratio, it's better to leverage up a diverse portfolio than to use a non-diverse portfolio, because risk that can be eliminated through diversification is not compensated by increased returns. The theory also goes that you should choose your diversification between risk assets and the risk-free asset according to your risk tolerance (i.e. select the highest return with tolerable risk). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_portfolio_theory for excruciating detail. The translation of the MPT stuff to practical steps is typically, put as much in stock index funds as you can tolerate over your time horizon, and put the rest in (intermediate-term investment-grade) bond index funds. That's probably what your planner is asking you to do. My personal view, which is not the standard view, is that you should take as much risk as you need to take, not as much as you think you can tolerate: http://blog.ometer.com/2010/11/10/take-risks-in-life-for-savings-choose-a-balanced-fund/ But almost everyone else will say to do the 80/20 if you have decades to retirement and feel you can tolerate the risk, so my view that 60/40 is the max desirable allocation to stocks is not mainstream. Your planner's 80/20 advice is the standard advice. Before doing 100% stocks I'd give you at least a couple cautions: See also:\""}
{"id": "599757", "text": "What is the goal of the money?  If it is to use in the short term, like savings for a car or college, then stick it in the bank and use it for that purpose. If you really want this money to mean something, then in my opinion you have only one choice:  Open a ROTH IRA with something like Vanguard or Fidelity and invest in an index fund.  Then do something that will be very difficult:  Don't touch it. By the time you are 65, it will grow to about 60,000.  However, assuming a 20% tax bracket, the value of that money is really more like 75,000.   Clearly this will not make or break you either way.  The way you live the rest of your life will have far more of an impact.  It will get you started on the right path. BTW this is advice I gave my son who is about your age, and does not earn a ton of money as a state trooper.  Half of his overtime pay goes into a ROTH.  If he lives the rest of his life like he does now, he will be a wealthy man despite making an average income.  No debt, and investing a decent portion of his pay."}
{"id": "599779", "text": "Yeah, I suppose that's true - and not just in finance but smaller companies in general. I think I might have a good gig right now where I can try my hand on both things. It's a bit tied to one IT system though (Misys Summit) but I guess a lot the skills are transferable."}
{"id": "599842", "text": "Fill out the form manually, using last year's return as an example of how to report these gains.  Or experiment with one of the low-priced tax programs; I've been told that they are available for as little as $17, and if your alternative is doing it manually, spending a bit of time checking their results isn't a huge problem. Or run the basic TTax, and tell it to add the appropriate forms manually. It supports them, it just doesn't have the interview sections to handle them. (@DanielCarson's answer has more details about that.) Or..."}
{"id": "599876", "text": "You are in business for yourself. You file Schedule C with your income tax return, and can deduct the business expenses and the cost of goods sold from the gross receipts of your business. If you have inventory (things bought but not yet sold by the end of the year of purchase), then there are other calculations that need to be done.  You will have to pay income tax as well as Social Security and Medicare taxes (both the employee's share and the employer's share) on the net profits from this business activity."}
{"id": "599925", "text": "Investopedia has a good explanation of the term shorting which is what this is. In the simplest of terms, someone is borrowing the bond and selling it with the intent to replace the security and any dividends or coupons in the end. The idea is that if a bond is overvalued, one may be able to buy it back later for a cheaper price and pocket the difference. There are various rules about this including margin requirements to maintain since there is the risk of the security going up in price enough that someone may be forced into a buy to cover in the form of a margin call. If one can sell the bond at $960 now and then buy it back later for $952.38 then one could pocket the difference. Part of what you aren't seeing is what are other bonds doing in terms of their prices over time here. The key point here is that brokers may lend out securities and accrue interest on loaned securities for another point here."}