input
stringlengths
14
166
output
stringlengths
3
17k
instruction
stringclasses
5 values
Are services provided to Google employees taxed as income or in any way?
Others have pointed out that many benefits offered by employers "for free" are actually taxed; the employee must pay taxes on the value of what they're receiving (usually services of some kind). This is called imputed income. Also pointed out was that healthcare is an exception; a specifically protected class of benefits that aren't taxed. But sometimes they are. Many companies now offer domestic partner health coverage as well, regardless of whether the couple is in any kind of civil union or other arrangement. The costs to the employee vary, but it's often that they simply pay double of what their individual coverage contribution would be. Independent of the employee's direct contribution for their domestic partner, they must also pay taxes on the value of the employer's cost of the coverage. This can be significant, as typically the employer is paying the lion's share of the healthcare cost.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Are services provided to Google employees taxed as income or in any way?
Companies often provide cafeteria, or catering services, to employees tax-free at subsidized rates. I'll use "cafeteria" as an illustration. The IRS says that in order to avoid lunch being taxed as income, the employees must pay the "direct costs" of the lunch, food and labor. In addition to those costs, cafeterias add two more items to come up with the total tab; "overhead," (the cost of renting the space), and of course, profit. The company can waive the last two, and charge employees only materials and labor. That's why subsidized cafeteria food can cost as little as half of what it would cost elsewhere.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Are services provided to Google employees taxed as income or in any way?
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.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Are services provided to Google employees taxed as income or in any way?
(Regarding one aspect of the question) Here's a survey suggesting new programmers value "free lunch", old programmers do not care about it: https://stackoverflow.blog/2017/06/12/new-kids-block-understanding-developers-entering-workforce-today/?cb=1
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Taxes due for hobbyist Group Buy
From the poster's description of this activity, it doesn't look like he is engaged in a business, so Schedule C would not be appropriate. The first paragraph of the IRS Instructions for Schedule C is as follows: Use Schedule C (Form 1040) to report income or loss from a business you operated or a profession you practiced as a sole proprietor. An activity qualifies as a business if your primary purpose for engaging in the activity is for income or profit and you are involved in the activity with continuity and regularity. For example, a sporadic activity or a hobby does not qualify as a business. To report income from a nonbusiness activity, see the instructions for Form 1040, line 21, or Form 1040NR, line 21. What the poster is doing is acting as a nominee or agent for his members. For instance, if I give you $3.00 and ask you to go into Starbucks and buy me a pumpkin-spice latte, you do not have income or receipts of $3.00, and you are not engaged in a business. The amounts that the poster's members are forwarding him are like this. Money that the poster receives for his trouble should be reported as nonbusiness income on Line 21 of Form 1040, in accordance with the instructions quoted above and the instructions for Form 1040. Finally, it should be noted that the poster cannot take deductions or losses relating to this activity. So he can't deduct any expenses of organizing the group buy on his tax return. Of course, this would not be the case if the group buy really is the poster's business and not just a "hobby." Of course, it goes without saying that the poster should document all of this activity with receipts, contemporaneous emails (and if available, contracts) - as well as anything else that could possibly be relevant to proving the nature of this activity in the event of an audit.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Taxes due for hobbyist Group Buy
You do actually have some profits (whatever is left from donations). The way it goes is that you report everything on your Schedule C. You will report this: Your gross profits will then flow to Net Profit (line 31) since you had no other expenses (unless you had some other expenses, like paypal fees, which will appear in the relevant category in part II), and from line 31 it will go to your 1040 for the final tax calculation.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
LLC Partnership Earned Income vs. Partnership Share
Why would you file four K-1s for each partner? You file one K-1 per partner, on which you report the total of income attributed to that partner. It shouldn't and cannot "vary". There's no variables here, the income you report is the income already earned and attributed to that partner. What's there to vary? How you decide the attribution of income is governed by your operating agreement, the IRS only needs the bottom line.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
LLC Partnership Earned Income vs. Partnership Share
It would appear that you are not actually "equal" partners. You have differently valued interests and those values fluctuate based on individual performance. The TurboTax advice is simplified for entities that don't track interests relative to partner inputs. IRC § 704(a), partner's distributive share is set by the partnership agreement, and § 704(b), failing an allocation by the agreement it is set by the partner's interest in the partnership. But note § 704(b)(2), which prevents blatant tax-rigging in the partnership agreement.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
What significant negative factors affect Yahoo's valuation?
There are two very large negative factors that affect Yahoo's valuation. The first is that their search business is in decline and continues to lose ground to Google and even Bing. There's no sign that they have any plan or product in the works to offset this decline, so there's tremendous uncertainty about the company's forward-looking revenues. The second is that the company can't seem to decide what to do with its stake in Alibaba, clearly the company's most valuable asset. It they sell it, the question then becomes what they plan to do with the proceeds. Will they do share buybacks or offer a special dividend to reward investors? Will they use some or all of the money to make strategic acquisitions that are revenue-enhancing? Will they use it to develop new products/services? Keep in mind one other thing here, too. There's a world of difference between what something is valued at and what someone's willing to actually pay for it. A patent portfolio is great and perhaps holds good value, assuming the buyer can find a way to monetize it. How exactly was the valuation of the patents arrived at, and are they worthwhile enough for someone to pay anywhere close to that valuation? There's more to this than meets the eye by using a first-blush look at asset valuation, and that's where the professionals come in. My bet is that they have it right and there's something the rest of the market doesn't see or understand about it, hence questions like yours. I hope this helps. Good luck!
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
How do I tell the Canada Revenue Agency that they're sending someone else's documents to my address?
Maybe just put all his correspondence back in the Post Box and mark it "Wrong address"? Precisely. Without opening. Just tell the postman that that person doesn't live there and have it returned to sender. The Revenue will figure it out. Most definitely do not accept any certified or registered mail not addressed to you personally.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Advice on what to do with my equity?
How will 45K-60K "end up in your pocket"? Are you selling your home? Where are you going to live? You talk about moving to Arizona, what is so magical about that place? Congratulations on making a wise purchase. Some people with new found money use it to correct past mistakes. However, if they do not change their behavior they end up in the same situation just less them money they once had. While 50K income is respectable at your age, it is below the national average for households. One factor in having a college education is those with them tend to experience shorter and fewer periods of unemployment especially for males. Nothing will ever replace hustle, however. I'd ask you to have a plan to raise your income. Can you double it in 5 years? You need to get rid of the revolving debt. Do that out of current income. No need to touch the house proceeds for something so small. Shoot for 9 months. Then you need to get rid of the speeding fines and the vehicle loan. That is a lot of vehicle for your income. Again, I would do that out of current income or by selling the vehicle and moving to something more inline with your income. As far as to moving or flipping foreclosures that is more of a question that has to do with your hopes and dreams. Do you want to move your children every 3 years? What if you move to Arizona and it turns out to be quite horrible? You and your wife need to sit down and discuss what is best for your family.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Advice on what to do with my equity?
What to do with your equity? Leave it alone...
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Child is on the way, invest for college and car fund options - opinions
Look at your options with a 529 program. If the money is used for education expenses: that currently includes tuition, room & board (even if living off campus), books, transportation; it grows tax free. Earnings are not subject to federal tax and generally not subject to state tax when used for the qualified education expenses of the designated beneficiary, such as tuition, fees, books, as well as room and board. Contributions to a 529 plan, however, are not deductible. If it is a 529 associated with your state you can also save on state taxes. You can make contributions on a regular basis, or ad hoc. Accounts can even be setup by other relatives. I have used a 529 to fund two kids education. It takes care of most of your education expenses. 529 programs are available from most states, and even some of the big mutual fund companies. Many have the option of shifting the risk level of the investments to be more conservative as the kids hit high school. Some states have an option to have you pay a large sum when the child is small to buy semesters of college. The deal is worth considering if you know they will be going to a state school, the deal is less good if they will go out of state or to a private college. The IRS does limit the maximum amount that you can contribute in a year an amount that exceeds the 14,000 annual gift limit: If in 2014, you contributed more than $14,000 to a Qualified Tuition Plan (QTP) on behalf of any one person, you may elect to treat up to $70,000 of the contribution for that person as if you had made it ratably over a 5-year period. The election allows you to apply the annual exclusion to a portion of the contribution in each of the 5 years, beginning in 2014. You can make this election for as many separate people as you made QTP contributions One option at the end is to take any extra money at graduation and give it to the child so that it can be used for graduate school, or if the taxes and penalties are paid it can be used for that first car. It can even be rolled over to another relative.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
If I were to get audited, what would I need?
While IANAL (tax or otherwise), I have always found that keeping original receipts is the only way to go. While anything can, at some level, be forged or faked, a photo is one more step removed from the original. A mere listing on a web site isn't much proof of anything. Keep your originals for a suggested seven years; while the IRS is trying to audit much faster than that, and any inkling of fraud can be investigated at any time, you should be well and clear with originals kept that long.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Getting a mortgage while self-employed
Would it be worth legitimizing his business or is it too late at this point? To be blunt, you're asking if we recommend that he stop breaking the law. The answer is obviously yes, he should be declaring his income. And it would probably benefit him to get on the same page as his employer (or client) so they can both start obeying the law together. Once he's filed a tax return for 2016 that would certainly help his cause as far as a lender is concerned, and as soon as he can provide some recent pay stubs (or paid invoices) he should be ready to move forward on the mortgage based on that additional income.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Tax liability in US for LLC's owned by an Indian Citzen
The LLC will not be liable for anything, it is disregarded for tax purposes. If you're doing any work while in the US, or you (or your spouse) are a green card holder or a US citizen - then you (not the LLC) may be liable, may be required to file, pay, etc. Unless you're employing someone, or have more than one member in your LLC, you do not need an EIN. Re the bank - whatever you want. If you want you can open an account in an American bank. If you don't - don't. Who cares?
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Tax liability in US for LLC's owned by an Indian Citzen
I am from India. I visited US 6-8 times on business VISA and then started 2 Member LLC. Myself and My wife as LLC Members. We provide Online Training to american students from India. Also Got EIN number. Never employed any one. Do i need to pay taxes? Students from USA pays online by Paypal and i am paying taxes in India. Do i need to pay Taxes in US? DO i need to file the Tax returns? Please guide me. I formed LLC in 2010. I opened an Office-taken Virtual office for 75 USD per month to open LLC in 2010. As there is physical virtual address, am i liable for US taxes? All my earning is Online, free lancing.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
What can I expect to pay when meeting my first financial planner?
My suggestion would be to ask the planner as an initial question as there could be a couple possible explanations for a free meeting: Initial consultation - Within some industries there will be that first meeting which is free to see how well do two people work together. In Canada there are some lawyers that will give a half-hour of their time and I'd imagine some financial planners may have a similar practice. This would be where that first meeting is a half-hour or hour to see what is your situation and what expertise do you want that the planner would have. Straight commission - There is also the possibility that the planner is compensated by the products you purchase through him. In this case, the mutual fund companies, insurance companies and other institutions that he recommends will be handling his compensation. While this does present a conflict of interest, you have to decide whether you want a fee-only planner which wouldn't have this issue though you'd have to pay out of pocket. Something to consider is what are you bringing to this meeting and how long is it intended to be. If you are bringing a lot of paperwork then it is definitely worth asking upfront while if it is an informal chat for a half hour then things may be different.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
What can I expect to pay when meeting my first financial planner?
A complete analysis of your current situation, goals, and formulating a plan to meet those goals, including discussing your risk tolerance cannot be completed during the initial meeting. The first meeting should be him trying to convince you of his skills and services, he will also be collecting the required data from you. You could inquire a few days before the meeting what information he needs from you. The less he asks for the less though the analysis at the initial meeting. This would also be a good time to ask about fee structure. Some planners make money on the initial plan, others make money on the execution of the plan. What fee that is expected for the initial analysis can vary greatly. You should ask, but most will consider this first meeting as the cost of doing business.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
How to systematically find sideways stocks?
You can likely use bollinger band values to programmatically recognize sideways trending stocks. Bollinger band averages expand during periods of volatility and then converge on the matched prices the longer there is little volatility in the asset prices. Also, look at the bollinger band formula to see if you can glean how that indicator does it, so that you can create something more custom fit to your idea.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Who Can I Hire To Calculate the Value of An Estate?
Generally, it would be an accountant. Specifically in the case of very "private" (or unorganized, which is even worse) person - forensic accountant. Since there's no will - it will probably require a lawyer as well to gain access to all the accounts the accountant discovers. I would start with a good estate attorney, who in turn will hire a forensic accountant to trace the accounts.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Will the ex-homeowner still owe money after a foreclosure?
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.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Will the ex-homeowner still owe money after a foreclosure?
Generally, yes, although not in all states. According to this article in Time: But in non-recourse states — Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Minnesota, North Carolina, North Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington — the bank has no recourse beyond the repossession of the property. As for the question about what price the bank can sell it: again, each state makes its own rules, and states may have rules against selling it for much below market value. Quick Google for "ohio state law foreclosure deficiency judgement market value" turned this up: Limitation on Deficiency Judgments. The property cannot be sold at foreclosure sale for less than two-thirds of the appraised fair market value. (Ohio Rev. Code §§ 2329.20, 2329.17). (source: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/deficiency-judgments-after-foreclosure-ohio.html)
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Will the ex-homeowner still owe money after a foreclosure?
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.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Is it ok to just report to 1 credit bureau instead of all 3
The reason you would want to report to all three is because lenders don't usually query all three. Thus, it may be that your negative mark will be missed by a future lender because that lender didn't query the agency you chose to report to. Generally, it is cheaper to report to more agencies than to query more agencies, and since those reporting are also those querying, it is in their best interest to continue reporting to all agencies, and expecting others to do the same. Each agency calculates the score independently based on the information reported to that agency. Thus only reporting a negative item to Experian will mean that TransUnion and Equifax scores for the same person will be higher.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Why do stocks track the price of Oil?
Anthony Russell - I agree with JohnFx. Petroleum is used in making many things such as asphalt, road oil, plastic, jet fuel, etc. It's also used in some forms of electricity generation, and some electric cars use gasoline as a backup form of energy, petrol is also used in electricity generation outside of cars. Source can be found here. But to answer your question of why shares of electric car companies are not always negatively related to one another deals with supply and demand. If investors feel positively about petroleum and petroleum related prospects, then they are going to buy or attempt to buy shares of "X" petrol company. This will cause the price of "X", petrol company to rise, ceteris paribus. Just because the price of petroleum is high doesn't mean investors are going to buy shares of an electric car company. Petrol prices could be high, but numerous electric car companies could be doing poorly, now, with that being said you could argue that sales of electric cars may go up when petrol prices are high, but there are numerous factors that come into play here. I think it would be a good idea to do some more research if you are planning on investing. Also, remember, after a company goes public they no longer set the price of the shares of their stock. The price of company "X" shares are determined by supply and demand, which is inherently determined by investors attitudes and expectations, ultimately defined by past company performance, expectations of future performance, earnings, etc.. It could be that when the market is doing well - it's a good sign of other macroeconomic variables (employment, GDP, incomes, etc) and all these factors power how often individuals travel, vacation, etc. It also has to deal with the economy of the country producing the oil, when you have OPEC countries selling petrol to the U.S. it is likely much cheaper per barrel than domestic produced and refined petrol because of the labor laws, etc. So a strong economy may be somewhat correlated with oil prices and a strong market, but it's not necessarily the case that strong oil prices drive the economy..I think this is a great research topic that cannot be answered in one post.. Check this article here. From here you can track down what research the Fed of Cleveland has done concerning this. My advice to you is to not believe everything your peers tell you, but to research everything your peers tell you. With just a few clicks you can figure out the legitimacy of many things to at least some degree.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
(Almost) no credit unions in New York City, why?
There are 2 credit unions in the Metro NY area that are open to everyone: You might also want to check out aSmarterChoice.org to see if there are other credit union options based on where you live, work, worship & more.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
(Almost) no credit unions in New York City, why?
I would have been tempted to dismiss your claim, but the data I found shows that you're correct. On the plus side, the growth rate in credit union market share is higher in New York than it is in California. While there is no question that bankers hate credit unions, I can't tell you why credit unions have a smaller market share in NY. Maybe the regulatory environment is part of it. Banks have a big lobby, and they pay a lot of taxes in NYC.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
The Intelligent Investor: Northern Pacific Railway example
Without reading the source, from your description it seems that the author believes that this particular company was undervalued in the marketplace. It seems that investors were blinded by a small dividend, without considering the actual value of the company they were owners of. Remember that a shareholder has the right to their proportion of the company's net value, and that amount will be distributed both (a) in the form of dividends and (b) on liquidation of the company. Theoretically, EPS is an indication of how much value an investor's single share has increased by in the year [of course this is not accurate, because accounting income does not directly correlate with company value increase, but it is a good indicator]. This means in this example that each share had a return of $10, of which the investors only received $1. The remainder sat in the company for further investment. Considering that liquidation may never happen, particularly within the time-frame that a particular investor wants to hold a share, some investors may undervalue share return that does not come in the form of a dividend. This may or may not be legitimate, because if the company reinvests its profits in poorer performing projects, the investors would have been better off getting the dividend immediately. However some value does need to be given to the non-dividend ownership of the company. It seems the author believes that investors failing to consider value of the non-dividend part of the corporation's shares in question led to an undervaluation of the company's shares in the market.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
The Intelligent Investor: Northern Pacific Railway example
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.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
The Intelligent Investor: Northern Pacific Railway example
Two of the main ways that investors benefit financially from a stock are dividends and increases in the price of the stock. In the example as described, the benefits came primarily from dividends, leaving less benefits to be realized in terms of an increase in the value of the company. Another way to put that is that the company paid its profits to shareholders in the form of a dividend, instead of accumulating that as an increase in the value of the company. The company could have chosen to take those profits and reinvest them in growing the business, which would lead to lower dividends but (hopefully) an increase in the valuation of the stock, but they chose to pay dividends instead. This still rewards the investors, but share prices stay low.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Why is a home loan (mortgage) cheaper than gold loan?
My doubt is whether Govt./Reserve Bank of India gives any explicit incentives to banks to offer cheaper home loans ? Currently NO. In the past Loan against GOLD was considered priority sector lending [Loans to poor and agriculture etc]. Every Bank need to lead around 25% to priority sector. Hence quite a few Banks gave loans relatively cheaper to todays rate rather than giving it as Farm loan that almost never get recovered. It is no longer the case now as Loan against GOLD is not considered priority lending. If it were just demand/supply, I feel that gold loans should have been cheaper It is demand and supply. There are quite a few reasons for this;
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Why is a home loan (mortgage) cheaper than gold loan?
Why is a home loan (mortgage) cheaper than gold loan? It has to do with risk. Lending money secured by gold is inherently riskier than a loan secure by your home. Increased risk means the lender must charge more. That's why home loans are cheap compared to loans for other purposes. Home loans are secured by the house. Houses are assets that hold and usually retain some value. Houses are easy to track down (they can't be hidden or moved) in the event that you don't repay your loan. Houses are reasonably liquid, they can be resold to pay off a defaulted loan.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Is human interaction required to open a discount brokerage account?
You definitely do not need human interaction to open an account at Schwab. You just need to provide a social security number and US drivers license. See http://www.schwab.com/public/schwab/investing/accounts_products/accounts/brokerage_account You can do it online or through the mail. They usually have some questions about your level of experience with investing. They are required to ask these questions to ensure that you don't get confused and put your money in inappropriate investments.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Transfering money from NRE account in India to family member
I am a US citizen and I want to transfer some amount 10 lakhs+ to my brother from my NRE account in India to his account. My brother is going to purchase something for his business. He is going to return my amount after 3-4 Months From the description it looks like you would like to loan to your brother on repatriation basis. Yes this is allowed. See the RBI Guide here and here for more details. There are some conditions; (iv) Scheme for raising loans from NRIs on repatriation basis Borrowings not exceeding US$ 2,50,000 or its equivalent in foreign exchange by an individual resident in India from his close relatives resident outside India, subject to the conditions that - a) the loan is free of interest; b) the minimum maturity period of the loan is seven years; c) The amount of loan is received by inward remittance in free foreign exchange through normal banking channels or by debit to the NRE/FCNR account of the non-resident lender; d) The loan is utilised for the borrower's personal purposes or for carrying on his normal business activity but not for carrying on agricultural/plantation activities, purchase of immovable property or shares/debentures/bonds issued by companies in India or for re-lending. Although it is mentioned as Seven years, this is revised to one year. Since he cannot deposit into my NRE account I guess he has to deposit it into my NRO account. A repatriate-able loan as above can be deposited into NRE Account. Is there any illegality here doing such transaction? No. Please ensure proper paper work to show this as loan and document the money trail. Also once I get my money in NRO account do I need to pay taxes in India on the money he deposited? This question does not arise.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
Yes, quite easily, in fact. You left a lot of numbers out, so lets start with some assumptions. If you are at the median of middle income families in the US that might mean $70,000/year. 15% of that is an investment of $875 per month. If you invest that amount monthly and assume a 6% return, then you will have a million dollars at approximately 57 years old. 6% is a very conservative number, and as Ben Miller points out, the S&P 500 has historically returned closer to 11%. If you assumed an aggressive 9% return, and continued with that $875/month for 40 years until you turn 65, that becomes $4 million. Start with a much more conservative $9/hr for $18,720 per year (40 hours * 52 weeks, no overtime). If that person saved 14% of his/her income or about $219 per month from 25 to 65 years old with the same 9%, they would still achieve $1 million for retirement. Is it much harder for a poor person? Certainly, but hopefully these numbers illustrate that it is better to save and invest even a small amount if that's all that can be done. High income earners have the most to gain if they save and the most to lose if they don't. Let's just assume an even $100,000/year salary and modest 401(k) match of 3%. Even married filing jointly a good portion of that salary is going to be taxed at the 25% rate. If single you'll be hitting the 28% income tax rate. If you can max out the $18,000 (2017) contribution limit and get an additional $3,000 from an employer match (for a total monthly contribution of $1750) 40 years of contributions would become $8.2 million with the 9% rate of return. If you withdrew that money at 4% per year you would have a residual income of $300k throughout your retirement.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
It depends on how much you save, how much your savings earns each year. You can model it with a very simple spreadsheet: Formula view: You can change this simple model with any other assumptions you wish to make and model. This spreadsheet presumes that you only make $50,000/year, never get a raise, that your savings earns 6% per year and that the market never has a crash like 2008. The article never states the assumptions that the author has made, and therefore we can't honestly determine how truthful the author is. I recommend the book Engineering Your Retirement as it has more detailed models and goes into more details about what you should expect. I wrote a slightly more detailed post that showed a spreadsheet that is basically what I use at home to track my retirement savings.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
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.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
Yes, becoming a millionaire is a reasonable goal. Saving 15% of your income starting at age 25 and investing in the stock market will likely get you there. The CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) of the S&P 500 over the last 35 years has been about 11%. (That 35 years includes at least two fairly serious crashes.) You may get more or less than that number in the future, but let's guess that you'll average 9%. Let's say that you begin with nothing invested, and you start investing $100 per week at age 25. (If your annual income is $35,000, that is about 15% of your income.) You decide to invest your money in an S&P 500 index mutual fund. 35 years from now when you are 60 years old, you would be a millionaire ($1.2 Million, actually). You may earn less than the assumed 9%, depending on how the stock market does. However, if you stick with your 15% investment amount throughout your whole career, you'll most likely end up with more, because your income will probably increase during your career. And you will probably be working past age 60, giving your investments time to earn even more.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
I'll offer another answer, using different figures. Let's assume 6% is the rate of return you can expect. You are age 25, and plan to retire at age 65. If you have $0 and want $1M at retirement, you will need to put away $524.20/month, or $6,290.40/year, which is 15% of $41,936. So $41,936 is what you'd need to make per year in order to get to your target. You can calculate your own figures with a financial calculator: 480 months as your term (or, adjust this to your time horizon in months), .486755% as your interest (or, take your assumed interest rate + 1 to the 1/12th power and subtract 1 to convert to a monthly interest rate), 0 as your PV, and $1M as your FV; then solve for PMT.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
I see a lot of answers calculcating with incomes that are much higher than yours, here is something for your situation: If you would keep your current income for the rest of your life, here is approximately how things would turn out after 40 years: All interest is calculated relative to the amount in your portfolio. Therefore, lets start with 1 dollar for 40 years: With your current income, 15% would be 82.5 dollar. At 12% this would over 40 years get you almost 1 million dollar. I would call a required return of more than 12% not 'likely'. The good news, is that your income will likely increase, and especially if this happens fast things will start to look up. The bad news is, that your current salary is quite low. So, it basically means that you need to make some big jumps in the next few years in order to make this scenario likely. If you can quickly move your salary towards ranges that are more common in the US, then 15% of your income can build up to a million before you retire. However, if you just follow gradual growth, you would need to get quite lucky to reach a million. Note that even if reaching a million appears unlikely, it is probably still a good idea to save!
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
The article links to William Bernstein’s 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.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
As others have shown, if you assume that you can get 6% and you invest 15% of a reasonable US salary then you can hit 1 million by the time you retire. If you invest in property in a market like the UK (where I come from...) then insane house price inflation will do it for you as well. In 1968 my parents bought a house for £8000. They had a mortgage on it for about 75% of the value. They don't live there but that house is now valued at about £750,000. Okay, that's close to 60 years, but with a 55 year working life that's not so unreasonable. If you assume the property market (or the shares market) can go on rising forever... then invest in as much property as you can with your 15% as mortgage payments... and watch the million roll in. Of course, you've also got rent on your property portfolio as well in the intervening years. However, take the long view. Inflation will hit what a million is worth. In 1968, a million was a ridiculously huge amount of money. Now it's 'Pah, so what, real rich people have billions'. You'll get your million and it will not be enough to retire comfortably on! In 1968 my parents salaries as skilled people were about £2000 a year... equivalent jobs now pay closer to £50,000... 25x salary inflation in the time. Do that again, skilled professional salary in 60 years of £125000 a year... so your million is actually 4 years salary. Not being relentlessly negative... just suggesting that a financial target like 'own a million (dollars)' isn't a good strategy. 'Own something that yields a decent amount of money' is a better one.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
Other people have already demonstrated the effect of compound interest to the question. I'd like to add a totally different perspective. Note that the article says if you can follow this simple recipe throughout your working career, you will almost certainly beat out most professional investors [...] you'll likely accumulate enough savings to retire comfortably. (the latter point may be the more practical mark than the somewhat arbitrary million (rupees? dollars?) My point here is that the group of people who do put away a substantial fraction of their (lower) early wages and keep them invested for decades show (at least) two traits that will make a very substantial difference to the average (western) person. They may be correlated, though: people who are not tempted or able to resist the temptation to spend (almost) their whole income may be more likely to not touch their savings or investments. (In my country, people like to see themselves as "world champions in savings", but if you talk to people you find that many people talk about saving for the next holidays [as opposed to saving for retirement].) Also, if you get going this way long before you are able to retire you reach a relative level of independence that can give you a much better position in wage negotiations as you do not need to take the first badly paid job that comes along in order to survive but can afford to wait and look and negotiate for a better job. Psychologically, it also seems to be easier to consistently keep the increase in your spending below the increase of your income than to reduce spending once you overspent. There are studies around that find homeowners on average substantially more wealthy than people who keep living in rental appartments (I'm mostly talking Germany, were renting is normal and does not imply poverty - but similar findings have also been described for the US) even though someone who'd take the additional money the homeowner put into their home over the rent and invested in other ways would have yielded more value than the home. The difference is largely attributed to the fact that buying and downpaying a home enforces low spending and saving, and it is found that after some decades of downpayment homeowners often go on to spend less than their socio-economic peers who rent. The group that is described in this question is one that does not even need the mental help of enforcing the savings. In addition, if this is not about the fixed million but about reaching a level of wealth that allows you to retire: people who have practised moderate spending habits as adults for decades are typically also much better able to get along with less in retirement than others who did went with a high consumption lifestyle instead (e.g. the homeowners again). My estimate is that these effects compound in a way that is much more important than the "usual" compounding effect of interest - and even more if you look at interest vs. inflation, i.e. the buying power of your investment for everyday life. Note that they also cause the group in question to be more resilient in case of a market crash than the average person with about no savings (note that market crashes lead to increased risk of job loss). Slightly off topic: I do not know enough how difficult saving 50 USD out of 50 USD in Pakistan is - and thus cannot comment whether the savings effort called for in the paper is equivalent/higher/lower than what you achieve. I find that trying to keep to student life (i.e. spending that is within the means of a student) for the first professional years can help kick-starting a nest egg (European experience - again, not sure whether applicable in Pakistan).
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
If by being a millionaire you mean dollar millionaire then I doubt that it is really that easy in Pakistani context. At present the exchange rate is 107 Pakistani rupees per US dollar so even with this exchange rate, to have a million US dollars means having 107 million rupees of wealth. Now with this maths in mind you can very well calculate how much possible it is for an average 25 years old Pakistani to have that much wealth. And by the time you have 107 million Pakistani rupees of wealth the exchange rate against the US dollar would have only gone up against Pakistani currency. That article which you have mentioned makes calculations in US context and dollar terms. However if you talk only in terms of your country's context then being a millionaire means having 1 million rupees of wealth and that is something which is quite achievable with your salary and within very short span of time.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
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.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Can saving/investing 15% of your income starting age 25, likely make you a millionaire?
I just want to point out a couple of things, and I do not have enough reputation to comment. Saving 50% is totally possible. I know people saving 65%. For more see here EDIT: Let me repeat that 4% it the maximum you can assume if you want to be sure to have at least that return in the long term. It's not the average, it's the minimum, the value you can expect and plan with. Just to reinforce the claim, I can cite Irrational Exuberance of Robert Schiller, who explicitly says, on page 135 of the 2015 edition, that from January 1966 to January 1992 the real annual return was just 4.1%. Sure, this does not matter so much if you are investing all the way through, but it's still a 26 year period.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Can a Zelle Bank Transfer be reversed or denied after credit has been added?
After collecting information via web searching, the comments above, and a additional call to BOA, i have concluded the following to the best of my knowledge. Zelle Transfers are final. Irreversible. As Jay mentioned above, funds are subtracted from the sending account before the transfer is made, therefore it eliminates sending funds that do not exist. I validated this information with BOA, and the BOA representative said that once a zelle transfer is initiated and the receiving party has received the funds, it can no longer be canceled. Funds received by the receiving party is credited immediately. I will note that the BOA representative was a BOA representative and not a Zelle representative. I say this because the representatives seemed to be slightly weary in answering my questions about Zelle, as if he was looking up the information as we spoke. If someone is reading this and plans to transfer huge amount of cash from a highly likely malicious user, i would recommend contacting Zelle or your personal bank directly to further validate this information. Zelle, from what i can find, is a fairly new technology. I could not find a Zelle contact number via the web for questioning, so i can only rely on the knowledge on my BOA representative.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Setting up a LLC for two partners in different states, what should we look into?
TL;DR: Get a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) for tax issues, and a lawyer for the Operating Agreement, labor law and contract related issues. Some things are not suitable for DIY unless you know exactly what you're doing. We both do freelance work currently just through our personal names. What kind of taxes are we looking into paying into the business (besides setup of everything) compared to being a self proprietor? (I'm seeing that the general answer is no, as long as income is <200k, but not certain). Unless you decide to have your LLC taxed as a corporation, there's no change in taxes. LLC, by default, is a pass-through entity and all income will flow to your respective tax returns. From tax perspective, the LLC will be treated as a partnership. It will file form 1065 to report its income, and allocate the income to the members/partners on schedules K-1 which will be given to you. You'll use the numbers on the K-1 to transfer income allocated to you to your tax returns and pay taxes on that. Being out of state, will she incur more taxes from the money being now filtered through the business? Your employee couldn't care less about your tax problems. She will continue receiving the same salary whether you are a sole proprietor or a LLC, or Corporatoin. What kind of forms are we looking into needing/providing when switching to a LLC from freelance work? Normally we just get 1099's, what would that be now? Your contract counterparts couldn't care less about your tax problems. Unless you are a corporation, people who pay you more than $600 a year must file a 1099. Since you'll be a partnership, you'll need to provide the partnership EIN instead of your own SSN, but that's the only difference. Are LLC's required to pay taxes 4 times per year? We would definitely get an accountant for things, but being as this is side work, there will be times where we choose to not take on clients, which could cause multiple months of no income. Obviously we would save for when we need to pay taxes, but is there a magic number that says "you must now pay four times per year". Unless you choose to tax your LLC as a corporation, LLC will pay no taxes. You will need to make sure you have enough withholding to cover for the additional income, or pay the quarterly estimates. The magic number is $1000. If your withholding+estimates is $1000 less than what your tax liability is, you'll be penalized, unless the total withholding+estimates is more than 100% of your prior year tax liability (or 110%, depending on the amounts). The LLC would be 50% 50%, but that work would not always be that. We will be taking on smaller project through the company, so there will be times where one of us could potentially be making more money. Are we setting ourselves up for disaster if one is payed more than the other while still having equal ownership? Partnerships can be very flexible, and equity split doesn't have to be the same as income, loss or assets split. But, you'll need to have a lawyer draft your operational agreement which will define all these splits and who gets how much in what case. Make sure to cover as much as possible in that agreement in order to avoid problems later.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
What are the procedures or forms for a private loan with the sale of a vehicle?
The Nebraska DMV web site has a neat page about this. It seems to be fairly simple, and not costly to record a lien and later release it. Just go there with the title and the sales agreement that details the terms, and pay the $7 fee.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
What are the procedures or forms for a private loan with the sale of a vehicle?
Draft up a promissory notes. Have a lawyer do it use one of those online contract places if you have simple needs. Your promissory note need to cover Be specific. There are probably a lot more items that can be included, and if a quick internet search is any indication it gets deep fast. http://lmbtfy.com/?q=car+sale+promissory+note (Like @LittleAdv says) Head to your DMV with the title and the promissory note. The title is signed over to you and held by the DMV. When you pay up, the seller informs the DMV and they send you the title. If you don't pay up, the seller can legally repossess the car. All butts are covered. Pay the note as agreed. When you are all paid up, your friend notifies the DMV who then mail you the title. Your butt is covered because your name is on the car, you can insure it and nobody can take it from you (legally) if you are paying the note as agreed. Your pal's butt is covered because if you stop paying half way through, he can keep whatever you have paid him and get his car back.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
What is the point of owning a stock without dividends if it cannot be resold?
Shares often come associated with a set of rights, such as ability to vote in the outcome of the company. Some shares do not have this right, however. With your ability to vote in the outcome of the company, you could help dictate that the company paid dividends at a point in time. Or many other varieties of outcomes. Also, if there were any liquidity events due to demand of the shares, this is typically at a much higher price than the shares are now when the company is private/closely held.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
What is the point of owning a stock without dividends if it cannot be resold?
If that condition is permanent -- the stock will NEVER pay dividends and you will NEVER be able to sell it -- then yes, it sounds to me like this is a worthless piece of paper. If there is some possibility that the stock will pay dividends in the future, or that a market will exist to sell it, then you are making a long-term investment. It all depends on how likely it is that the situation will change. If the investment is small, maybe it's worth it.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Does setting up a company for your own improves credibility?
The key here is that you are defacto running your own company no matter if you acknowledge it or not. In the end these questions have the goal of deciding if you can and will repay the loan. Presumably you filed taxes on your income. These can be shown to the loan officer as proof you have the ability to repay your loan. Running your freelancing as a business has advantages of being able to deduct normal expenses for running the business from your revenue. I am not sure how business cards improves your credit worthiness as they can be had for $10 in about an hour.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
How to account for startup costs for an LLC from personal money?
Typically you give a loan to the company from yourself as a private person, and when the company makes money the company pays it back to you. Then the company pays for all the expenses with the money from the loan. Even if you don't want a business account yet, you can probably ask your bank for a second account (mine in the UK did that without any problems).
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
How to account for startup costs for an LLC from personal money?
You don't even need to formally loan the LLC any money. You pay for the setup costs out of pocket, and then once the LLC is formed, you reimburse yourself (just like with an expense report). Essentially you submit an expense report to the LLC for the startup costs, and the LLC pays out a check to you, categorized for the startup expenses.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
How to account for startup costs for an LLC from personal money?
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.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
How to account for startup costs for an LLC from personal money?
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,
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
How to account for startup costs for an LLC from personal money?
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
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
How to account for startup costs for an LLC from personal money?
An LLC is a pass-through entity in the USA, so profits and losses flow through to the individual's taxes. Thus an LLC has a separate TIN but the pass-through property greatly simplifies tax filings, as compared to the complicated filings required by C-corps.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
What should I do with my freshly opened LLC in California after I've moved?
There's no reason to keep the California LLC if you don't intend to do business in California. If you'll have sales in California then you'll need to keep it and file taxes accordingly for those sales. You can just as easily form a new LLC in Washington state and even keep the same name (if it's available in Washington, that is). Keeping the California LLC just creates paperwork for whatever regulatory filings California will require for no purpose at all. As for your question about it looking suspicious that you just set up an LLC and then are shutting it down, nobody's going to care, to be honest. As with your situation, plans change, so it isn't really all that unusual. If you're concerned the government will say something, don't.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
In the US, this was the case during the 19th century. There was a system of "subscriptions" between banks, where larger banks backed the smaller banks to some extent. In trade, notes from distant banks were not accepted or discounted relative to known local banks, or silver/gold coinage. There were a number of problems with this system which came to a head during the Panic of 1907. During this crisis, a cascading series of banking failures was only stopped by the personal intervention of JP Morgan. Even when Morgan intervened, it was very difficult to make capital available in a way that avoided the panic. The subsequent creation of the Federal Reserve was a response to that crisis.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
Who says they don't? In the United Kingdom the Bank of England and the Bank of Scotland print the money. In some other countries (like Hong Kong, Israel, and the US) commercial banks were issuing the currency at some point of time, but now the governments do that. The problem with commercial banks issuing currency is the control. If a bank is allowed to print money - how can the amount of currency be controlled? If it is controlled by the government then the bank will be just a printing press, so what's the point? And since governments now want to control the monetary policy, banks have no reason to just be printing presses for the government, the governments have their own. edit Apparently in Hong Kong it is still the case, as I'm sure it is in some other places in the world as well.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
In Scotland, each bank issues its own separate notes. It's not uncommon to see identical-valued £10 notes, for example, from three different banks in one's wallet.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
Are you talking about printing up more of the same kind of bill, or printing up a different kind of bill? You'll have different answers based on which one you mean. If it's a different kind of bill: Governments don't like competition in this matter. In US history there are examples of the government shutting alternative currencies down. A recent run at an alternative currency is the Liberty Dollar. The similarity is not lost on BitCoin or even Chuck E. Cheese (last one is a satire, but I did worry for a second as I still have a bunch of those tokens!). If it's the same kind of bill: The currency is a tool of the government (in the US) and it does the sourcing for its production. There isn't a whole lot of reason for others to get involved, really. It's special paper, special plates, special presses, special everything, and doing it in one place ensures some consistency of product. There aren't any compelling reason to open up another manufacturing channel to produce exactly the same product. There's no real economic benefit for banks to print their own money. The larger ones play a key role in shaping how much is printed, but actually printing the bills is an offshoot of this.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
There is absolutely no logical reason why each nation does not own and control banking and thus the supply of money. Any system including the financial system works exactly the same way, regardless of ownership. Banking depends solely on the confidence of the customers/investors. Therefore when a sovereign nation/state has ownership of the banks, the profits are kept in-house, within the nation, which is actually a bonus, and taxes can be off-set by profits, which is another benefit. Any improvement or benefit by the private ownership of banking is a total myth.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
Any person at any time may produce their own currency, one can even do so on the back of a paper napkin, ripped beer coaster or whatever. This is NOT a banking privilege, it is within the lawful ability of anyone capable of engaging in commerce. It is called a 'negotiable instrument' ... it gives the holder rights to a sum of money. Notice that I say 'holder' ... this is what distinguishes it from a non-negotiable instrument, the fact that you don't need to redeem it from source, you can pass it to another who then becomes the 'holder in due course' and thus obtains the rights conferred. The conferable rights over a sum of money (or, indeed, other asset) are themselves 'value' Do banks do this ? Yes, all the time! ... one of the simplest examples are cheques drawn against the bank, which are considered 'as good as cash'. Usually they will be drawn out to the order of the person you wish to pay ... but can equally be drawn out to bearer. The only reasons they resist making out to bearer is : But you can write your own at 'any time' on 'any thing' ... See the apocryphal, yet deliciously entertaining, tale of the 'negotiable cow'
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Why don't banks print their own paper money / bank notes?
Actually, banks do issue their own money, it's just not embodied as a piece of paper, it's called checkbook money and in the US, it's backed by 3$ per every 100$ promised, that's the magic of "fractional reserve banking."
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Should I use an NRE or NRO account to transfer money from India to the US? Any reports needed?
Deposits into NRE account can only be done from funds outside India. So your brother cannot deposit into your NRE account. He can deposit in NRO account or directly wire transfer the funds. Both these require some paper work depending on the amount.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Should I use an NRE or NRO account to transfer money from India to the US? Any reports needed?
NRE is better. It's a tax free account, exempt from income tax. NRE account is freely repatriable (Principal and interest earned) while the NRO account has restricted repatriability
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
What's the point of a chargeback when they just ask the merchant whether they owe money to the buyer?
When you initiate a chargeback, the merchant has the right to dispute the chargeback. If they can provide proof that the purchase actually took place, the chargeback will fail. We don't know all the details of your situation, of course, but it appears from what you have said that the tax chain probably has documents that you signed agreeing to the charges. They prepared your return (even if they did a poor job), and so from their perspective, they have decided that they deserve to be paid. Whether or not they did a good job is a matter of opinion, of course; their position might be that they did it correctly, and the second business did it poorly. The chargeback is a powerful tool, but it is not a magic button that makes a charge disappear. If the merchant can show that a sale did indeed take place and show that the proper amount was charged, the chargeback will fail. For a service, it isn't enough usually to simply state that you were unsatisfied; if you received the service at the agreed-upon price, the charge is valid. A chargeback is sort of a nuclear option when it comes to getting a refund. There are negative ramifications and expenses every time a merchant gets a chargeback (even if they ultimately win), and so often they will be willing to work something out to avoid a chargeback. You should go to the merchant first, if you can, and ask for a refund before considering the chargeback option. If you file a chargeback without even giving them the opportunity to work it out with you, the merchant will usually want to fight back.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
What's the point of a chargeback when they just ask the merchant whether they owe money to the buyer?
So, what's the point of a charge-back, if they simply take the word of the merchant? tl;dr: They don't. As both a merchant and a consumer I have been on both ends of credit card chargebacks, and have received what I consider to be mostly fair outcomes in all cases. Here are some examples: Takeaways from this: I strongly urge all consumers who are considering doing a chargeback to try to work with the merchant first, and use the CC dispute as a last resort. In general, you can think of the credit card dispute department like a judge. They hear the arguments presented by both sides, and consider them to the best of their ability. They don't always get it right, but they make their best attempt given the limited information they are provided.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
What's the point of a chargeback when they just ask the merchant whether they owe money to the buyer?
The point of a chargeback is to force merchants to do the paperwork. Many merchants don't, and are easy targets for chargebacks, even when they have, in fact, provided the good or service. You used a tax prep service. They may have given you poor (technical) advice, but such firms are usually very good about doing the paperwork. That's why you lost.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
What's the point of a chargeback when they just ask the merchant whether they owe money to the buyer?
You may be using the wrong method to get your money back. As others have said, this is not a valid use for chargeback; that is when a fraudulent charge occurred, or when a merchant charges you incorrectly. However, many cards have various kinds of guarantees, one of which might cover this situation. Particularly in some european countries, such as the United Kingdom which has Section 75 allowing you a recourse, services are included with goods. Goods are typically the only covered elements in the US, though, but check your credit card agreement to be sure. Second, you can go through the FTC. They will provide you a sample form letter to request a refund of your money, and if the merchant is not cooperative might choose to help you directly (especially if many others are in your situation).
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Corporate Equity Draw vs Income
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.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
What happens if a bank no longer use an intermediary bank?
If your counterparty sent money to a correspondent account at another bank, then it is completely up to the other bank what to do with the money. If the wire transfer completed, then the account is not closed. If I were your business partner, I would immediately contact the bank to which the transfer was made and explain the situation and hopefully they will transfer the money back. Whenever a wire transfer is made, the recipients name, address, and account number are included. If that name, address and account do not belong to you, then you have a problem because you have no legal right to the money in a court of law. For this reason, you should be avoid any situation where you are wiring money to anyone except the intended recipient.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
How quickly will the funds be available when depositing credit card checks?
For those who don't know, credit card checks are blank checks that your credit card company sends you. When you fill them out and spend them, you are taking a cash advance on your credit card account. You should be aware that taking a cash advance on your credit card normally has extra fees and finance charges above what you have with regular credit card transactions. That having been said, when you take one of these to your bank and try to deposit them, it is entirely up to bank policy how long they will make you wait to use these funds. They want to be sure that it is a legitimate check and that it will be honored. If your teller doesn't know the answer to that question, you'll need to find someone at the bank who does. If you don't like the answer they give you, you'll need to find another bank. I would think that if the credit card is from Chase, and you are trying to deposit a credit card check into a Chase checking account, they should be able to do that instantly. However, bank policy doesn't always make sense.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
K, welcome to Money.SE. You knew enough to add good tags to the question. Now, you should search on the dozens of questions with those tags to understand (in less than an hour) far more than that banker knows about credit and credit scores. My advice is first, never miss a payment. Ever. The advice your father passed on to you is nonsense, plain and simple. I'm just a few chapters shy of being able to write a book about the incorrect advice I'd heard bank people give their customers. The second bit of advice is that you don't need to pay interest to have credit cards show good payment history. i.e. if you choose to use credit cards, use them for the convenience, cash/rebates, tracking, and guarantees they can offer. Pay in full each bill. Last - use a free service, first, AnnualCreditReport.com to get a copy of your credit report, and then a service like Credit Karma for a simulated FICO score and advice on how to improve it. As member @Agop has commented, Discover (not just for cardholders) offers a look at your actual score, as do a number of other credit cards for members. (By the way, I wouldn't be inclined to discuss this with dad. Most people take offense that you'd believe strangers more than them. Most of the answers here are well documented with links to IRS, etc, and if not, quickly peer-reviewed. When I make a mistake, a top-rated member will correct me within a day, if not just minutes)
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
First, a note of my personal experience: up until a year ago, my credit lines were composed exclusively of credit cards with perfect payment histories, and my credit score is fine. If you mean that credit cards have no impact on a person's credit score until they miss a payment, that is certainly not correct. FICO's website identifies "payment history" as 35% of your FICO score: The first thing any lender wants to know is whether you’ve paid past credit accounts on time. This is one of the most important factors in a FICO® Score. ... Credit payment history on many types of accounts Account types considered for payment history include: ... Details on late or missed payments ("delinquencies") and public record and collection items FICO® Scores consider: How many accounts show no late payment A good track record on most of your credit accounts will increase your FICO® Scores. Clearly, from the last item alone, we see that credit lines (a category which includes credit cards) with no late payments is a factor in computing your FICO score, and certainly other credit bureaus behave similarly. Possibly the banker was trying to explain some other point, like "If you're careful not to spend more on your card than you have in the bank, you can functionally treat your credit card as a debit line," but did so in a confusing way.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
Not sure what you mean by "missing". Credit card debt can be paid back in full when you get the bill, or you can "take a loan" and "pay in installments". If you do the latter, and pay back at least the minimum required amount on time, you are not "missing" your payment. Technically, you are taking a small, but expensive loan, and if you pay that loan back according to the terms and conditions that apply to your credit card, this is reported to the credit bureau and improves your credit. If you are really "missing your payment", paying late (more than a few days), less than minimum or nothing at all, this won't help to improve your credit. A "first-time offender" won't always be reported to the credit bureau, but if he is, it won't be a positive report.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
I can't think of any conceivable circumstance in which the banker's advice would be true. (edit: Actually, yes I can, but things haven't worked that way since 1899 so his information is a little stale. Credit bureaus got their start by only reporting information about bad debtors.) The bureaus only store on your file what gets reported to them by the institution who extended you the credit. This reporting tends to happen at 30, 60 or 90-day intervals, depending on the contract the bureau has with that institution. All credit accounts are "real" from the day you open them. I suspect the banker might be under the misguided impression the account doesn't show up on your report (become "real") until you miss a payment, which forces the institution to report it, but this is incorrect-- the institution won't report it until the 30-day mark at the earliest, whether or not you miss a payment or pay it in full. The cynic in me suspects this banker might give customers such advice to sabotage their credit so he can sell them higher-interest loans. UDAAP laws were created for a reason.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
Of course credit cards are viewed as credit. If you're using money on a credit card, you are not directly paying for your transactions on goods/services immediately: this is the act of borrowing credit to pay for them. Debit cards, on the other hand, work where the funds are taken from an account immediately (or subject to a small delay - but usually no more than 24 hours - depending on various factors). You should never miss credit card payments, as that will affect your credit rating. If you have unpaid money on your card this is debt - plain and simple. But to answer your question succinctly - yes, credit cards are a form of credit, as the name suggests. When you apply for a mortgage any unpaid credit (debt) is considered and would adversely affect you if you have such debts. The level to which it affects you depends on the amount of debt. This is how it works in the UK, but to my knowledge it is the same in the US and most other countries. Please clarify if you think this is incorrect.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
There's a difference between missing a payment and "carrying a balance" (making an on-time payments that are less than the full balance due). I have heard mortgage brokers claim that, if you have no other credit history, carrying a small balance here and there on a credit card may improve your score. ("Small" is in relation to your available credit and your ability to pay it off.) But actually missing a payment will probably hurt your score. Example: You have a card with a credit limit of $1000. In July you charge $300 worth of stuff. You get the next statement and it shows the balance due of $300 and a minimum payment of $100. If you pay the entire $300 balance in that cycle, most cards won't charge you any interest. You are not carrying a balance, so the credit scores may not reflect that you actually took a $300 loan and paid it off. If you instead pay $200, you'll be in good standing (because $200 is greater than the minimum payment). But you'll be carrying a $100 balance into the next statement cycle. Plus interest will accrue on that $100. If you do this regularly, your credit score will probably take into account that you've taken a small loan and made the payments. For those with no other credit history, this may be an appropriate way to increase your credit score. (But you're paying interest, so it's not free.) And if the average balance you carry is considered high relative to your ability to pay or to the total credit available to you, then this could adversely affect your score (or, at least, the amount of credit another provider is willing to extend to you). If you instead actually miss a payment, or make a payment that's less than the minimum payment, that will almost certainly hurt your credit score. It will also incur penalties as well as interest. You want to avoid that whenever possible. My guess is that, in the game of telephone from the banker to you, the "carrying a balance" was misinterpreted as "missing a payment."
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Are credit cards not viewed as credit until you miss one payment?
This does not directly address the question, but how the Bank views your behaviour is not the same as a credit reporting bureau. If you do not "go deep" on your card at all, you may be deemed not to be exercising the facility, indeed they may ask you to reduce your credit limit. This is not the same as "missing a payment". At the same time, do not just make the minimum payment. Ideally you should clear it within 3 months. Think of it as a very short term line of credit. Not clearing the balance within three months (or turning it over) demonstrates a cash flow problem, as does clearing it from another card. Some banks call this "kite flying" after similar behaviour in older days with cheque accounts. If you use the credit and show you can pay it off, you should never need to ask for a credit increase, it will be offered. The Bureau will be informed of these offers. Also, depending upon how much the bank trusts you, the Bureau may see a "monthly" periodic credit review, which is good if you have no delinquencies. Amex does this as a rule.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Who buys variable annuities?
An annuity makes sense in a few different scenarios: In general, they are not the best deal around (and are often ripoffs), and will almost certainly be a bad deal if pitched by a tax preparer, insurance salesman, etc. Keep in mind that any "guarantees" offered are guarantees made by an insurance company. The only backing up of that claim in the event of a company failing is protection from your state's Guaranty Association. (ie. not the Feds)
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Who buys variable annuities?
There is always some fine print, read it. I doubt there is any product out there that can guarantee an 8% return. As a counter example - a 70 yr old can get 6% in a fixed immediate annuity. On death, the original premium is retained by the insurance company. Whenever I read the prospectus of a VA, I find the actual math betrays a salesman who misrepresented the product. I'd be really curious to read the details for this one.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
Who buys variable annuities?
Two types of people: (1) Suckers (2) People who feel that investment advisors/brokers make too little money and want to help out by paying insane commissions. Think I'm kidding. Check out this article: "Variable Annuity Pros and Cons" Seriously, for 99% of us, they are a raw deal for everyone except the person selling them.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Who buys variable annuities?
I wrote a detailed answer about variable annuities on another question, but I want to include one specific situation where a variable annuity may be the right course of action. (For the sake of simplicity, I'm quoting directly from that answer): Three-quarters of US states protect variable annuity assets from creditors. Regular IRA's don't benefit from protection under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and may therefore be more vulnerable to creditors. If you're a potential target for lawsuits, e.g. a doctor worried about medical malpractice suits, variable annuities may be an option for you. As always, you should consult a legal/tax professional to see if this might be a good option for you to consider. The SEC also has a fantastic publication on variable annuities that provides a great deal of information. It's not directly related to this question because it doesn't necessarily focus on the circumstances in which they might be a good fit for you, but it's educational nevertheless and should give you more than enough information to properly evaluate any policy you're looking to buy.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Why does AAPL trade at such low multiples?
This is also an opinion, the iPhone makes up too much of the company's total revenue. Last quarter results were very well received because of the somewhat dramatic increase in service revenue indicating that maybe the company can shift from relying so heavily on the iPhone. As it stands, Apple is a single product company and that hinders long term prospects, hence the relatively low multiple. And the company has missed estimates, in fact one of those large dips was an earnings miss. Additionally, if you're looking at the charts another one of the recent dips was likely caused by the brexit vote because everything was clobbered for a couple of days after that.
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Why does AAPL trade at such low multiples?
This is an opinion, but I think it has more to do with the market's uncertainty about the long-term future of the company without Steve Jobs. Apple hasn't released anything more than incremental upgrades to its existing product lines since Jobs passed, and while some people would argue about the Apple watch, Jobs played a significant role in its development prior to his death, so that doesn't really count. Whether you like or hate Apple, you had to admire Jobs' passion and creativity, and there's real question as to whether the company can sustain its dominance in the market without the Jobs vision over the long haul. My guess is that the market is leaning slightly toward the "no" column, but only ever so slightly. The company continues to deliver fantastic results, but how long will that last of their next products don't wow consumers the way previous ones have? This skepticism manifests itself in a stock that trades at a lower P/E than it deserves to, but this is just my opinion. I hope this helps. Good luck!
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
Can the Standard Deduction still apply to a Traditional IRA early withdrawal?
IRA distributions are reported on line 15b on the standard form 1040. That is in the same Income section as most of your other income (including that 1099 income and W2 income, etc.). Its income is included in the Line 22 "Total Income", from which the Personal Exemption (calculated on 6d, subtracted from the total in line 42) and the Standard Deduction (line 40 - also Itemized Deduction total would be here) are later reduced to arrive at Line 43, "Taxable Income". As such, yes, he might owe only the 10% penalty (which is reported on line 59, and you do not reduce this by the deductions, as you surmised).
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
US tax - effectively connected income
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.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
My wife and I are selling a house worth $230k-$260k. Its a rental. Should we use an agent, limited service listing agent, or FSBO?
The answers you'll receive are going to be largely subjective. I can't tell you which option would be best for you, but there are plenty of things to consider. Do you know how to sell a home? If your market is hot enough, FSBO may make sense as you won't need the marketing power and expertise of an agent. In very hot markets, you'll end up with potential bidding wars if you price your house correctly. But that's where things start getting tricky. Do you know what your house is realistically worth in your market, or are you making assumptions based on Zillow (or similar)? Do you know what paper work is needed to complete a FSBO sale? Are you any good at negotiating? There are certainly plenty of resources out there for FSBO sellers to learn how to do it, but it can be overwhelming. FSBO isn't really fee free. If the buyer has an agent, they'll want a percentage (3%) for setting up their part of the sale. Without experience in negotiation, you may be leaving a decent amount of money on the table. Also, in negotiations, an experienced agent may nickel & dime you with contingencies all the way up until closing. Then there's anything you might need to pay for marketing materials and time off from work (if needed) to have the house shown. However, if you're in a market where people are literally walking up to your door to ask if you'd consider selling and for how much (which just happened to a friend of mine), then it might actually be a pretty painless process. Traditional agents charge a fee, but that fee goes towards marketing and their experience in sales and negotiations. They do the work of getting your property in front of the right people and setting up house showings. The work is done on your behalf, and you won't need to alter your personal work schedule anywhere near as much as you would with FSBO. They only get paid if the house sells. Limited service agents are a bit of an unknown to me, but it's more than likely the buyer will have an agent, so assume the higher fee. It also appears that the LSA gets paid at least $500 no matter what happens, so they're certainly not putting in any extra effort to help get your house sold. It appears that you're simply paying to get on their list of homes and get some marketing from them, but that's about it. I'd imagine you could get the same exposure as a well educated FSBO seller.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Is it cheaper to use car Insurance or pay out of pocket?
There's not a single answer here, as the premium you pay for car insurance depends on multiple factors, including (but not limited to): All these factors contribute to the likelihood of getting into an accident, and the expected damage from an accident. So just having an accident and making a claim will likely raise your premium (all else being equal), but whether or not it will be cheaper in the long run depends (obviously) on how much your premium goes up, which cannot determined without all of the facts. Your agent could tell you how much it would go up, but even making such an inquiry would likely be noted on your insurance record, and may cause your premium to go up (although probably not by as much). However, the point of insurance is to reduce the out-of-pocket expenses from future accidents, so the question to ask is: How likely am I to have another accident, and if I do, can I pay cash for it or will I need to offset some cost with an insurance claim. Do you risk making a claim and having your rates go up by more than $700 over the next 3-4 years (the rough time it takes for a "surcharge" to expire)? Or do you just pay for the repair out-of-pocket and keep your premiums lower?
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
Limited Liability Partnership capital calculation
Retained earnings is different from partner capital accounts. You can draw the money however the partners agree. Unless money is specifically transferred to the capital funds, earnings will not show up there.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.
How does a “minimum number of items to be bought” factor into break even analysis?
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.
Utilize your financial knowledge, give your answer or opinion to the input question or subject . Answer format is not limited.
FTB sent refund check for 2011 during audit; Does this really mean that whole audit is over for 2011?
Not it doesn't, and yes they can. If the audit is closed, you should have received invitation to attend the closing conference, and get the summary of decisions from that meeting in writing. I suggest you check with your tax representative about this refund check before cashing it.
Offer your insights or judgment on the input financial query or topic using your financial expertise. Reply as normal question answering
Where are the non floated Groupon shares
The original investors and founders own them. Think about it this way - When you hear that an IPO priced at $10 opened at $50, is that 'good or 'bad'? Of course, it depends who you are. If you are the guy that got them at $10, you're happy. If you are the founder of the company, you are thinking the banker you paid to determine a market price for the IPO failed. Big. He blew it, basically as you just sold your company for 20% of the perceived value. But, instead of selling all the shares, just sell, say, 5%. Now, the IPO opening price is just a way to understand the true value of your company while keeping 95% of the upside once the market settles down to a regular trading pattern. You can slowly sell these shares into the market or you can use them as cash to take over other companies by buying with these shares instead of actual cash. Either way, the publicly traded shares should trade based on the total value of the company and the fraction they represent.
Based on your financial expertise, provide your response or viewpoint on the given financial question or topic. The response format is open.
Where are the non floated Groupon shares
Many people have criticized the Groupon IPO model because it doesn't make sense as an investment, unless you are an insider with cheap shares. Basically, you have:
Share your insights or perspective on the financial matter presented in the input.
I just “paid” online with a debit card with no funds. What now?
There are a few factors at play here. Depending on the bank that has offered you the card there are different types of overdraft protection that may have been set up. Typically, if they attempt to run the card with no money, if one of these is in play, you will be spared any overdraft fees by the transaction charging to a designated overdraft account, usually savings, or by the transaction failing due to insufficient funds. If you know the transaction went through, and you know there were not enough funds in the account to cover the transactions, then you have a few options. If you have overdraft protection that auto charges insufficient funds charges to a separate account, then you have nothing to worry about. If you do not, most banks offer a grace period where you have until the end of the day to zero out your account, that is to say pay the overdraft amount and bring your balance to at least $0. If this is a charge that occurred in the past, and you have already been charged an overdraft fee, there may still be hope. I cannot speak for all banks, but I know that Chase Bank offers a once per year overdraft forgiveness, where they will get rid of the charges if you agree to bring the account out of the negative. There is a chance other banks will do the same if you call their customer service.
Offer your thoughts or opinion on the input financial query or topic using your financial background.