sonny-dev/inters-qdu huggingface dataset:
Query: Why big clients want the contractor to be incorporated before giving them work

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> They believe that it reduces the risk that Revenue Canada will deem you to be an employee and make them pay a whole pile of tax, EI, CPP and so on that should have been paid if you had been hired as an employee. It's my recollection that the employer gets dinged for both the employee and employer share of those withholdings (and generally the employer's share is larger than yours) so they really want to prevent it. There's a Revenue Canada publication about whether you're an employee or not. There's nothing on it about being incorporated, but still employers feel more protected when their contracts are incorporated.  We did work as a sole proprietorship at the very beginning, so that we could deduct our losses against employment income earned earlier in the year, before we started the business. You can find clients who will take you on. We incorporated once the losses were over with (basically we had bought the equipment and office supplies we needed to get started.) It's a simple and relatively inexpensive thing to do, and gives clients a sense of protection. It won't protect you from your own poor decisions since you'll be a director of the firm.
Query: What is the easiest way to back-test index funds and ETFs?

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> "Back-testing itself is flawed. ""Past performance is no guarantee of future results"" is an important lesson to understand. Market strategies of one kind or another work until they don't.  Edited in -- AssetPlay.net provides a tool that's halfway to what you are looking for. It only goes back to 1972, however. Just to try it, I compared 100% S&P to a 60/40 blend of S&P with 5 yr t-bills (a misnamed asset, 5 yr treasuries are 'notes' not 'bills') I found the mix actually had a better return with lower volatility.  Now, can I count on that to work moving forward? Rates fell during most of this entire period so bonds/notes both looked pretty good. This is my point regarding the backtest concept.  GeniusTrader appears more sophisticated, but command line work on PCs is beyond me. It may be worth a look for you, JP. ETF Replay appears to be another backtest tool. It has its drawbacks, however, (ETFs only)"

 <=SEP=> "I'd start with a Google search for ""best backtesting tools."" Does your online brokerage offer anything? You already understand that the data is the important part.  The good stuff isn't free. But yeah, if you have some money to spend you can get more than enough data to completely overwhelm you. :)"

 <=SEP=> yAnother potential tool for you would be a Monte Carlo Simulator.   here's one  http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Business+Fundamentals I know that past performance is no guarantee.....  but I think it's in many cases not exactly a flawed tool, and especially with respect to money managers a good way to find good ones.  If a manager has shown an ability over time to consistently beat the market, yes he might be due for a bad day, but you'd generally expect that they should be able to continue that trend. I'd apply the same logic to pundits.  If their track record sucks, and they constantly seem to whipsaw you with their advice, why listen to them other than

 <=SEP=> check pastsat-backtesting , backtesting tool, where one can can test on well known technical indicators without coding skills
Query: Non Resident aliens - Question of standard vs itemized

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> The IRS' primary reference Pub 519 Tax Guide for Aliens -- current year online (current and previous years downloadable in PDF from the Forms&Pubs section of the website) says NO: Students and business apprentices from India.   A special rule applies .... You can claim the standard deduction .... Use Worksheet 5-1 to figure your standard deduction. If you are married and your spouse files a return and itemizes deductions, you cannot take the standard deduction. Note the last sentence, which is clearly an exception to the 'India rule', which is already an exception to the general rule that nonresident filers never get the standard deduction. Of course this is the IRS' interpretation of the law (which is defined to include ratified treaties); if you think they are wrong, you could claim the deduction anyway and when they assess the additional tax (and demand payment) take it to US Tax Court -- but I suspect the legal fees will cost you more than the marginal tax on $6300, even under Tax Court's simplified procedures for small cases.
Query: How does spot-futures arbitrage work in the gold market?

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> You're missing the cost-of-carry aspect: The cost of carry or carrying charge is the cost of storing a physical commodity, such as grain or metals, over a period of time. The carrying charge includes insurance, storage and interest on the invested funds as well as other incidental costs. In interest rate futures markets, it refers to the differential between the yield on a cash instrument and the cost of the funds necessary to buy the instrument. So in a nutshell, you'd have to store the gold (safely), invest your money now, i.e. you're missing out on interests the money could have earned until the futures delivery date.  Well and on top of that you need to get the gold shipped to London or wherever the agreed delivery place is. Edit: Forgot to mention that of course there are arbitrageurs that make sure the futures and spot market prices don't diverge. So the idea isn't that bad as I might have made it sound but being in the arbitrage business myself I should disclaim that profits are small and arbitraging is highly automated, so before you spot a $1 profit somewhere between any two contracts, you can be quite sure it's been taken by an arbitrageur already.

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

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> I assume US as mhoran_psprep edited, although I'm not sure IRS necessarily means US. (It definitely used to also include Britain's Inland Revenue, but they changed.)  (US) Stockbrokers do not normally withhold on either dividends/interest/distributions or realized capital gains, especially since gains might be reduced or eliminated by later losses. (They can be required to apply backup withholding to dividends and interest; don't ask how I know :-) You are normally required to pay most of your tax during the year, defined as within 10% or $1000 whichever is more, by withholding and/or estimated payments. Thus if the tax on your income including your recent gain will exceed your withholding by 10% and $1000, you should either adjust your withholding or make an estimated payment or some combination, although even if you have a job the last week of December is too late for you to adjust withholding significantly, or even to make a timely estimated payment if 'earlier in the year' means in an earlier quarter as defined for tax (Jan-Mar, Apr-May, June-Aug, Sept-Dec). See https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/estimated-taxes and for details its link to Publication 505. But a 'safe harbor' may apply since you say this is your first time to have capital gains. If you did not owe any income tax for last year (and were a citizen or resident), or (except very high earners) if you did owe tax and your withholding plus estimated payments this year is enough to pay last year's tax, you are exempt from the Form 2210 penalty and you have until the filing deadline (normally April 15 but this year April 18 due to weekend and holiday) to pay. The latter is likely if your job and therefore payroll income and withholding this year was the same or nearly the same as last year and there was no other big change other than the new capital gain. Also note that gains on investments held more than one year are classified as long-term and taxed at lower rates, which reduces the tax you will owe (all else equal) and thus the payments you need to make. But your wording 'bought and sold ... earlier this year' suggests your holding was not long-term, and short-term gains are taxed as 'ordinary' income. Added: if the state you live in has a state income tax similar considerations apply but to smaller amounts. TTBOMK all states tax capital gains (and other investment income, other than interest on exempt bonds), and don't necessarily give the lower rates for long-term gains. And all states I have lived in have 'must have withholding or estimated payments' rules generally similar to the Federal ones, though not identical.
Query: Why do dishonour fees exist?

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> "In the United States, many banks aim to receive $ 100 per year per account in fees and interest markup.  There are several ways that they can do this on a checking account.  These examples assume that there is a 3 % difference between low-interest-rate deposit accounts and low-interest rate loans. Or some combination of these markups that adds up to $ 100 / year.  For example:  A two dollar monthly fee = $ 24 / year, plus a $ 2,000 average balance at 0.05% = $ 29 / year, plus $ 250 / month in rewards debit card usage = $ 24 / year, plus $ 2 / month in ATM fees = $ 24 / year. Before it was taken over by Chase Manhattan in 2008, Washington Mutual had a business strategy of offering ""free"" checking with no monthly fees, no annual fees, and no charges (by Washington Mutual) for using ATMs.  The catch was that the overdraft fees were not free.  If the customers averaged 3 overdraft fees per year at $ 34 each, Washington Mutual reached its markup target for the accounts."
Query: Funds in closed bank account have gone to the government

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> "Legally speaking, if you do close a limited company, the funds belong to the government (""bona vacantia""). There's some guidance on this at Companies House and there is indeed a substantial amount of administration work to get it undone. Notable excerpts: You should deal with any loose ends, such as closing the company’s   bank account, the transfer of any domain names - before you apply. [...] From the date of dissolution, any assets of a dissolved company will   belong to the Crown. The company’s bank account will be frozen and any   credit balance in the account will pass to the Crown. [...] 4. What happens to the assets of a dissolved company? From the date of dissolution, any assets of a dissolved company will   be 'bona vacantia'. Bona vacantia literally means “vacant goods” and   is the technical name for property that passes to the Crown because it   does not have a legal owner. The company’s bank account will be frozen   and any credit balance in the account will be passed to the Crown. [...] Chapter 3 - Restoration by Court Order The registrar can only restore a company if he receives a court order,   unless a company is administratively restored to the register (see   chapter 4).  Anyone who intends to make an application to the court to   restore a company is advised to obtain independent legal advice. [...] Chapter 4 - Administrative Restoration 1. What is Administrative Restoration? Under certain conditions, where a company was dissolved because it   appeared to be no longer carrying on business or in operation, a   former director or member may apply to the registrar to have the   company restored. [...]"
Query: My previous and current employers both use Fidelity for 401(k). Does it make sense to rollover?

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> I would check to see what the fee schedule is on your previous employer's 401k. Depending on how it was setup, the quarterly/annual maintenance fee may be lower/higher than your current employer. Another reason to rollover/not-rollover is that selection of funds available is better than the other plan. And of course always consider rolling over your old plan into a standard custodial rollover IRA where the management company gives you a selection of investment options. At least look at the fees and expense ratios of your prior employer's plan and see if anything reaches a threshold of what you consider actionable and worth your time. Note: removed reference to self directed IRA as vehicle is more complicated account type allowing for more than just stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. Not for your typical retail investor.

 <=SEP=> I would always suggest rolling over 401(k) plans to traditional IRAs when possible.  Particularly, assuming there is enough money in them that you can get a fee-free account at somewhere like Fidelity or Vanguard.  This is for a couple of reasons. First off, it opens up your investment choices significantly and can allow you significantly reduced expenses related to the account.  You may be able to find a superior offering from Vanguard or Fidelity to what your employer's 401(k) plan allows; typically they only allow a small selection of funds to choose from.  You also may be able to reduce the overhead fees, as many 401(k) plans charge you an administrative fee for being in the plan separate from the funds' costs. Second, it allows you to condense 401(k)s over time; each time you change employers, you can rollover your 401(k) to your regular IRA and not have to deal with a bunch of different accounts with different passwords and such.  Even if they're all at the same provider, odds are you will have to use separate accounts. Third, it avoids issues if your employer goes out of business.  While 401(k) plans are generally fully funded (particularly for former employers who you don't have match or vesting concerns with), it can be a pain sometimes when the plan is terminated to access your funds - they may be locked for months while the bankruptcy court works things out. Finally, employers sometimes make it expensive for you to stay in - particularly if you do have a very small amount.  Don't assume you're allowed to stay in the former employer's 401(k) plan fee-free; the plan will have specific instructions for what to do if you change employers, and it may include being required to leave the plan - or more often, it could increase the fees associated with the plan if you stay in.  Getting out sometimes will save you significantly, even with a low-cost plan.
Query: What should I do with my paper financial documents?

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> Regarding your specific types: If you can't part with anything, sure, scan them. Also, there are lots of opportunities to sign up for eStatements with just about any financial provider.  They want you to sign up for them, because it reduces their expenses. If you still like having paper around (I do admit that it's comforting in a way) then you can usually prune your paper a bit by statement (getting rid of T&C boilerplate, advertisements, etc.) or by consolidation (toss monthly when the quarterly consolidation statement arrives; toss the quarterly when the yearly arrives).

 <=SEP=> Here's my approach: As for Google Docs, I think that its safe enough for most people. If you in a profession that was subject to heavy regulatory scrutiny, of if you are cheating on your taxes, I would probably not use a cloud provider. Many providers will provide documents to government agencies without a subpoena or notice to you.

 <=SEP=> I won't add to the timelines, as I agree or don't care but my two cents are
Query: Short selling - lender's motivation

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> "Oftentimes, the lender (the owner of the security) is not explicitly involved in the lending transaction. Let's say the broker is holding a long-term position of 1MM shares from Client A. It is common for Client A's agreement with Broker A to include a clause that allows the broker to lend out the 1MM shares for its own profit (""rehypothecation""). Client A may be compensated for this in some form (e.g. baked into their financing rates), but they do not receive any compensation that is directly tied to lending activities. You also have securities lending agents that lend securities for an explicit fee. For example, the borrower's broker may not have sufficient inventory, in which case they would need to find a third-party lending agent. This happens both on-demand as well as for a fixed-terms (typically a large basket of securities). SLB (securities lending and borrowing) is a business in its own right.  I'm not sure I follow your follow-up question but oftentimes there is no restriction that prevents the broker from lending out shares ""for a very short time"". Unless there is a transaction-based fee though, the number of times you lend shares does not affect ""pocketing the interest"" since interest accrues as a function of time."

 <=SEP=> "As the other answer said, the person who owns the lent stock does not benefit directly.  They may benefit indirectly in that brokers can use the short lending profits to reduce their fees or in that they have the option to short other stocks at the same terms.   Follow-up question: what prevents the broker lending the shares for a very short time (less than a day), pocketing the interest and returning the lenders their shares without much change in share price (because borrowing period was very short). What prevents them from doing that many times a day ? Lack of market.   Short selling for short periods of time isn't so common as to allow for ""many"" times a day.  Some day traders may do it occasionally, but I don't know that it would be a reliable business model to supply them.  If there are enough people interested in shorting the stock, they will probably want to hold onto it long enough for the anticipated movement to happen.   There are transaction costs here.  Both fees for trading at all and the extra charges for short sale borrowing and interest.  Most stocks do not move down by large enough amounts ""many"" times a day.  Their fluctuations are smaller.  If the stock doesn't move enough to cover the transaction fees, then that seller lost money overall.  Over time, sellers like that will stop trading, as they will lose all their money.   All that said, there are no legal blocks to loaning the stock out many times, just practical ones.  If a stock was varying wildly for some bizarre reason, it could happen."
Query: Has anyone created a documentary about folks who fail to save enough for retirement?

Relevant passages:
 <=SEP=> To answer your question, Retirement Revolution may fit the bill to some extent. I'd also like to address some of the indirect assumptions that were made in your bullet points.  I'm convinced that the best way to overcome this is not simply to hold down a good job with COLAs every year, max out your IRA accounts and 401(k)s, invest another 10-20% on top, and live off of the savings and whatever Social Security decides to pay you. Instead, the trick is to not retire -- to make a transition into an income-producing activity that can be done in the typical retirement years, hopefully one that is closer to one's calling (i.e., more fulfilling).  This takes time, not money.  If people just shut off the TV and spent the time building up a side business that has a high passive component, they'd stand a much better chance of not outliving their money.

 <=SEP=> "Since your question was first posted, I happened to watch PBS FRONTLINE's The Retirement Gamble, about ""America's Retirement Crisis"" and the retirement industry.  You can watch the entire episode online at the previous link, and it's also available on DVD. Here's a link to the episode transcript. Here's a partial blurb from a post at PBS that announced the episode: If you’ve been watching any commercial television lately, you are well   aware that the financial services industry is very busy running   expensive ads imploring us to worry about our retirement futures. Open   a new account today, they say. They are not wrong that we should be doing something: America is   facing a retirement crisis. One in three Americans has no retirement   savings at all. One in two reports that they can’t save enough. On top   of that, we are living longer, and health care costs, as we all know,   are increasing. But, as I found when investigating the retirement planning and mutual   funds industries in The Retirement Gamble, which airs tonight on   FRONTLINE, those advertisements are imploring us to start saving for   one simple reason. Retirement is big business — and very profitable. (... more... ) There's another related PBS FRONTLINE documentary from back in 2006, Can You Afford To Retire? You'll find a link on that page to watch the program online. Finally, I'm also aware of but haven't yet seen a new documentary called Broken Eggs: The Looming Retirement Crisis in America. Looks like it isn't available for online streaming or on DVD yet, but I expect it would be, eventually."