vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
I err on the side of saving all of mine for a while.  Just toss them in a box at least.  A years' worth is about the size of a shoebox. I started doing this because one year, about a week after I tossed my receipts for the year, I realized that I had a fair bit of allotment left on my flexible savings account to use up.  I could have used those to substantiate over-the-counter medicines I purchased. Even if you don't use them for tax purposes, you can use them for budget-tracking purposes.
It sounds like you're mixing a simple checkbook register with double-entry bookkeeping. Do you need a double-entry level of rigor? Otherwise, why not have two columns, one for income (like a paycheck) and one for expenses (like paying a cable bill)?  Then add up both columns and then take the difference of the sums to get your increase or decrease for the time period. If you want to break up income and expenses further, then you can do that too.
Like-kind of exchanges have a list of requirements. The IRS has not issued formal guidance in the matter. I recommend to be aggressive and claim the exchange, while justifying it with a good analogy to prove good faith (and persuade the IRS official reading it the risk of losing in tax court would be to high). Worst case the IRS will attempt to reject the exchange, at which point you could still pony up to get rid of the problem, interest being the only real risk. For example: Past tax court rulings have stated that collectable gold coins are not like kind to gold bars, and unlike silver coins, but investment grade gold coins are like kind to gold bars. So you could use a justification like this: I hold Bitcoin to be like-kind to Litecoin, because they use the same fundamental technology with just a tweak in the math, as if exchanging different grades of gold bars, which has been approved by tax court ruling #xxxxx. Note that it doesn't matter whether any of this actually makes sense, it just has be reasonable enough for you to believe, and look like it is not worth pursuing to an overworked IRS official glancing at it. I haven't tried this yet, so up to now this is a guess, but it's a good enough guess in my estimation that I will be using it on some rather significant amounts next year.
"This is what this sounds like to me: https://www.thebalance.com/having-a-garage-sale-or-yard-sale-what-to-do-first-399030 also: http://blogs.hrblock.com/2012/07/25/garage-sale-money-does-the-irs-need-to-know/ Selling a personal item at a loss is generally not a taxable event. You cannot report it as a loss, and the IRS can't tax a transaction like that. If you really want to include these as sales as part of your LLC, you'll probably have to pay tax if you list it as income. I'm just confused as to why you'd want to do that, if you know that you're selling these particular items at a loss, and you also know that you have no documentation for them. I just wouldn't report anything you sold at a loss and treat it as ""garage sale items"" separate from your business."
As asked previous in the week, there is a big difference between budgeting and expense tracking.  Using software, like GNUCash, allows one to track their spending.   A budget is a plan, the tracking is what actually happened. I do not track expenses, although I do budget.  For me, hitting financial goals is good enough of a track, without investing the time and energy into tracking every penny.  One could easily criticize my method, as how can you have a good plan without continuous feedback? For me it is an example of the 80/20 principle.  If I put in 20% effort into making and sticking to a budget, I will obtain 80% of the financial success that a person who devotes 100% effort into budgeting and tracking.  A person with the same income and life events, who budgets and tracks, will likely be more successful that I, however, not overwhelmingly so.  For me time is better spent on other endeavors.  You seem to have this attitude as well, but those that do track have it as part of their path to financial success and probably view us as somewhat foolish.    This is another example how personal finance is more about behavior than math.
"In the US, Section 3.114 of the Uniform Commercial Code sets the rules for how any confusion in checks or other business transactions is handled: “If an instrument contains contradictory terms, typewritten terms prevail over printed terms, handwritten terms prevail over both, and words prevail over numbers.”  If there was any ambiguity in the way you wrote out the amount, the institution will compare the two fields (the written words and the courtesy box (digits)) to see if the ambiguity can be resolved.  The reality is that the busy tellers and ATM operators typically are going to look at the numeric digits first. So even if they happen to notice the traditional ""and..."" missing, it seems highly unlikely that such an omission would cause enough ambiguity between these the two fields to reject the payment. Common sense dictates here. I wouldn't worry about it."
In theory this could lead to problematic investments being made, since no individual robot would know what the others are doing.  For instance, one robot might decide to sell a certain stock or fund for tax loss harvesting purposes, but a different robot might buy the fund the next day for its own reasons.  This would count as a wash sale and would affect your tax liability, but neither robot would be aware of it, so they probably wouldn't notify you of it correctly, so you might not pay the correct tax, which would clearly be bad. Similar problems could arise, for instance, if the different robots have different rebalancing strategies, leading to an overall allocation that isn't optimal. In general the idea of these services is that the robots do complicated things that can save you (or make you) money, and they hide this complexity from you.  Without knowing exactly what they're doing, it's difficult to ensure that the aggregate action of multiple robots would still be beneficial; they could be canceling each other out, or worse.
As a programmer*, I expect the ATM and counter receipts to have an error and look hard for it.  If I don't find the error I usually cram it in my pocket which is the same as throwing it away. I should keep them, but I also look at my online balances for almost all of my accounts several times a week so I (perhaps foolishly) don't worry about paper receipts too much. *Maybe I should be a tester.
"I've received letters notifying me of data breaches in the past.  In the end, I've never signed up for the offered protection service, figuring if ""they"" can hack Target or ADP or the IRS, they can hack anybody, like...  Equifax. And now Equifax has been hacked. My family's Social Security Numbers were stolen from a hospital database.  I think that information, plus public information was used to gain further data from the IRS FAFSA tool.  (we got a letter from the IRS).  Ultimately, fraudsters used whatever data they had to file a tax return with the IRS and with the Cali FTB (we don't and never have lived in California).  We got letters from both, and managed to stop the fraud before it really impacted us...other than having to file a paper tax form this past tax season. Anyway...  in a world where Equifax gets hacked:  the only solution is: I don't bother with the crazy password schemes you talk about...  I have a few different passwords I use, but most my investment accounts use the same username and password. It's all about risk.  Bruce Schneier says the same thing.  The amount to spend on security should depend on what you're trying to protect.  I don't care much if somebody gets into my google account, because I have a google account just because I have to.  I barely use it at all.  Similarly my yahoo account.  My yahoo account uses my ""insecure password"", and my investment accounts use my ""secure password"".  Credit Card info?  Meh.  Unless they get into the credit card company database, which undoubtedly has my Social Security Number, it's not that big of a deal.  Yeah, they can make fraudulent charges, but there are legal protections, so in theory I can't be out any money. So think this way:  what's the risk, and what's the appropriate level of effort to take to mitigate that risk."
Credit in debit way - the card simply functions like a debit card for that transaction - pulling cash from your checking account. No difference.  You've simply discovered the fact that some banks are using the same piece of plastic for two functions, debit which draws funds directly from your checking, and credit which offers you time to pay a bill the comes in some time later. It's a personal choice.
Debit cards do not earn the bank any interest from you whereas credit cards do, so they want to give incentive to use credit over debit.
Debit cards can be riskier than credit cards. That's why I personally avoid debit cards unless I have a very good reason to go that direction (e.g. HSA accounts).  To explain the risk, consider what happens if someone steals the card or number and starts using it: Credit card: You get a big bill, which you dispute and eventually get dismissed.   Debit card: Your bank account balance drops,  you don't have access to cash, and your checks start bouncing and you rack up bounced check charges with your bank and stores where you write checks. Eventually, you convince the bank it was fraud and they refund the money to your account. The big difference is that while it is going on you are out the money with a debit card, and with a credit card the BANK is out the money. The above scenario happened to my brother and it wasn't pretty. He was having to borrow money to pay his rent and groceries while the bank sorted it out.
"When using a debit card in a ""credit"" way, you don't need to enter your PIN, which protects you from skimmers and similar nastiness. Also, assuming it's a Visa or Mastercard debit card, you now have access to all of the fraud protection and other things that you would get with a credit card. The downside for the merchant is that credit card transaction fees are typically higher than debit card transaction fees. I'm less familiar with using a credit card in a ""debit"" way, so don't have anything to offer on that part of your question."
Your final question ""can a merchant know if I give him number of debit or credit card"" is already asked: Can merchants tell the difference between a credit card and embossed debit card? Yes they can, and yes there are a few things you can't (or might prefer not to) do with debit. The same could even be said of Visa vs. Mastercard, leading to the conclusion that if you have a Visa debit you should look for a Mastercard credit. But that seems to be less of an issue as time goes on and almost everywhere in Europe apparently takes both or neither. If you travel a lot outside the EU then you might want to be loaded down with every card under the sun, and three different kinds of cash, but you'd already know that without asking ;-)"
ATM and Debit are not the same thing. ATM is a card that can only be used to withdraw money from the ATMs that belong to that bank (or participate in the same network). In some countries, ATM cards can be used for shopping if the merchant is equipped with an appropriate reader and is participating in an appropriate network. Debit card can be used for purchases in any store showing the appropriate (Visa/MC) logo, and withdraw money at any ATM showing the appropriate (Visa/MC or the ATM network that appears on the card) logo.
Your question is based on a false premise. Debit cards are more popular in the US than credit cards are. Indeed it seems to be the non-US part of the world that is big in credit cards. See here for example
It comes down to liability - if a fraudulent transaction takes place with a debit card, you are out $$ until it is resolved - while as with a credit card, the credit lender is out $$ - the credit lender does not like losing $$, and therefore would like to be paid extra $$ for assuming this risk, and they found the merchant as the one most willing to pay. Sometimes the merchant will pass on this cost to the consumer, but often times the credit card company has a contract with the merchant preventing such a fee, because then they would be at a price disadvantage when compared to debit.
In Addition to @JoeTaxpayer's answer, in the UK credit cards offer additional protection than if you were to pay by debit card. This includes (but is not limited to) getting your money back if the company you've bought something from goes bust before your order is complete.
Credit Cards when I can.  The reason if there is fraud or disputed charges (like I very much disagree with the cell phone charge) a debit card is already gone and I have to get the money back, versus a credit card where I haven't paid anybody anything.
Credit card, without a doubt. The reason is dispute resolution. If you dispute a charge on debit card - the money has left your account already, and if the dispute was accepted - you'll get it back. If. Eventually. In the mean time your overdraft will be missing $$$. For credit cards, you can catch a fraud action before the money actually leaves your pocket and dispute it then. In this case the charge is set aside, and you will only be required to actually pay if the dispute is rejected. I.e.: The money stays in your pocket, until the business proves that the charge is legit. In both cases, if the dispute is justified (i.e.: there was indeed a fraud) neither you nor the bank will lose money at the bottom line, it's just who's got the money during the dispute resolution process (which may be lengthy) that matters.
In Canada, there are many stores that take debit (Interac) but don't take Visa or MasterCard. For example, a corner store. In the US the reverse is often true: every tiny place seems to take Visa or MasterCard, but not debit. A Visa debit card looks like a Visa card to the merchant. It therefore has the benefit of being usable at places that only take Visa. (Substitute MasterCard as necessary.) This benefit is very small in Canada, less so elsewhere. Meanwhile the money is actually coming out of your bank account just like a debit card, which therefore has the benefit that you're not borrowing money, can't accidentally overspend, and run no risk of incurring interest charges. It is also a way to get what appears to be a credit card when you can't qualify for credit. If you do the majority of your spending in Canada, you don't need a Visa or MasterCard debit card. Your regular debit card (Interac) will work fine for you. If you have a credit card anyway (from another bank or whatever) then again, you don't need a debit card that can pretend to be a credit card.
"Yes and No.  There's always a ""fee"".  The difference in credit vs debit usually determines how much that fee is and how it's paid.  Each vendor who accepts the major credit card is under contract to pay for equipment and meet certain standards.  The same is true for debt card transactions.  How much the ""fee"" is can vary based on the contract the vendor has with MasterCard/Visa/AMEX.  But in general most debt transactions go back to the bank who distributed the card."
The question should be - do you need a debit card?  Other than American Express I have to tell my other credit card issuers to not make my cards dual debit/credit. Using a debit card card can be summed up easily - It creates a risk of fraud, errors, theft, over draft, and more while providing absolutely no benefit.   It was simply a marketing scheme for card companies to reduce risk that has lost favor, although they are still used.  That is why banks put it on credit cards by default if they can. (I am talking about logical people who can control not overspending because of debit vs. credit - as it is completely illogical that you would spend more based on what kind of card you have.)
If it is one of those debit cards you use just like a credit card without a PIN, I'd cancel it regardless of whatever you are trying to do with your finances. They just seem too dangerous to me.  Unlike a credit card, if someone makes fraudulent purchases on a debit card the money is gone from your bank account until you resolve the issue with the issue. With a credit card, the BANK is out the money until it gets worked out. My brother once had his credit card number (not the card) stolen and the criminals emptied his bank account. Eventually the bank put the money back after an investigation, but it had two really nasty side effects: 1) Dozens of checks bounced. The bank refunded the bounced check fees, but not all of the stores would.   2) He had no money in his account until it was resolved. Luckily in his case they resolved it in a few days, but he was already making preparations to borrow money to pay his rent/bills.
The post that you linked to saying that a pre-paid credit card is really a debit card is kind of right and kind of wrong.  From your point of view, to get a $1000 pre-paid credit card, you need to hand over $1000. So nobody is giving any credit to you. You can only spend money that you actually own, like a debit card.  For the merchant accepting your card, it is exactly like a credit card. He doesn't know what deals you had to make to get the card. The merchant just knows that up to some amount, he will receive money. So in that sense it is a credit card and will be accepted like a credit card.
Debit card purchases without PIN are treated as credit card purchases by merchants, and that includes ID verification. In addition to the ways you mentioned, you can get a debit card in any grocery store and load it with cash, and these debit cards don't have a name imprinted on them. But then if you lose them - you may have troubles proving you did in fact lose them when you try to recover your money, as anyone can use them. Technically you can register them online and call in and request refunds for fraud losses just as any other debit/credit card in the US (with $50 deductible), but in practice it may be difficult. These cards have very high fees, and may not be accepted for rentals etc.
In most cases, the brand on the card, eg Visa or MasterCard, is a middleman. The company processes the transaction, transferring $xx from the bank to the seller, and telling the bank to debit the buyer's account. The bank is at risk, not the company transacting the purchase. What's interesting is that American Express started as both. My first Amex card, issued in 1979 (long expired, but in my box of memorabilia) had no bank. American Express offered a card that offered no extended credit, it was pay in full each month. Since then, Amex started offering extended credit, i.e. with annual interest, and minimum payments, and more recently, offering transaction processing for banks which take on the credit risk, essentially becoming very similar to MasterCard and Visa.
Fees mostly.  BOA, for example, just announced $5/month for for all debit cards.  Chase has foreign transaction fees, mostly hidden. BOA once famously raised interest rates on credit card holders to 28%, legally.  Also, some people do not like patronizing a bank with CEOs that bankrupt the company and then get multi-million dollar golden parachutes. Finally some people have a problem with banks or institutions that suspend accounts based on political or unproven legal proceedings (ala Wikileaks and BOA).  Credit unions are less like to be involved in this sort of activity since they are not privately traded, and as such they are not ruled by shareholders who demand bottom line results at all costs.
Unlike MasterCard and Visa who only provide clearing service and tie up Banks to actually issue cards or POS terminals for merchants; Discover card operates more like American Express. It's a totally different network; cards and POS to merchants are directly offered by Discover Bank only. There is no other banks that issue this card.
Credit card fraud is an extremely (to stress, EXTREMELY) small proportion of total credit card transactions.  The card issuing entities all offer zero fraud liability, even on debit cards.  There are millions of transactions every day and fraud loss just isn't worth developing, and supporting, an additional authentication layer that faces the consumer. To be clear, the downside is cost.  Cost to develop, cost to implement, cost to maintain, cost to support.  All of this to stop something that millions of people have yet to even experience.
"Well, it took some effort to get an explanation from my bank. Turns out that some supermarkets use direct debit as a method of transferring money for purchases payed by so-called ""EC"" cards here. I was told that for some reason, a supermarket decided to reverse one of such transactions."
"I've been using YNAB4 for the last few years, and I like it so much that I haven't switched to the web version (new YNAB) yet. However, I have played around with the web version a little, and here is what I have discovered. Despite the different look of the credit card account and the lengthy dissertation on the credit card differences in the Transition Guide, credit cards are handled almost exactly the same in the new YNAB as they were in YNAB4. You enter credit card spending transactions in the same way as YNAB4. When you enter a transaction, money is pulled out of the budget category you select. The only difference is that in YNAB4, this money was considered ""gone."" Now, that money moves from your budget category into the new credit card category. When it comes time to pay the credit card bill, you also enter this transaction in the same way as before. It is entered as a transfer of money from your checking account to your credit card account. The only difference here is that with new YNAB, the funds are deducted from your credit card category. This is handled automatically, so you don't have to think about it if you don't want to. If you always pay your credit card bill in full, you never have to budget money manually into the credit card category. The money will already be there from when you entered the credit card spending transactions. The only time you would manually budget money into the credit card spending category is if you have old credit card debt that you are trying to pay off. A quick example, in pictures: I start out with $10,000 in my checking account, and no credit card debt: I've got all $10,000 in my ""Fun Money"" category: Now, I spend $100 at the Store: You can see that, just like in YNAB4, the credit card account is now in the red $100, and the checking account balance has not changed. In the categories, my Fun Money category is down $100 to $9,900, just like it would be in YNAB4. The only difference is that there is now $100 in the new Credit Card Payments category.
For me, it is mostly for the fraud protection. If I have a debit card and someone makes a fraudulent charge the money is removed from my bank account.  From my understanding, I can then file a fraud complaint with the bank to recover my money.  However, for some period of time, the money is missing from my bank account.  I've heard conflicting stories of money being returned quickly while the complaint is undergoing investigation as well as money being tied up for several days/weeks.  It may depend on the bank. With a credit card, it is the banks money that is tied up.
You can use the debit card for practically any purchase that you make. You'll have to take the usual precautions and then a few additional ones.   Cards make your life really easy and convenient with some basic precautions.  All the best for your travel and stay in the USA. My two cents.
Just use a credit card like AMEX Blue that categorizes your purchases, and reconcile at the end of the month. There is no good reason to use a debit card.