vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"It's all about access to capital: You can borrow against 401ks up to an extent. You can borrow against CDs outside of tax sheltered retirement plans. You can't borrow against an IRA, although there is a situation with a very small time frame that would still be state sanctioned with no tax penalties. I wouldn't recommend it. Annuities come with penalties. I've looked at many possibilities of accessing retirement capital without penalty, and 401k's offer that ability, but its also good to just have savings accounts and investments that are not tax-deferred. Borrowing against 401k pros: http://www.ehow.com/how_2075551_borrow-money-from-401k.html  cons: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/retirement/06/eightreasons401k.asp#axzz29TtJPoXO Outside of your general expenses and play money, money you put toward - say... - a house should be non-tax deferred. Because if you like borrowing, you can always borrow against the house, or any property. The root of the problem is liquidity and access to capital, understanding those fundamental concepts will answer most questions. ""Am I liquid? Yes/No"" ""Can I be liquid without losing money? Yes/No"" As usual, more is more, adjust your priorities accordingly."
"The IRS isn't going to care how you filed for benefits - they're effectively the high man on the totem pole.  The agency that administers the SNAP program is the one who might care.  File the 1040 correctly, and then deal with SNAP as you note.  Do deal with SNAP, though; otherwise they might be in trouble if SNAP notices the discrepancy in an audit of their paperwork. Further, SNAP doesn't necessarily care here either.  SNAP defines a household as the people who live together in a house and share expenses; a separated couple who neither shared expenses nor lived together would not be treated as a single household, and thus one or both would separately qualify.  See this Geeks on Finance article or this Federal SNAP page for more details; and ask the state program administrator.  It may well be that this has no impact for him/her.  The details are complicated though, particularly when it comes to joint assets (which may still be joint even if they're otherwise separated), so look it over in detail, and talk to the agency to attempt to correct any issues. Note that depending on the exact circumstances, your friend might have another option other than Married Filing Jointly.  If the following are true: Then she may file as ""Head of Household"", and her (soon-to-be) ex would file as ""Married Filing Separately"", unless s/he also has dependents which would separately allow filing as Head of Household.  See the IRS document on Filing Status for more details, and consider consulting a tax advisor, particularly if she qualifies to consult one for free due to lower income."
A 529 plan! The savings can only be used for education purposes, but you can use them for ANYONE and even change the beneficiary.  Distributions are tax free, and contributions are usually state tax free.
I think it is too early to tell. They changed so many variables in an incredibly complex system, and a lot of it will depend on how the requirements in the legislation look once the bureaucrats and insurance companies get a chance to interpret them and implement them as policy. My gut feeling is that for most people, you should plan on some pretty price increases for insurance in the next few years as insurance companies try cover the costs of removing lifetime caps and insuring people with pre-existing conditions. That said, the personal finance issue that you really should be planning for is your portfolio not your insurance costs. The bill includes almost a 4% increase in capital gains taxes.
For most Americans the date on the check determines the tax year.  A check with the date of Jan X 2016 will be reflected on the tax forms you will file in early 2017. That also means that the 401K money is also 2016 money, and so is the money for the flexible spending account, or health savings account. The change of year impacts everybody differently. That last/first check can make a big difference for some people. If you are trying to make sure you deposit the maximum amount of money into one of those accounts, knowing how many pay checks there is in the year is important. It also works the other way, getting an extra check can cause you to over deposit into those accounts. The taxes for that Jan 2016 paycheck are collected by your employer and periodically sent to the appropriate government office. You are paying those taxes on payday, even though you won't file that paperwork until 2017.
"Tax is often calculated per item. Especially in the days of the internet, some items are taxable and some aren't, depending on the item and your nexus. I would recommend calculating and storing tax with each item, to account for these subtle differences. EDIT: Not sure why this was downvoted, if you don't believe me, you can always check with Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_468512_calculated?nodeId=468512#calculated I think they know what they're talking about. FINAL UPDATE: Now, if someone goes to your site, and buys something from your business (in California) and the shipping address for the product is Nevada, then taxes do not have to be collected. If they have a billing address in California, and a shipping address in Nevada, and the goods are shipping to Nevada, you do not have to declare tax. If you have a mixture of tangible (computer, mouse, keyboard) and intangible assets (warranty) in a cart, and the shipping address is in California, you charge tax on the tangible assets, but NOT on the intangible assets. Yes, you can charge tax on the whole order. Yes for most businesses that's ""Good enough"", but I'm not trying to provide the ""good enough"" solution, I'm simply telling you how very large businesses run and operate. As I've mentioned, I've done several tax integrations using software called Sabrix (Google if you've not heard of it), and have done those integrations for companies like the BBC and Corbis (owned and operated by Bill Gates). Take it or leave it, but the correct way to charge taxes, especially given the complex tax laws of the US and internationally, is to charge per item. If you just need the ""good enough"" approach, feel free to calculate it by total. Some additional reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_of_Digital_Goods Another possible federal limitation on Internet taxation is the United States Supreme Court case, Quill Corp. v.
Your contributions that you've already made are made and done, and will not disappear. What the Windfall Elimination Provision does is make sure that people do not collect the subsidized low-income payments while also collecting a full pension.  People who did not pay anything into SS are able to collect money - less, but still something - from the system.  Prior to this provision, people on full pensions who were exempt from SS contributions (such as teachers in many places) were able to still collect those amounts (which were never earned through contributions) even though they had quite significant pensions; that led to subsidies being given to people that didn't have as much need for them, as opposed to the indigent people who did need them. In your case, earning for 20+ years and then presumably only earning a small pension, you may be affected by this, but not necessarily severely.   First of all, you are limited in how much your total reduction is to the lesser of a bit over $400 ($413 in 2015) or half your pension amount per month; so if you earn a $200 in pension monthly, your SS benefits are reduced by $100 monthly at most. Second, your percentage (and total cap) is reduced if you have over 20 years of credited work at 62 by 10% per credited year, and if you hit 30 years it's eliminated.  So if you have 25 years right now, your total reduction is more like $200 at most. You also have an option to keep earning via credited work.  Do some part-time work or summer work, for example.  Sell things online.  Whatever you need to do in order to get more years of credited work such that you end up with 30 years at 62.  That will then increase your benefits back to the full amount. This article published on Nasdaq's website explains how this works in detail, including tables of benefit reductions.  And, log in to ssa.gov to check how many years of creditable coverage you have and to see if you can get to 30 years and avoid any issues with this at all.
Take some of the commentary on home buying forums with a grain of salt. I too have read some of the commentary on these forums such as myFICO, Trulia, or Zillow and rarely is the right advice given or proper followup done. Typical 401k withdrawals for home purchase would not be considered a hardship. However, most employer 401k plans will allow you to take a loan for 401k as long as you provide suitable documentation: HUD-1 statement, Real Estate Contract, Good Faith Estimate, or some other form of suitable documentation as described by the plan administrator.  For instance, I just took a 401k loan to pay for closing costs and I had to provide only the real estate contract. Could I not follow through with the contract? Sure, but what if I am found out for fraud? Then the plan administrator would probably end up turning the distribution into a taxable distribution. I wouldn't go to jail in this hypothetical situation - I am only stealing from myself. But the law states that certain loan situations are not liable for tax as long as that situation still exists. In the home loan situation, my employer allows for a low interest, 10 year loan. My employer also allows for a pre-approved loan for any purpose. This would be a low interest, 5 year loan.  There is also the option to not do a loan at all. But normally that is only allowed after you have exhausted all your loan options and the government makes it intentionally harsh (30% penalty at least) to discourage people from dumping their tax free haven 401k accounts. That all being said, many plans offer no prepayment penalty. So like my employer has for us, I can pay it all back in full whenever I want or make micropayments every month. Otherwise, it comes out of my pay stub biweekly. So if it were to fall through, I could just put it all back like it never happened. Though with my plan, there is a cooling off period of 7 days before I can take another loan. Keep in mind that if you leave your employer then the full amount becomes a taxable distribution unless you pay it back within a certain period of time after leaving the employer.  Whether this fits your financial situation is up to you, but a loan is definitely preferred over a partial or full withdrawal since you are paying yourself back for your rightly earned retirement which is just as important.
It's a battle that doesn't matter. A skirmish when compared to 1031 Exchanges, basis step ups, the massive decline in personal income taxes for the upper brackets, etc. Our tax policy as a whole is skewed and becoming more regressive (or, to the GOP, fair) all the time. Not entirely unrelated, but I did some research and played with some numbers about income taxes because it's something that interests me. Using this link: https://taxfoundation.org/us-federal-individual-income-tax-rates-history-1913-2013-nominal-and-inflation-adjusted-brackets/ you can see that $10,000 income in 1950 (which is about $100,000 in 2016 dollars) was taxed (I'm using married filing separately throughout): 20% on the first $2,000 22% from $2,000 to $4,000 26% from $4,000 to $6,000 30% from $6,000 to $8,000 34% from $8,000 to $10,000 The highest marginal tax rate was 91%, which applied to all income over $200,000 (just over $2,000,000 in 2016 dollars). Median household income in 1950 was $3,216. So the median american paid a maximum marginal tax of $22%. If you do the math, our median household pays 20.8% of its income in taxes versus 26.4% for the $10,000 income household. Fast forward to 1970, where our $10,000 CPI adjusts to $15,975 and median household income is now $6,186: 14% on first $500 15% from $500 to $1,000 16% from $1,000 to $1,500 17% from $1,500 to $2,000 19% from $2,000 to $4,000 22% from $4,000 to $6,000 25% from $6,000 to $8,000 The highest marginal tax rate has dropped 23% to 70% from 91% and our median American is paying a maximum marginal tax rate of 25%. Skip forward to 2010, where our $10,000 CPI adjusts to $91,504 and median household income is now $49,445.
"HSAs as they exist today allow a person to contribute tax deductible money (like a traditional IRA) to a savings account.  The funds in the savings account can be spent tax free for qualified expenses.  If the money is invested it also grows tax free.  This means a discount on your cash health expenses of the amount you would have paid in taxes, which given your relative's income isn't likely to be very much. As HSAs exist today they must be paired to a qualified High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP).  Many plans have a deductible that meets or exceeds the level set by the regulations but many plans waive the deductible for things like X-Rays; waiving the deductible causes most ""high deductible"" plans to not qualify for HSA accounts. There are other qualified HSA expenses like Long Term Care (LTC) insurance premiums that can also be spent tax and penalty free from HSA funds. At age 60 with low income an HSA serves little purpose because the tax savings is so marginal and an HDHP is required.  That does not however mean that the scope of HSA availability should not be expanded.  Just because this is not a silver bullet for everyone does not mean it is of no use to anyone."
Lastly it makes sense to spend the money in my HSA on anything eligible because you can never roll it over into a retirement account, its shaky if another person (spouse) could get reimbursed for eligible medical expenses if you die, and if you lose your receipts you may not be able to spend all of the HSA money tax free. Is this an accurate assessment or is there a reason why I should not touch the HSA money at all and wait to reimburse my eligible expenses. First off, if you are married the HSA can be transferred to your spouse. But in general, it really depends on what you would do with the money if you distributed it right away. If you need the money to pay debts, bills, etc, then it might make sense to take it, but if it would be extra money that you would invest somewhere, then you should leave it in the HSA because it grows tax free while it's in there and (probably) wouldn't if you take it out. The caveat though is that you need to find an HSA administrator that offers your preferred investment choices. As for your worry that you might lose your receipts, well, that's a valid point- but I wouldn't drive my decision based on that- I would archive them digitally to remove that concern completely. ...Should I reimburse myself from ... the HSA funds if I am not hitting the 401k limit yet? It depends. If it's a Roth 401k, all other things being equal, (you are able to choose the same investments with your HSA as you can choose in your 401K, and the costs are the same), then you are better off leaving the money in your HSA rather than pulling it out and putting it into the Roth 401k. The reason is that there is no tax difference, and once you put it into the 401K you (probably) can't touch it (for free) until you retire. With the HSA, if you could have taken a distribution but chose not to, then you can take that amount of money out anytime you want to without any consequences, just like your normal checking account.
"The uncertainty as I see it is around **personal** income tax rates and the **employee** portion of the SS tax. This has nothing to do with the operating costs of large businesses, right? Small businesses often have their taxes done essentially on the owner's personal return, so in those cases the personal income tax rate affects them. This article talks about large businesses who are fussing about the ""uncertainty"".   Why is this uncertainty about things like taxes treated like something new? Historically tax rates have bounced around, and in the past taxes have been higher. The SS tax cut is a very recent thing, but now that's it in place suddenly people can't imagine hiring if it goes back to what it was for many years. Also, the SS tax cut is on the employee portion, so even if it goes back the employer contribution doesn't change? WTF are they talking about?  This sounds more like silly people being confused by partisan talking points."
In general  What does this mean? Assume 10 holidays and 2 weeks of vacation. So you will report to the office for 240 days (48 weeks * 5 days a week).  If you are a w2 they will pay you for 260 days (52 weeks * 5 days a week). At $48 per hour you will be paid: 260*8*48 or $99,840. As a 1099 you will be paid 240*8*50 or 96,000. But you still have to cover insurance, the extra part of social security, and your retirement through an IRA. A rule of thumb I have seen with government contracting is that If the employee thinks that they make X,000 per year the company has to bill X/hour to pay for wages, benefits, overhead and profit. If the employee thinks they make x/hour the company has to bill at 2X/hour. When does a small spread make sense: The insurance is covered by another source, your spouse; or government/military retirement program.  Still $2 per hour won't cover the 6.2%  for social security. Let alone the other benefits. The IRS has a checklist to make sure that a 1099 is really a 1099, not just a way for the employer to shift the costs onto the individual.
The 401(k) contribution is Federal tax free, when you make the contribution, and most likely State too. I believe that is true for California, specifically. There was a court case some years ago about people making 401(k) or IRA contributions in New York, avoiding the New York state income tax. Then they moved to Florida (no income tax), and took the money out. New York sued, saying they had to pay the New York income tax that had been deferred, but the court said no. So you should be able to avoid California state income tax, and then later if you were to move to, for example, Texas (no income tax), have no state income tax liability. At the Federal level, you will have different problems. You won't have the money; it will be held by the 401(k) trustee. When you try to access the money (cash the account out), you will have to pay the deferred taxes. Effectively, when you remove the money it becomes income in the year it is removed. You can take the money out at any time, but if you are less than 59 1/2 at the time that you take it, there is a 10% penalty. The agreement is that the Feds let you defer paying the tax because it is going to finance your retirement, and they will tax it later. If you take it out before 59 1/2, they figure you are not retired yet, and are breaking your part of the agreement. Of course you can generally leave the money in the 401(k) plan with your old employer and let it grow until you are 59.5, or roll it over into another 401(k) with a new employer (if they let you), or into an IRA. But if you have returned to your own country, having an account in the U.S. would introduce both investment risk and currency risk. If you are in another country when you want the money, the question would be where your U.S. residence would be. If you live in California, then go to, say France, your U.S. residence would still be California, and you would still owe California income tax.
"There are two types of insurance, which causes some confusion. Social Security Disability Insurance (which you indicate you have) is insurance you can receive benefit from if you earn enough ""work credits"" (payroll taxes) prior to your disability onset. It is not a needs-based program. Supplemental Security Income is a need-based program which does not consider your work history. To qualify for this, your total assets need to be lower than some threshold and your family income also below some threshold. If you inherit a home, or money, I doubt this would jeopardize your SSDI qualification, since your qualification was based on a disabling condition and work history. If you inherit an income property, which you manage (i.e. you become a landlord), this may jeopardize your claim that you are unable to work. Even if you are not making an ""income"" as the landlord, but the work your are performing is deemed to have some ""value"" this too could jeopardize your claim. All of this can be very complicated, and there are some excellent references on the web including SSA website, and some other related websites. Finally, if you become able to work while on SSDI, your benefit may/will end depending on the level of work you are able to perform. But just because you are able to work again does not mean you need to repay past benefits received (assuming your condition has not been falsified). Your local social security office, or the social security main office both offer telephone support and can also answer questions regarding your concern. Here are a couple relevant links:"
"There is no simple answer to your question.  It depends on many things, perhaps most notably what college your daughter ends up going to and what kind of aid you hope to receive. Your daughter will probably fill out the FAFSA as part of her financial aid application.  Here is one discussion of what parental assets ""count"" towards the Expected Family Contribution on the FAFSA.  You can find many similar pages by googling.  Retirement accounts and primary residence are notable categories that do not count.  So, if you were looking to reduce your ""apparent"" assets for aid purposes, dumping money into your mortgage or retirement account is a possibility. However, you should be cautious when doing this type of gaming, because it's not always clear exactly how it will affect financial aid.  For one thing, ""financial aid"" includes both grants and loans.  Everyone wants grants, but sometimes increasing your ""eligibility"" may just make you (or your daughter) eligible for larger loans, which may not be so great. Also, each college has its own system for allocating financial aid.  Individual schools may ask for more detailed information (such as the CSS Profile).  So strategies for minimizing your apparent assets that work for one school may not work for others.  Some elite schools with large endowments have generous aid policies that allow even families with sizable incomes to pay little or nothing (e.g., Stanford waives tuition for most families with incomes under $125,000). You should probably research the financial aid policies of schools your daughter is interested in.  It can be helpful to talk to financial aid advisors at colleges, as well as high school counselors, not to mention general financial advisors if you really want to start getting technical about what assets to move around.  Needless to say, it all begins with talking with your daughter about her thoughts on where to go."