vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"Why do people keep talking about 401K's at work?  That is NOT dollar cost averaging.  DCA refers to when you have a large sum of money.  Do you invest it all at once or spread it out over several smaller purchases over a period of time?  There really isn't a ""when"" should I use it.  It is simply a matter of where your preferences lie on the risk/reward scpectrum.  DCA has lower risk and lower reward than lump sum investing.  In my opinion, I don't like it.  DCA only works better than lump sum investing if the price drops.  But if you think the price is going to drop, why are you buying the stock in the first place? Example: Your uncle wins the lottery and gives you $50,000.  Do you buy $50,000 worth of Apple now, or do you buy $10,000 now and $10,000 a quarter for the next four quarters? If the stock goes up, you will make more with lump-sum(LS) than you will with DCA. If the stock goes down, you will lose more with LS than you will with DCA. If the stock goes up then down, you will lose more with DCA than you will with LS. If the stock goes down then up, you will make more with DCA than you will with LS. So it's a tradeoff.  But, like I said, the whole point of you buying the stock is that you think it's going to go up! So why pick the strategy that performs worse in that scenario?"
"I assume by that you mean gradually buying the same mix of funds over time.  If that's the case, there is no rational reason to do this.   Dollar-cost averaging is an artifact of the way most people fund their 401(k).  I would not consider it a viable ""strategy"".  (Neither does Wikipedia)  Let's say you have $100,000 that you add $10,000 at a time.  When you add money, one of three things can happen: Since you can't predict the future, there's no mathematical justification for buying in segments.  There's just as much chance that your funds will be worth more or less, so on average it should make little to no difference.   In fact, given the time value of money there is a slight  advantage to investing it all now so you can capture any future returns.  You can always rebalance later to capture gains on some funds and purchase funds that are down to (hopefully) catch them on a rebound."
"Value averaging has you shift the balance of your portfolio over time, not the amount of contributions.  So you can only do it if you have a portfolio holding both risky assets (shares etc) and some cash. You start out by making a plan about how much you will contribute every month and at what rate you expect the share part of the portfolio to grow.  Perhaps based on 20th century data you think an 8% growth rate is reasonable.  Or alternatively if you know your desired final amount obviously you can work backwards to a desired rate from that. If in any month the share part is falling below its expected growth path, you would put more money into it: possibly your whole paycheck contribution plus some from the savings cash account.  On the other hand if the share component is growing ""too fast"" you would put all your additional savings into cash.  So if your investments are doing well, you're not supposed to spend the excess money, but rather to put it aside into a dedicated cash account to top up your share component when prices fall. In theory, this has the auto-levelling benefit of Dollar Cost Averaging, but even better: when prices are high, you'll automatically buy fewer shares, or even sell some; conversely when prices are low you'll buy extra shares from your reserve account. If it turns out your estimate was unreasonably optimistic, and over your lifetime shares only ever average 3%, you'll end up with an entirely share portfolio, and a bumpier ride than you might have liked.  If you have horrible luck and over your entire investing life shares return less than cash (which has happened, though not yet in the USA), then this will be worse than a standard balanced portfolio. The original book Value Averaging by Edelson has a pretty good explanation of various cases, though I would say some of the examples are worked in excessive detail. I have not implemented this myself, one reason being that the amount I'm able to save from year to year varies, as it probably does for you, and so predicting a path is not quite so simple as he assumes.  You could still do it I suppose. I think you could get a very crude approximation to this by simply directing your savings into cash when the share market's rate of growth over the last several years is above what you think is the long term average."
There are some that are already under similar restrictions.  Highly comp-ed employees can only put a small portion of the traditional limit in their qualified plans.  Some may have very high incomes, that if limited to 18K, would be saving inadequately.   Others may have high incomes and not have a 401K.  What do they do? I see only two options: The reduction in the contribution limit would certainly improve the attractiveness of real estate as an investment.
As long as your total doesn't exceed the per-year limit, you should be able to deposit after-tax money into your Health Savings Account. Contact the HSA administrator for details. Note that unless your employer sets this up, you'd be sending them after-tax money, which goes in the same category as other non-reimbursed health expenses, so you may not get any immediate tax savings by doing this vs. just spending the money out of pocket. However, once there us enough reserve money in your HSA for you to invest it in the same way a 401k can be invested, it will grow tax-free. So if you're putting in significantly more than you expect to withdraw any time soon, this may still be a worthwhile thing to do. Definitely talk to HR about whether you can still get it set up pre-tax... though most employers don't allow midyear changes unless there has been a significant change in your family (new wife, new kids, that sort of thing).
There is no limit on the output maximum in one year. The strength of the HSA is that if you don't spend all the money in the account, it rolls over to the next year. The benefit is that if a few years down the road you get a huge medical bill you are protected because you can pull it out of the HSA.  The goal for me was to build up the account to a level that even if I had to may the maximum out of pocket for my insurance policy the money game from previous years deposits and current year deposits. Even you ever have the situation where the employer doesn't offer a high deductible plan the money for co-payments and medicines can still be pulled from the pre-existing HSA.  If the government did limit you to withdraws not exceeding current year deposits the roll over feature would be worthless.
"My 401k allows cash holdings to 100% if desired. I'm not sure why some won't, they are making money on your money after all. If you are looking to the funds vehicles for investing suggestions however, they will never allow cash. I found you must go into ""Invest on my own"" vehicle to make that change.  I have beaten and timed this market several times by sitting with cash on the sidelines. The only time I missed it was when I talked to a fund administrator in 2008 dot com crash and stayed in at this suggestion. I told him I didn't see where the market could go much higher as I had made 12-28% on some funds. He was dead wrong of course and I lost 50% that year.  Now, trust me, in 2017, assets are grossly overvalued. If they won't let you deposit to cash, don't invest and just save your money until the next crash."
From what I can make out from CRA site it seems that you can definitely not redeposit in the same year (as I originally incorrectly answered to someone else, but have since corrected). It does appear, however, that you can withdraw as much as you like, and that would generate room for the subsequent year. Good Luck
"Just like all employee benefits there is a focus on removing or limiting owners of businesses' ability to abuse tax preferences under the guise of an employee benefit. As you point out there is an overall plan maximum 401(k) for employer contributions and match contributions.  There is a nondiscrimination test for FSA programs (there is also a nondiscrimination test for medical plans under sections 125 and 105(h)).  Employer contributions are counted toward the total of HSA contributions.   Why an HSA has a different maximum arrangement than 401(k) is anyone's guess.  But the purpose of the limit is to prevent owners of companies from setting up plans that do little more than funnel tax free funds to themselves.  An owner/employee could pay themselves a wage, contribute the maximum, then have the ""employer"" also match the maximum, so there are limits in place."
It may not be an ideal option, but you could use an HSA as a tax-sheltered investment vehicle.   The contribution limit is only $3,350 for an individual and $6,650 for a family in 2015 (plus $1K if you're 55+), so you're only making up a small portion of the 401(k) limit.  Also, you (and a family member to get the higher contribution limit) have to be covered by a qualifying high-deductible health insurance plan (HDHP) to be eligible to make HSA contributions.  As such, it may not be the best option if you regularly incur significant medical expenses.  And in many cases, the investment fees in an HSA are higher than you would find in a 401(k) or IRA. The investment choices can be limited, so it is important to research the options before selecting a provider. All that being said, the contributions and growth are both tax-deferred (tax-free if you use it for healthcare). Then at age 65 or Medicare eligibility you can withdraw the funds without penalty and pay only income tax, even if they are not used toward healthcare expenses.
One reason why they limit it is to protect you. If I hack your account, I get your entire financial history. I can see a copy of every check you ever wrote. I can see the account number with every doctor, utility, and credit card. I can also see the account information on the back of those checks for all your relatives who you sent $10 for their birthday.  I can use the information in those accounts to see where you used to live, this allows me to spoof you when applying for new credit. If they ask if I ever lived on Main street in Anytown USA. I can confidently say yes. If I only let you download a window of time, the responsibility is on you to protect that data that is before the window. They protect it in file isolated from the internet, and finally only in archive locations. Some of the information doesn't exists in electronic form. Data from the 1990's and earlier may not exist in the form you want. They have been expanding the windows over time. I can see/download a pdf of my monthly statement going back 7 years. Of course that data can't go directly into quicken. Some places do let you get a file that goes back farther, but they charge you for it, and it can only be done by them sending you the file. That prevents you from downloading your entire  history everyday. That times 70 Million customers would overwhelm their server and other infrastructure. Regarding the amount of data:
"Like the old American Express commercial: ""no preset spending limit"". It is really up to the bank(s) in question how big a cheque they are willing to honour. A larger amount would likely be held longer by a receiving institution to ensure that it cleared properly, but nothing written in law (in Canada, that I am aware of)."
The biggest challenge as a young person maxing out a 401k in my opinion is the challenge of saving for a house, and (if necessary) paying off student loans. You have to consider - are you OK renting for the next 3, 5, 10 years? Or do you eventually want to buy a place? how much will that cost vs your current expenses?  That being said, I didn't max out but had over 8-10% of 401k contribution in the same situation you're in right now and I don't regret it.  Rereading your question, I see you are considering investing in a Roth IRA. Especially at your current age, assuming your wages will go UP, investing to the company match with the 401K and then maxing out a Roth IRA would be my recommendation. THEN continue maxing out the 401k (if you wish).  P.S. I highly recommend doing two things if you go down this path:
No. You will be penalized for taking your 25k out so you will only get like 18k out. Plus you can slowly pay back the credit cards but you can't build up the 401k as fast. You can also try a service that can negotiate the amount down for you (so you would only pay 16k or something).   Protect the 401k.
If they leave the extra funds in the account the IRS will consider it as employer match. They weren't funds from your paycheck, they were from the employers profits. Because they don't have a formal matching program the extra funds will still keep then under the max match.  There is one other explanation that needs to be considered. If the last paycheck from 2011 was near the end of the year (the last Friday of 2011 was December 30th) the 401K funds from that final paycheck may not have been deposited into your 401K until early January 2012. If you count contributions when looking at your 401K statement it will look like one two many for 2012; but the IRS only cares when it was deducted from your paycheck, not when it was deposited into your account. The Department of Labor only requires they be deposited by the 15th of the following month.
With painful 20/20 hindsight, I earnestly say - max it out hard.  The reason is the sheer opportunity of it.  As a young person you have time on your side - you have so many years for the earnings to compound!  It is many times more advantageous to max it out now, than fail to do so and be in your 40s trying to catch up.   Use the Roth 401K if your company supports that.  After that, max out a Roth IRA if your income is low enough to use them.  Otherwise, max out a traditional IRA (this will not be tax deductible because your income is too high), and the next day, convert it to Roth. That conversion will be tax-free since you already paid taxes on that money.  401K money is untouchable.  No one can ever take it from you - not with a lawsuit, not with bankruptcy.  As such, never give it up willingly by borrowing from it or cashing it out early, no matter how serious the problem seems in the short term. How do you invest a 401K when the market is so scary?  I found out when I became a Board member overseeing management of an endowment.  Turns out there's a professional gold standard for ultra-long-term, high growth, volatility-be-damned investing. Who knew?
It doesn't matter if you aren't maxing out your IRA contributions anyway.  If you are maxing out IRA contribution and you still have extra money to deposit then yes you better have all the money inevested, but if you aren't maxing out your contribution then it doesn't really mattter where you stick your emergency savings.  But if you fall into money later you will be glad you put your emergency in a roth.
Not 100% related, but the #1 thing you need to avoid is CREDIT CARD DEBT. Trust me on this one.  I'm 31, and finally got out of credit card debt about eight months ago. For just about my entire 20s, I racked up credit card debt and saved zero. Invested zero. It pains me to realize that I basically wasted ten years of possible interest, and instead bought a lot of dumb things and paid 25% interest on it. So yes, put money into your 401k and an IRA.  Max them out.
Most 401k plans (maybe even all 401k plans as a matter of law) allow the option of moving the money in your 401k account from one mutual fund to another  (within the group of funds that are in the plan).  So, you can exit from one fund and put all your 401k money (not just the new contributions) into another fund in the group if you like.  Whether you can find a fund within that group that invests only in the companies that you approve of is another matter. As mhoran_psprep's answer points out, changing investments inside a 401k (ditto IRAs, 403b and 457 plans) is without tax consequence which is not the case when you sell one mutual fund and buy another in a non-retirement account.
Make sure you are hitting the actual max of the 401k. Most think it is 18K, but that is the amount you can contribute into either pre-tax or roth. On top of this, you can also contribute using an after-tax contribution (treated differently from Roth). Total amounts up to 54k (since you are under 50).  One thing I would look into for ways to beat interest rates in bank accounts and CDs is Municipal Bond funds, given your high income. I have seen some earning almost 6% tax-free YTD. These also give you liquidity. Definitely keep your 3 mo salary in the bank, but once you get over that while maxing out your 401k, this is a pretty good way to make your money work for you, without crushing you come tax time.   Building that muni bond fund account gradually, you can eventually use that account to pay for things like car payments, mortgage, rent, vacation, etc. Just be sure if you go with a mutual fund, that you are aware of any surrender charge schedules. I have seen this done with C Shares, where you can withdraw your investment without penalty after 1 year.   Let me know if this is unclear or you would like any additional information. Best of luck!
"Many employees don't contribute enough to maximize the match, so the cost to the employer is not the same.  Under the 50% of 6% strategy an employee contributing 5% would get a 2.5% match not a 3% and that saves the company 0.5%. @TTT provided an excellent link in the comments below to a study titled ""How much employer 401(k) matching contributions do employees leave on the table?"" performed by Financial Engines, an independent financial advisory service.  The information meaningful to this answer is on Page 5 (Page 7 of the PDF): 4,378,445 eligible employees were included in the study 1,077,775 of the eligible employees did not contribute enough for the full match; of them, 285,386 Received zero match funds 792,389 Received some match funds, but not the full match available So 792,389 or 18% of the employees studied contributed in to employer 401(k) plans but not enough to maximize their available match."
Your math is fine, except employers might not permit the withdrawal. You'd have to go back to their rules or contact HR to understand the withdrawals permitted.
As others have pointed out in comments and answers, the 6 withdrawal limit was based on Regulation D. Banks/credit unions that offer checking-account based HSAs do exist, with no limit on the number of withdrawals (at least according to information given to me over the phone -- I didn't check the disclosure brochures). Concrete examples (I can't vouch for any of these, just found them in my research):
This is determined by each banking institution. In general, if making the withdrawal in person, the limit is based on what you have in your account, but many ask for advance notice when withdrawing more than $5000. They may still allow a larger withdrawal without notice, but usually have a policy in place and will tell you over the phone. You should also be aware that the bank is required to report withdrawals totaling $10,000 or more in a day to the treasury department and may require extra paper work (businesses are often exempted or at least have higher amounts). For very large withdrawals, you would definitely have to wait, but you may not be able to get an answer over the phone as to how long unless you actually have $600K on deposit at that bank. They will have some kind of protocol to handle such a request, i.e. teller will talk to a manager, who may have to make a call to a regional or national office and make special arrangements. Most branches don't want to have their regular stash of cash plus an extra $600K lying around. There are insurance and security concerns. The increased potential for theft can put employees and other customers at risk. They may also not feel comfortable unloading bags of money from their vault or armored truck into the back of your car. While this is a very uncommon scenario, it has actually happened before. It took 'weeks' and when funds were available, additional security and police escorts were called in. Edit: You can find summaries of the regulations here and here and more complete info here. In general, the money should be available within 1-8 business days after it is deposited depending on the nature and amount of the deposit, but the regulations are really designed for more ordinary transactions. For a $600K withdrawal, the bank can cite security issues and decline to honor the request in cash. If you ask, your bank should provide their standard policy, which could include language such as this: We require prior notice for large cash withdrawals. We can refuse an order to withdraw funds in cash or to cash an item if we believe that the request is a security risk or possesses a hardship on the Bank. We may require you to accept an Official Check or electronic transfer to receive the funds.
This creates incentive for the employee to contribute more and increases the funds under management of the 401(k) plan. The size of the plan influences the fees that are charged in each of the funds offered. (The more assets under management, the better for those in the plan.) More importantly, 401(k) plans are not allowed to discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees. That discrimination is determined by calculating the average deferrals by your lower compensated employees and comparing them to the average deferrals of your highly compensated employees. If highly compensated employees are saving too much compared to the rest of the pack, they will have some of their contributions returned the next year (with all the tax implications of that). Forcing everyone to contribute 6% to get the full match helps the plan to not fail the discrimination test and protects the highly compensated employees from losing some of their tax deferrals.
If one makes say, $10K/mo, and the company will match the first 5% dollar for dollar, a 10%/mo deposit of $1K/mo will see a $500/mo match. If the employee manages to request 90% get put into the 401(k), after 2 months, he's done.  If the company wished, they could continue the $500/mo match, I agree. They typically don't and in fact, the 'true up' you mention isn't even required, one is fortunate to get it. Many companies that match are going the other way, matching only after the year is over. Why? Why does any company do anything? To save money. I used to make an attempt to divide my deposit over the year to max out the 401(k) in December and get the match real time, not a true up.
If one separates from work at 55 or older, they can withdraw from that 401(k) with no penalty.  You might wish to consider a mix of Roth IRA deposits as well. The deposits can be withdrawn at anytime with no tax consequence.
You are not allowed to take a routine 401(k) withdrawal each year. There are specific reasons that you might be allowed to take a withdrawal and what you're proposing doesn't fit into those categories.
"In my experience, no. You are not ""out if pocket"" for that amount. Remember, the purpose of that number is to set a limit on how much of your own money you might have to spend during the year, not on how much is spent/discounted/reimbursed on your behalf."
I'm sorry for your situation.  If 15 years of maximum savings only has you at $60K, I'm going to assume you are currently in the 15% bracket. A withdrawal will cost you 15% (and maybe push you into the 25% bracket) as well as the 10% penalty, and state tax. Don't do it. Be sure your 401(k) has listed beneficiaries. Your wife will be able to take an annual withdrawal, and pay very little, probably 10%, maybe 15% worst case.  You reference that she'd have a lump sum. Yes, but she won't have to take it all at once. She should be able to transfer the funds from the 401(k) to an IRA, and withdraw small amounts each year.  It's a very rare circumstance where an early 401(k) withdrawal actually makes any real economic sense.