|
Kal Torak posted:The only thing I would say is don't secure it. Why not? Doesn't that provide substantial advantages in terms of rate and quantity of credit offered?
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:11 |
|
|
Kal Torak posted:This is what I do. I live on the edge in terms of my cash flow as I do a lot of investing and trading. We use our LOC as the buffer if we ever need it. I have a $30,000 unsecured LOC at 6% interest from CIBC. Is that rare? Is that a high interest rate? I never carry a balance so it doesn't matter currently, but I'm also in the line of thinking that a 6 month emergency fund is not something I really need given my $30k LOC and doubly so since I work for my provincial government. Unlikely to find myself out of a job.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:I have a $30,000 unsecured LOC at 6% interest from CIBC. Is that rare? Is that a high interest rate? I never carry a balance so it doesn't matter currently, but I'm also in the line of thinking that a 6 month emergency fund is not something I really need given my $30k LOC and doubly so since I work for my provincial government. Unlikely to find myself out of a job. That's a good rate for an unsecured line. Regarding limit they'll give you whatever they think you can manage based on income/credit score/current debts. You definitely don't need to shop around for better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
That's interesting to know you can get a decent LOC unsecured. It's been a while since I last looked at bank loans. Normally I get by without, the few exceptions I borrowed from and repaid my parents. However I may be looking to borrow again next January for a short duration, but longer than I'd want on my credit card. I'll probably still borrow from my parents again though. I'd rather them get 6% than a bank.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:I have a $30,000 unsecured LOC at 6% interest from CIBC. Is that rare? Is that a high interest rate? I never carry a balance so it doesn't matter currently, but I'm also in the line of thinking that a 6 month emergency fund is not something I really need given my $30k LOC and doubly so since I work for my provincial government. Unlikely to find myself out of a job. That seems decent to me. I have a 25K unsecured LOC with Scotia for prime + 2, so currently 5%. I rarely use it, but I treat it the same way you do. That's my emergency fund in case something ever happens. Kal Torak fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Why not? Doesn't that provide substantial advantages in terms of rate and quantity of credit offered? Because you should be able to get a decent rate and quantity without it. Maybe I'm just paranoid but I would hate to secure a debt that I can already get without putting something up for it. If there is a significant advantage in the rate or amount then sure, secure it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:I have a $30,000 unsecured LOC at 6% interest from CIBC. Is that rare? Is that a high interest rate? I never carry a balance so it doesn't matter currently, but I'm also in the line of thinking that a 6 month emergency fund is not something I really need given my $30k LOC and doubly so since I work for my provincial government. Unlikely to find myself out of a job. I think my unsecured LOC is 9% at TD, but any balance on it is measured in the minutes so I really didn't give it much thought. 6% does sound pretty good though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
I had another thought regarding my earlier question with going over your RRSP limit. Normally with an RRSP, you put money in after you've paid income tax, then deduct that amount on your taxes, resulting in the money not having had income tax paid on it (or you company pays into your plan and adjusts your income tax deductions accordingly). But when you go over, you can't claim a deduction on the amount over your limit. Now that excess money has been hit with your income tax. Normally when you withdraw from your RRSP, it gets treated as income for that year, and you pay income tax on it. Does a withdrawal for correcting an over contribution, also get treated like additional income? If it does, then you'd essentially be paying income tax on it twice, which would really be incentive not to over contribute.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Golluk posted:I had another thought regarding my earlier question with going over your RRSP limit. Normally with an RRSP, you put money in after you've paid income tax, then deduct that amount on your taxes, resulting in the money not having had income tax paid on it (or you company pays into your plan and adjusts your income tax deductions accordingly). But when you go over, you can't claim a deduction on the amount over your limit. Now that excess money has been hit with your income tax. From: http://business.financialpost.com/2012/01/11/did-you-over-contribute/ If you discover that you have over-contributed, you should try and withdraw the excess amount as soon as possible. Although you must include the withdrawal in income on your tax return, you can claim an offsetting deduction as long as you do so within the required time frame and the following conditions are met: o You reasonably expected to be able to claim a deduction for the contribution, either in the year you made the contribution or the year before; and o You did not make the contribution with the intention of later withdrawing it and deducting the offsetting amount. • You can ask the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to certify the amount of the excess contribution using Form T3012A. The financial institution will release the funds without withholding tax with this certified form. • Without a T3012A, you can still withdraw the excess amount but the financial institution will withhold tax. Use Form T746 when you file your tax return to claim the offsetting deduction and a credit for the tax withheld. Source: H&R Block Canada Bottom line: This "scheme" is probably a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
Keep in mind if you over contribution occurs in the next calendar year, you can carry it over. For example, if you planned on contributing for 2013 in Jan/Feb 2014 as many do, but realized it made you go over you can claim it for 2014.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Keep in mind if you over contribution occurs in the next calendar year, you can carry it over. For example, if you planned on contributing for 2013 in Jan/Feb 2014 as many do, but realized it made you go over you can claim it for 2014. That would probably be the easiest method then. Put in what I can this year, then apply the matching check to the next year. And make 45% on the match itself? I would not be surprised if there are some loop holes since this doesn't seem to be a common way of doing RRSP matching. What I've read talks about what you do if you made a mistake, but nothing talks about when you do it intentionally. I don't mind the 1% a month, or the withholding tax. What would stop me is lost contribution room the next year, and getting hit with income tax twice. I'll have a closer look at that T3012A, But it sounds like it's for accidental over contributions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
I'm discovering in the world of transferring from managed to a direct account it appears to be far easier to just sell your positions to cash, transfer the cash in to the new acct and just buy the new funds and re-balance/create a new portfolio from scratch. What a pain in the rear end transferring from F to A, LL funds, yadda. I'll keep my positions in equities and transfer in-kind (along with the GICs of course) but man.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Apparently BMO is cutting the MER on their ETFs to match iShares. http://www.moneysense.ca/invest/etfs/how-low-can-etf-fees-go Any thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
Canadian Couch Potato posted:Itching to switch http://canadiancouchpotato.com/2014/03/25/ishares-cuts-its-fees-to-the-core/
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
Yep, that's definitely a good point. I'm not in the market yet, though, so I'm just curious about how this changes the different options. I'm wondering if Vanguard will follow...
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
Grouco posted:Yep, that's definitely a good point. I'm not in the market yet, though, so I'm just curious about how this changes the different options. I'm wondering if Vanguard will follow... I think they will. Oddly they're now the most expensive of the main ETF issuers - which is pretty much in direct contravention of what Vanguard is all about!
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
Tax question,  I might be able to convince my boss to pay my part-time grad school tuition in lieu or on top of a raise. Maybe even get the office to buy most of my textbooks (It's basically Frozenvent's Job: The Degree, so those are books we could actually use at the office.) Tuition's roughly $2000 a year; I'm a part-time student for 9 months or so a year. If my marginal rate is 39%, am I better off paying my own way? My gut feeling is no, but I'm getting mixed responses from people I'm asking around here. Edit: If I'm reading things right Quebec slashed the tuition credits pretty hard last year. FrozenVent fucked around with this message at 02:05 on Apr 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Tax question, Given your tax rate, with the 8% tax credit, Your pre-tax cost would be about $2,620.00. On the other hand, given your tax rate, I'm going to hazard a guess that even a 3% raise would give you more money, carries on beyond your time in school, and won't possibly need to be renegotiated each term. That is my take on it anyways. Created a Self Directed Basic RSP account with TD Waterhouse today. It was a bit of a toss up if I should have gone with a TD bank mutual fund account, converted to e-series. But eventually I plan to move to ETFs, and I should be above the $25,000.00 minimum within a year, which waives the $25 yearly fee. It also keeps the two somewhat consolidated and convenient come balancing time. The rep suggested I could just not claim the excess contribution as a deduction, and use it for the next year. But he wasn't sure either what happens if you go over intentionally, then withdraw. He suggested a tax specialist. One day I'll figure this out fully. Golluk fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Apr 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
Golluk posted:Given your tax rate, with the 8% tax credit, Your pre-tax cost would be about $2,620.00. On the other hand, given your tax rate, I'm going to hazard a guess that even a 3% raise would give you more money, carries on beyond your time in school, and won't possibly need to be renegotiated each term. The short answer is that it would be a terrible idea to go over intentionally. Among other things it would likely flag your return for audit in subsequent years which would leave you with an enormous headache. Just work out the math to max your contribution each year and you'll be further ahead. Lexicon posted:Why not? Doesn't that provide substantial advantages in terms of rate and quantity of credit offered? Perhaps, although it actually depends on the asset used as security. I currently have an unsecured LOC for approximately 30% of my pre-tax salary, at prime plus 1%. I don't know where you guys go to get your lines but you need to push your bankers harder! Like negotiating for anything as fungible as banking products, it's pretty easy to go to a competitor and get better rates, which you can either take, or lever with your current bank to get your rates improved if you don't want to switch. Threaten to pull your other accounts too! If they see themselves losing your mutual fund or trading account business they'll bend over backwards to get you a better rate. Prime plus 3% isn't great and whoever said they're paying 9% is getting screwed unless they've got credit problems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 09:11
|
|
|
Golluk posted:Given your tax rate, with the 8% tax credit, Your pre-tax cost would be about $2,620.00. On the other hand, given your tax rate, I'm going to hazard a guess that even a 3% raise would give you more money, carries on beyond your time in school, and won't possibly need to be renegotiated each term. Yeah if I can get money that's what I'm taking, but I have a feeling I'm more likely to get tuition reimbursement and I wanted to make sure I wouldn't be shooting myself in the foot financially. Gonna ask for 5%, tuition and another 5 days PTO, see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Dumb tax question: I made more money than my husband last year and want those sweet, sweet tax credits. Do I fill out schedule 5 and he fills out 2, or vice versa? edit: ok I figured out half my question, I definitely had to fill out schedule 5. Does he have to fill out schedule 2? HookShot fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Apr 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
HookShot posted:Dumb tax question: I made more money than my husband last year and want to steal his sweet, sweet tax credits. Surely you're not doing this by hand? That's for TurboTax to work out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Surely you're not doing this by hand? That's for TurboTax to work out. I've always done my taxes by hand, they've never actually been hard in any way. I think this is the last year though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
HookShot posted:I've always done my taxes by hand, they've never actually been hard in any way. I'm offended by the existence of TurboTax (it exists because they lobby for the status quo, as opposed to a more sensible scenario where the CRA does most computations for us), but as a software guy, this is a job for computers I've always argued. Too much error prone arithmetic. That's cool you've done it so far on your own though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I'm offended by the existence of TurboTax (it exists because they lobby for the status quo, as opposed to a more sensible scenario where the CRA does most computations for us), but as a software guy, this is a job for computers I've always argued. Too much error prone arithmetic. While I agree with the sentiment, have you used a government computer system recently? gently caress that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Surely you're not doing this by hand? That's for TurboTax to work out. No kidding. It's great you can do it by hand, but even tax professionals use software. And extremely powerful software at that (Taxprep or Profile).
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:I'm offended by the existence of TurboTax (it exists because they lobby for the status quo, as opposed to a more sensible scenario where the CRA does most computations for us), but as a software guy, this is a job for computers I've always argued. Too much error prone arithmetic. Yeah, I always double/triple check everything, the only thing CRA has ever corrected is when I've made major mistakes like the year I paid an entire year's worth of EI Premiums without being registered for it, so they just sent me that amount back. I'm going to have to get an accountant this year though, I think. Or at least some kind of software.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
HR block stopped supporting out of country software returns and I found every level of Turbotax's customer support to be dog poo poo stupid and unhelpful where it did exist, so I spent a while looking for a useful product after failing to figure out how to do it manually. GenuTax is my new best friend and I'll keep using it even when I return to Canada. Not only is it free (donation based support, which I will gladly pay when the confirmation comes that my return is correct) but it supports multi year, multi returns, eFILE, and exppsed me to some of the inanity that is Canada's occasionally dumb tax laws. It's was vetted by CRA as being legit too, which was a nice warm fuzzy that my identity is probably safe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Mrs. Slidebite does our taxes with Turbotax but double-checks by hand. She has found at least 1 error with the way Turbo-tax/Quick-tax does them each year, including this year and has to manually make changes. Errors are usually in the hundreds of dollars and can go either way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:While I agree with the sentiment, have you used a government computer system recently? Oh sure, but it's within human capability. It already works this way in more civilized parts of the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
This is a stupid question but I'm a little confused and can't figure out a coherent response: - I have $15,000 in student loans. - I have $10,000 in a chequing account. - I have $12,000 in a TFSA savings account that has, since my initial $12,000 deposit (in 2014!) also accumulated $100 in interest. The interest will begin accumulating on the student loans at the end of this month, would it be possible to pay off the student with the TFSA without incurring serious penalties? I am not near by contribution limit for the TFSA but am worried that I'll get hit with a tax penalty. I have the option in TD's EasyWeb of transferring money from it to pay off the loan, however I'm a bit confused by the possible repercussions (but would obviously like to avoid having any interest pile on). I'll be making a rather high income shortly at a company with a 10% RRSP match so could I pay off the loan and then just contribute towards RRSP until 2015 when I can contribute fully to the TFSA again?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
How old are you? That makes a difference in your TFSA contribution room. You can pull money out of your TFSA at any time without penalty; you just can't put the same money back in in the same fiscal year. Are you 100% sure you've got that job after graduation? If so, you can use a mix of chequing and TFSA to kill off the student loan. Chequing first. Then yes, go and get that 10% match, up to the maximum the employer will match, then top off your TFSA. (Basically until January 1 2015, assuming you never did anything with your TFSA before 2014, you can contribute (Your maximum contribution room) - (all your contribution ever); then in 2015 you can contribute (Your maximum contribution room) - (All your contributions ever) + (The amount you withdrew in 2014))
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
Lexicon posted:Oh sure, but it's within human capability. It already works this way in more civilized parts of the world. You see, if CRA takes over the calculation, they lose the ability to charge you penalties when the calculation is wrong. The government also then incurs the cost of doing the calc, and needs to develop a customer service function to deal with all the people that call back that their return is wrong. This way it's on the taxpayer to get right and I think that's appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:You see, if CRA takes over the calculation, they lose the ability to charge you penalties when the calculation is wrong. The government also then incurs the cost of doing the calc, and needs to develop a customer service function to deal with all the people that call back that their return is wrong. This way it's on the taxpayer to get right and I think that's appropriate. I'd be surprised to find out CRA turns a profit on those penalties, honestly - they're expensive as gently caress to recover when you consider the cost of the investigation and the number of audits they do that don't turn up anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:You see, if CRA takes over the calculation, they lose the ability to charge you penalties when the calculation is wrong. The government also then incurs the cost of doing the calc, and needs to develop a customer service function to deal with all the people that call back that their return is wrong. This way it's on the taxpayer to get right and I think that's appropriate. The CRA already largely knows what information taxpayers remit to it, so this is a disingenuous assessment. As I said, it works this way in most other Western countries - the United States, and Canada by proxy it seems, are pretty distinct in this regard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Apparently I forgot to include enough obvious sarcasm in my post today. I thought the 'you see' at the start would be smarmy enough to make it obvious but I guess not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
Kalenn Istarion posted:Apparently I forgot to include enough obvious sarcasm in my post today. I thought the 'you see' at the start would be smarmy enough to make it obvious but I guess not. You did, indeed, forget enough obvious sarcasm. And I forgot to replace the dud batteries in my sarcasm detector.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
So I was snooping around the practice account if RBC:DI and when I looked at the GICs I saw quite a range, with the highest being "Equitable Bank of Canada" for the 2 years @ 2%. If a person wanted a GIC as part of portfolio diversification, any reasons not to go with them? They seem legit but I've never heard of them before. http://www.equitablebank.ca/en/index.htm
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
slidebite posted:So I was snooping around the practice account if RBC:DI and when I looked at the GICs I saw quite a range, with the highest being "Equitable Bank of Canada" for the 2 years @ 2%. If it's not CDIC insured, I'd stay the hell away from it. Something seems vaguely shady about this outfit, but I can't quite identify why I think that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:11 |
|
|
Lexicon posted:If it's not CDIC insured, I'd stay the hell away from it. That said GIC are for low risk capital preservation. If you are not trying to protect capital for a set number of years then don't buy them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2014 18:30
|
|
