|
We had a guy from the NYS Deferred Comp program come by yesterday and get some new people enrolled, do a brief overview of the program, etc. Apparently we're still stuck with the T Rowe Price target retirement funds which suck (.78 ER on most of the ones for 2040 and beyond) which is something I was hoping would change, he did say their ERs will be dropping this year though. A lot of the do-it-yourself options are changing too apparently. The wonderful VIIIX with its .02 ER wil no longer be available... but only because Blackrock won the new contract and will offer essentially the same fund at .01 or .005  The other big change is a lot of these mutual funds will instead be CITs going forward, has anyone looked into them before? Supposedly they're identical except they're run by our own board of directors and are regulated by the federal comptroller instead of the SEC and thus can shave expenses down even further.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 18:10
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
BlackRock is offering low expense funds?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Yes but without reducing fees on their existing funds. So people with investments in taxable accounts will have to take capital gains to take advantage of it: https://blog.wealthfront.com/avoid-blackrock-etfs/
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
In case it isn't 100000% clear - They don't give a gently caress about existing customers. They want to get more customers, whom they will promptly not give a gently caress about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
I'm just glad low expense ratio index funds are becoming even a little bit more en vogue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
Even if they are, I don't see any reason to trust any of the newest contenders for longer than a couple of years before they say, "Sorry, we're increasing the fees on these funds by 400% because a bloo bloo bloo we can't make money this way. By the way, there is now a $500 account transfer fee. Eat a dick, suckers."
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:"Sorry, we're increasing the fees on these funds by 400% because a bloo bloo bloo we can't make money this way. By the way, there is now a $500 account transfer fee. Eat a dick, suckers." Name/post combo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:If you're talking about 457s then the answer is always "more" because of the extremely generous withdrawal rules. I thought that non-governmental 457s were actually trickier than 401k/403b plans in terms of deciding whether to contribute or not. While you can withdraw whenever without an additional penalty, I thought that many employers require you to take it as either 1 large sum or a few divided payments. If that means that the majority of the savings end up being taxed at the highest marginal rate when you withdraw because you have to take out a ton at once, doesn't that mean you ultimately pay more in tax than you saved on the initial deduction and should just contribute to a taxable account instead? Also, does that PA law apply if your parents aren't in PA but you are? Ugh, regretting our upcoming move already. Although the specific case seemed to imply it was used to not let the kids take money from the estate before outstanding debts were paid, which seems reasonable I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:Even if they are, I don't see any reason to trust any of the newest contenders for longer than a couple of years before they say, "Sorry, we're increasing the fees on these funds by 400% because a bloo bloo bloo we can't make money this way. By the way, there is now a $500 account transfer fee. Eat a dick, suckers." I think it's a ten year contract with the NY state system and I don't think they'll be able to jack up the ERs in the middle of it but then again it wouldn't surprise me. I deal with other contractors pulling poo poo like that with the state all the time so we'll see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
Chu020 posted:I thought that non-governmental 457s were actually trickier than 401k/403b plans in terms of deciding whether to contribute or not. While you can withdraw whenever without an additional penalty, I thought that many employers require you to take it as either 1 large sum or a few divided payments. If that means that the majority of the savings end up being taxed at the highest marginal rate when you withdraw because you have to take out a ton at once, doesn't that mean you ultimately pay more in tax than you saved on the initial deduction and should just contribute to a taxable account instead? Hmmm good point, I forgot about non-governmental 457s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
Jon Von Anchovi posted:Withdrawal taking a while shouldn't worry you. If you are putting in money that you might need quickly you're using the wrong investment. This should be money you are putting in and not taking out. Thanks for this. Very helpful. Yeah I'm doing this for long term. I just wanted to make sure this thing isn't a piece of poo poo. Yeah i don't want to salary sacrifice into super because i won't be able to touch that poo poo until I'm 65 (i think?) And i want to retire at 55, by the latest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 07:00
|
|
|
CheeseFactory posted:Thanks for this. Very helpful. Except that you only need this money to last you from the time you want to retire until You can access super. So 5 or 10 Years. Money salary sacrificed into super is taxed at 15% not your marginal rate. So you instantly get a (in my case) 37%-15% = 22% return on that money. The money, since it is pre-tax, also doesn't need to be declared on your tax return. You are lowering your overall taxable income. You can put up to $25,000 per year (including your employers contribution) into super and tax advantaged space will begin accruing as of July 2018 for a maximum of 5 years. You should very highly consider making use of this tax advantaged space, but you also aren't in a *bad* after-tax investment vehicle either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Jon Von Anchovi posted:Except that you only need this money to last you from the time you want to retire until Yeah I'm aware of those benefits of salary sacrificing into super. But there is the whole mental barrier of knowing i can't touch that money for 34 years, which i hate. But yeah, everything you're saying is right. What do you mean by tax advantaged space and what is the significance of July 2018?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
Hello friends Just finishing uni and starting my first full-time salaried position. Over the past 4 years I've had minimal interaction with my bank and the 2 accounts I've had open with them. 1 is a saver, the other is a current. As far as I know the saver's never had anything in, and the current has always had "just enough". I basically set these accounts up with my parents (ie. my parents spoke to the nice bank lady and set these accounts up for me), and I'd like to start afresh, do it myself, know exactly what I'm getting and keep all the documents. My question is, what type of accounts should I open? I was thinking a similar setup to the one I have. 1 saver that my salary is paid into, that I never draw money out of, and 1 current, that I transfer a fixed sum into at the start of every month, from the saver. This is for all expenses - food, rent, food, car insurance, food, everything. Is that a sane/workable/normal setup? Any problems with it? How does yours differ? I have student debt which is deducted from my income and no other debt. If there's anything relevant I haven't mentioned, ask and I shall tell. The bank I'm looking at is Santander (based in the UK). Sorry if posting in wrong place (but not really sorry  )
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
I finally got a look at my 401k fund options for a job I started in January (I am eligible to start contributing May 1). The lowest expense ratio they offer, on Vanguard index funds, is 1.18%, and it goes well up from there. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
CheeseFactory posted:Yeah I'm aware of those benefits of salary sacrificing into super. But there is the whole mental barrier of knowing i can't touch that money for 34 years, which i hate. But yeah, everything you're saying is right. Tax advantaged space as in the room under the contribution limit (of 25,000 per annum from now onward). This space builds up for 5 years, so in five years you could put in 125,000 in one go for example. July 2018 is because they just lowered the contribution limit and simplified the system so necessary financial year is the first time this backward looking accrual of the new contribution limit will apply. Check out www[dot]ato[dot]gov[dot]au/Rates/Key-superannuation-rates-and-thresholds/?anchor=Concessionalcontributionscap#Concessionalcontributionscap I just changed over my HECS payment to be a pre tax superannuation contribution when I finished paying off student loans, so my take home pay stayed the same. Not sure if you have HECS though
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
Oh man BFC gets awesome during Aussie hours. How's it feel to be pushing 3 decades with no meaningful recession?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
Lol at their property market though
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:11
|
|
|
Jon Von Anchovi posted:Tax advantaged space as in the room under the contribution limit (of 25,000 per annum from now onward). This space builds up for 5 years, so in five years you could put in 125,000 in one go for example. July 2018 is because they just lowered the contribution limit and simplified the system so necessary financial year is the first time this backward looking accrual of the new contribution limit will apply. Check out www[dot]ato[dot]gov[dot]au/Rates/Key-superannuation-rates-and-thresholds/?anchor=Concessionalcontributionscap#Concessionalcontributionscap Ok gotya. Thanks for the tips. I'll give it some thought. Nah. No HECS. No debt at all. Just wanna dump my money in investments are retire early because i hate loving working. CheeseFactory fucked around with this message at 09:20 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:14
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Lol at their property market though Yeah seriously. Houses close to tripling in value in 12 years. Glad i bought my place 12 years ago. The prices now are nuts. A recession is the only thing going to bring them down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:18
|
|
|
In all seriousness, you should sell your place to a Chinese immigrant, rent for the time being, and wait for the bubble to collapse. The numbers for the Ozzie property market are ridiculous. 
shrike82 fucked around with this message at 10:19 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 10:15
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:In all seriousness, you should sell your place to a Chinese immigrant, rent for the time being, and wait for the bubble to collapse. The thought has crossed my mind. 5 years ago i thought it was going to pop and the fucker is still going. So clearly im terrible at predicting stuff, so i don't trust myself. But look at the worm compared to the income It's gotten to the point where even the prime minister talks about housing affordability quite often and they are talking about dumb ideas like letting first home buyers dip into their super for their house (horrible horrible idea). I'm just sitting back and watching it all unfold 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 11:04
|
|
|
That graph is crazy. What explains such a large price increase?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 11:59
|
|
|
B-Mac posted:That graph is crazy. What explains such a large price increase? Record low interest rates, immigration, overseas buyers, the "Australian dream" of everyone must buy a house, everyone else buying 5 because why the gently caress not look at that graph and i get to negatively gear it. Good old fashion supply and demand. The bubble has to pop. A real estate agent did an evaluation for me late last year and i accepted it for shits and giggles even though i have no intentions to sell. Anyway, he rang me up again a couple of weeks ago telling me the evaluation is 100k higher. That's the insanity of what's going on over here at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 12:39
|
|
|
B-Mac posted:That graph is crazy. What explains such a large price increase? Housing bubbles don't need to be based in reality. Check out the D&D thread on the Canadian bubble. Think it's been going three or four years now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:In all seriousness, you should sell your place to a Chinese immigrant, rent for the time being, and wait for the bubble to collapse. Jesus. Or if you don't want to move, sell to a speculative landlord and do a rentback agreement. Then when the bubble bursts and they're super upside down, offer to buy the house right back for a tidy profit on your end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 13:06
|
|
|
I most impressed by the stable rent. I'm assuming there is some form of price control?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
toadoftoadhall posted:Hello friends Probably not the perfect thread but what I would do is this: 1) figure out your budget for all the money that you make each month 2) If you want to save (get an emergency fund, save towards retirement, a house, whatever) you need to pay yourself first 3) based on your budget try to get 3-6 month equivalent in the savings account 4) Move onto your next savings goal (perhaps a car or house or what this thread is about long term investing and retirement) Say you make $4000 after taxes a month. Say your budget is $3000 with $1000 for saving. I would take my pay check and (assuming direct deposit) send $3000 to my current (I assume this is like checking in the US) and $1000 to your savings. Then your savings happens automatically and your budgeted money is already in your current. Once your money in your current is gone or close to gone for the month you will have to think long and hard (or at the very least log in and make the transfer) before dipping into your savings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Looks like the ideal time to sell and rent for awhile.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Yeah, that Australia graph is not an example of supply and demand at all. The stable rent indicates that there isn't a shortage of actual housing. In many major U.S. cities (D.C., SF, NY, and Seattle are the big ones) there is a legitimate shortage in housing because of a combination of bad urban planning (lots of single family houses, not a lot of apartments, limited land mass for expansion) and a huge influx of people and money in the last decade. That sends rents and housing prices through the roof because there are 8 people for every apartment. The Australia situation looks to be the exact opposite and is crazy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
You guys should read up about negative gearing. http://www.chaser.com.au/national/new-citizenship-test-to-focus-entirely-on-the-value-of-negative-gearing/#XgEgsZ6ELp2GMPJq.99 quote:After a day of heavy consultation throughout the suburb of Point Piper, Malcolm Turnbull has announced that Australia’s citizenship test will focus entirely on the value of negative gearing. shrike82 fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Does anyone have any experience with Fidelity Brokerage Accounts? I'm thinking of rolling a UGMA (my parents opened it for me but we never need to tap) into one as a long term savings/retirement savings vehicle. (My wife makes enough to support our household while I look for a new job).
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
If I want to buy a home but in under five years seems unfeasible, does putting money in a taxed VTSMX fund seem appropriate?
Neon Belly fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Depends. What do you think you will do if there is a 40% price crash in 5 years?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
If you absolutely want to use the money within 5 years then just buy I Bonds and super safe money market funds
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
I'm a little confused by the distinction between normal Vanguard mutual fund accounts and the brokerage account, aside from the obvious distinction that you can buy and hold stocks + ETFs with the brokerage account. I ask because when I tried to do a traditional IRA contribution into a mutual fund this year Vanguard still forced me to open a brokerage account (previously I only had a normal mutual fund account for my Roth IRA). Reading the internet it seems like Vanguard is trying to consolidate both account types into brokerage accounts going forward, but I've read conflicting accounts and seems more confusing then it should be. My basic question is whether there's any reason not to make all future purchases of Vanguard mutual funds through the brokerage account for long-term investment purposes. edit: VVVVV Thanks for the clarification, it makes sense now. I was getting confused by some Boglehead forums posts made a few years ago. Also it wasn't explained why I was being redirected to sign up for the brokerage account instead of just being able to buy the mutual funds like I had previously. Nocturtle fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Vanguard is in the process of merging/migrating all accounts to a "brokerage" type account. Most accounts have already been migrated, and I would imagine that all new accounts get opened as a brokerage type account. https://investor.vanguard.com/info/account-upgrade It's simpler for everyone. You can still buy mutual funds in the new brokerage account, but you can also buy ETFs and stocks without having to maintain two types of accounts. There's no downside, it's just less paperwork.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
toadoftoadhall posted:Hello friends This is probably better suited to the 'Newbie Personal Finance' thread here in BFC  Santander's 1-2-3 used to be well-regarded, until they upped the monthly charge to £5 and halved their monthly interest-payable to 1.5%. You can still come out ahead through cashback, especially if your utilities, council tax etc. are paid via Direct Debit, but the plum's not as sweet as it once was. Otherwise, there's not an awful lot of variety in current accounts these days: if you all you want is a hole to shovel money into, you can't go wrong by wasting an afternoon on moneysavingexpert.com and/or the comparison site of your choice. Some banks offer favourable interest on set monthly contributions, which is ideal if you're salaried. Your planned setup seems simple - which is great, when starting out the last thing you need a million different accounts. I'd offer two points, though:
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 19:10
|
|
so I could say that I finally figured out what this god damned cube is doing. Get well Lowtax.
|
The best thing I ever did for myself was open a checking account at separate banks to put a hard firewall between direct deposit and direct draft transactions. Paycheck goes to Account A then Account B transfers 35% of my average recurring monthly bills from A each week. All bills are then set to direct draft from Account B and if the power company fucks up an extra zero or I have a huge water leak or I get identity thefted, there's a hard cap on the potential damage and a second pot of money that won't be impacted at all. Account B is for all recurring transactions and ONLY for recurring transactions, and the excess that builds up from deliberately overfunding is transferred to savings when the balance reaches 250% of monthly average withdraws.
shame on an IGA fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
CopperHound posted:Depends. What do you think you will do if there is a 40% price crash in 5 years? Continue to put money in it? As I said, I don't see myself being able to afford a house in five years regardless (would need to at least double my household income). If I had started investing in 2000 with a 10-year horizon I also would have seen a 25% drop. I know that 5-years is generally considered the cutoff between invest/just put it in saving, but this feels unclear still. Neon Belly fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Apr 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 12:55
|
|