Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Orange DeviI
Nov 9, 2011

by Hand Knit
I can get margin at 1.7% but I’m not doing it

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

paternity suitor
Aug 2, 2016

please knock Mom! posted:

I can get margin at 1.7% but I’m not doing it

IB right? If you needed to borrow money what other source would you use and why?

Space Gopher
Jul 31, 2006

BLITHERING IDIOT AND HARDCORE DURIAN APOLOGIST. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THIS SHIT DON'T STINK EVEN THOUGH WE ALL KNOW IT DOES BECAUSE I'M SUPER CULTURED.

paternity suitor posted:

Is anyone using M1 Plus for the 2% margin loan capability? It seems almost too good to be true. I was planning to open a HELOC just to have the ability to access cash quickly but this seems even better. 2% is insane (yes I know it’s pegged to the Fed rate)

CubicalSucrose asked about it half a page before your post.

The reason they can offer such cheap money is that you're putting up very liquid collateral, that they're free to liquidate at any time if they want to. If you're borrowing over a timeframe where the interest rate difference really matters, there's a risk you'd be forced to sell at the bottom of a dip or crash.

CopperHound
Feb 14, 2012

I found a reminder of how different things were 35 years ago in this book:

Check out this CD rate:

They were way off with inflation rate projection, but not too far off on actual college costs. That is until you remember their numbers include room and board:

jokes
Dec 20, 2012

Uh... Kupo?

CopperHound posted:

I found a reminder of how different things were 35 years ago in this book:

Check out this CD rate:

They were way off with inflation rate projection, but not too far off on actual college costs. That is until you remember their numbers include room and board:


:negative: goddamn I want a 12% CD

H110Hawk
Dec 28, 2006

jokes posted:

:negative: goddamn I want a 12% CD

You don't want the 18% mortgage it backed though. (But perhaps the houses that cost literally a quarter of what they do today...)

CopperHound
Feb 14, 2012

H110Hawk posted:

You don't want the 18% mortgage it backed though. (But perhaps the houses that cost literally a quarter of what they do today...)
Yeah, I don't think that's going to be a concern for me anytime soon.

Space Gopher
Jul 31, 2006

BLITHERING IDIOT AND HARDCORE DURIAN APOLOGIST. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THIS SHIT DON'T STINK EVEN THOUGH WE ALL KNOW IT DOES BECAUSE I'M SUPER CULTURED.

CopperHound posted:

Check out this CD rate:

They were way off with inflation rate projection, but not too far off on actual college costs. That is until you remember their numbers include room and board:


There's a closer relationship than you might think.

Inflation rates tend to set a baseline for what you can expect a low-risk investment to return, because there's no reason to invest somewhere that risks your money more than TIPS but returns less. Inflation hits the cost of labor, too. If inflation were 8% across the board then you could probably find a savings account paying that much, a CD at 12% is a very nice rate but not the stuff of wild fantasy, and salaries would have also gone up at a roughly similar pace.

Cuts to public higher education driving tuition increases way over inflation really hosed the past couple of generations in a unique way. The good news is that state and federal support is so low, the pattern can't continue!

Sardonik
Jul 1, 2005

if you like my dumb posts, you'll love my dumb youtube channel

Space Gopher posted:


Cuts to public higher education driving tuition increases way over inflation really hosed the past couple of generations in a unique way. The good news is that state and federal support is so low, the pattern can't continue!

Sure it can, that's where private educational loans come in, as the banks find new and exciting ways to squeeze the younger generations who could only dream of owning homes. :suicide:

Small White Dragon
Nov 23, 2007

No relation.

Space Gopher posted:

Cuts to public higher education driving tuition increases way over inflation really hosed the past couple of generations in a unique way. The good news is that state and federal support is so low, the pattern can't continue!

You say that, but I'm sure universities will find new and exciting expensive things to waste money on.

Space Gopher
Jul 31, 2006

BLITHERING IDIOT AND HARDCORE DURIAN APOLOGIST. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THIS SHIT DON'T STINK EVEN THOUGH WE ALL KNOW IT DOES BECAUSE I'M SUPER CULTURED.

Sardonik posted:

Sure it can, that's where private educational loans come in, as the banks find new and exciting ways to squeeze the younger generations who could only dream of owning homes. :suicide:

You're missing the point.

The rate of increase in the total cost to educate a student at public universities over the past couple decades has been roughly equal to inflation, and in some cases even lower. There are expanded services and admin, but that's been countered by low-cost automation for clerical work and cheap adjunct labor for teaching.

For almost all students, the dramatic cost increases have happened because states cut university funding. Yes, private institutions have had amenity arms races, but most students don't go to tiny expensive liberal arts schools that are fighting over the little pool of rich kids that didn't make it into the Ivy League. Most students go to state schools. State governments have made deeper and deeper cuts to their support for public universities. With a bunch of tenured professors and long-term building loans to pay off, the only way for those schools to balance the books was to jack up tuition.

Higher education is probably going to stay incredibly expensive, but the rate of tuition increases isn't going to stay near-vertical like it did from the late 2000s to mid 2010s. There just aren't many more subsidies to take away.

Sardonik
Jul 1, 2005

if you like my dumb posts, you'll love my dumb youtube channel

Space Gopher posted:

You're missing the point.

The rate of increase in the total cost to educate a student at public universities over the past couple decades has been roughly equal to inflation, and in some cases even lower. There are expanded services and admin, but that's been countered by low-cost automation for clerical work and cheap adjunct labor for teaching.

For almost all students, the dramatic cost increases have happened because states cut university funding. Yes, private institutions have had amenity arms races, but most students don't go to tiny expensive liberal arts schools that are fighting over the little pool of rich kids that didn't make it into the Ivy League. Most students go to state schools. State governments have made deeper and deeper cuts to their support for public universities. With a bunch of tenured professors and long-term building loans to pay off, the only way for those schools to balance the books was to jack up tuition.

Higher education is probably going to stay incredibly expensive, but the rate of tuition increases isn't going to stay near-vertical like it did from the late 2000s to mid 2010s. There just aren't many more subsidies to take away.

You're not wrong about the origin of the phenomenon for a lot of public generally non-tuition driven schools, I just don't think the tuition increases are going to appreciably slow even for them. Working in higher education I don't see that bell being un-rung if it's an accepted norm now, even with the various systems of governance that proport to oversee tuition increases. Moreover, were state support zeroed out, which seems a lot more likely than increases in certain states, I wouldn't be surprised to see plenty of public institutions outright resembling the private tuition driven model in short order, permanently.

Small White Dragon
Nov 23, 2007

No relation.
Although not quite as high, tuition increases at private, non-profit universities have also vastly outpaced inflation, which suggests there's probably more at work there.

jokes
Dec 20, 2012

Uh... Kupo?

Universities spend so much money on poo poo that no other country does. Like they’re all fighting to be Versailles via student loans.

Fake James
Aug 18, 2005

Y'all got any more of that plastic?
Buglord
Reading up more on my Roth IRA options and I think I am going to go with Schwab. Looking at the 2050 Target Date Index currently. How does transferring old Roth IRA CDs work? I know I should initiate the transfer from Schwab's side, but do I need to wait for the CD to mature (on 2/27) or is there typically an option to schedule it for a specific date?

Also do transfers count towards yearly contributions or have fees for multiple transfers into one account? Was planning on moving a Roth IRA CD from Bank of America, Roth IRA CD from USAA, and Roth IRA mutual fund at a lovely bank all into Schwab and then make my 2020 and 2021 contributions.

KYOON GRIFFEY JR
Apr 12, 2010



Runner-up, TRP Sack Race 2021/22
Transfers don't count towards your annual contribution as you're just moving money around; it's already in an IRA.

You shouldn't have to pay fees for transfers.

Fhqwhgads
Jul 18, 2003

I AM THE ONLY ONE IN THIS GAME WHO GETS LAID
Not sure if this is more for the tax thread, but this is my first year doing a backdoor conversion, and I thought I did everything correctly on the Vanguard site, but I have a 1099-R that is showing a fully taxable amount. I put the money into the trad IRA after tax, and when it was in there went through the conversion steps. I remember checking something like "Don't withhold taxes" because it was already after tax money. Did I do this completely incorrectly?

Fhqwhgads fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Feb 16, 2021

withak
Jan 15, 2003


Fun Shoe

Fhqwhgads posted:

Not sure if this is more for the tax thread, but this is my first year doing a backdoor conversion, and I thought I did everything correctly on the Vanguard site, but I have a 1099-R that is showing a fully taxable amount. I put the money into the trad IRA after tax, and when it was in there went through the conversion steps. I remember checking something like "Don't withhold taxes" because it was already after tax money. Did I do this completely incorrectly?

That is correct. Somewhere in your taxes you will document that the 6k payout was actually a conversion to a Roth and it will net to zero.

withak fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Feb 16, 2021

SlapActionJackson
Jul 27, 2006

Fhqwhgads posted:

Not sure if this is more for the tax thread, but this is my first year doing a backdoor conversion, and I thought I did everything correctly on the Vanguard site, but I have a 1099-R that is showing a fully taxable amount. I put the money into the trad IRA after tax, and when it was in there went through the conversion steps. I remember checking something like "Don't withhold taxes" because it was already after tax money. Did I do this completely incorrectly?

Vanguard's 1099-R should have box 2b checked, which means "we don't know the tax implications, have your tax software figure it out". The tax software should walk you through form 8606 to document the non-deductibility of the original contribution which will eliminate the tax liability on the conversion.

Fhqwhgads
Jul 18, 2003

I AM THE ONLY ONE IN THIS GAME WHO GETS LAID
Thanks both of you. I do need to look up this form 8606, and Vanguard is telling me the same thing.

Xguard86
Nov 22, 2004

"You don't understand his pain. Everywhere he goes he sees women working, wearing pants, speaking in gatherings, voting. Surely they will burn in the white hot flames of Hell"
I had the same heart the year I did it.

You know some places they just tell you what you owe and then you pay it or dispute it. Good thing we have our superior method of F-ing guessing.

spwrozek
Sep 4, 2006

Sail when it's windy

Xguard86 posted:

I had the same heart the year I did it.

You know some places they just tell you what you owe and then you pay it or dispute it. Good thing we have our superior method of F-ing guessing.

Figuring out HOW to make turbo tax account for this correctly the first time was a total pain if I remember right. If I didn't know better I would have been writing a big ole check to Uncle Sam.

Fhqwhgads
Jul 18, 2003

I AM THE ONLY ONE IN THIS GAME WHO GETS LAID
Yeah my problem right now with both freetaxusa and TurboTax is trying to figure out the right button combinations that let me do this correctly. The obvious answers aren't the correct ones.

dexter6
Sep 22, 2003

Fhqwhgads posted:

Yeah my problem right now with both freetaxusa and TurboTax is trying to figure out the right button combinations that let me do this correctly. The obvious answers aren't the correct ones.
https://thefinancebuff.com/how-to-report-backdoor-roth-in-turbotax.html

Fhqwhgads
Jul 18, 2003

I AM THE ONLY ONE IN THIS GAME WHO GETS LAID

With some tweaks I was able to follow this for FreeTaxUSA as well!

withak
Jan 15, 2003


Fun Shoe
Freetaxusa is alarming the first time through because the question that lets you subtract the 6k back out doesn't come until pretty late through the process (long after you enter the 1099-R), so the running summary it shows of owed/refund is somewhat concerning up to that point.

Fhqwhgads
Jul 18, 2003

I AM THE ONLY ONE IN THIS GAME WHO GETS LAID

withak posted:

Freetaxusa is alarming the first time through because the question that lets you subtract the 6k back out doesn't come until pretty late through the process (long after you enter the 1099-R), so the running summary it shows of owed/refund is somewhat concerning up to that point.

Yeah it was more convoluted, but I got both systems to match down to the dollar, so that makes me feel better.

zynga dot com
Nov 11, 2001

wtf jill im not a bear!!!

A dossier and a state of melted brains: The Jess campaign has it all.
I'm over the income threshold to contribute to a Roth IRA. I know that I could still do a backdoor Roth, but like a dummy I've already rolled several past 401ks into an IRA, so I'd be subject to the pro rata rule. I also know that I could roll those IRAs back into my current 401k to avoid those tax consequences.

Here's where I'm unsure. I don't plan on leaving my current job for a while, but my 401k is provided through Guideline, which doesn't have a lot of appealing options - basically pure index funds. That's fine, but the rest of my accounts are with Fidelity, where there are a lot of ETFs/mutual funds out there that have beaten index funds pretty solidly over the last 5 years or so. Past performance blah blah but let's say I believe that will continue, or at least funds will continue to exist that will modestly beat the average index fund going forward.

If that's true, is doing a backdoor Roth really worth rolling all of my money out of Fidelity when I could just throw it in a taxable brokerage account instead? Or am I thinking about this incorrectly?

Iron Lung
Jul 24, 2007
Life.Iron Lung. Death.

H110Hawk posted:

Unless your 401k has fees like this posters ira:


You should use that space.

Why if your taxable brokerage was better would you invest a dollar in your 401k past the match? (It's rhetorical, just want you to think it through.) In for a penny, in for a pound.

You don't have to consistently invest in the 401k to shift extra cash into it, it's just extra steps and stricter adherence to your budget. If you have say $1000 extra you want to save for retirement (+30 years from now) you can increase your 401k%, have the next paycheck deposit it, then turn it back down to 10%. You would eat the reduced paycheck and pay yourself back out of the excess savings you have. This funnels the money from the taxable savings column to the tax advantaged savings column.


And this isn't any better. The fees for your ira account should be $0/year from all sources including buying mutual funds etc. No weasel words allowed. Your mutual fund expense ratio should be less than half a % (0.50%).

sorry for the delayed response, but wanted to make sure I did actually respond because I really appreciate it! I'll look into what you mentioned about fees etc, and I appreciate the rhetorical. Gonna look into a bunch of stuff for the near future. I'm probably going to do ETF stuff, just because I'm interested in them and honestly I just want to.

80k
Jul 3, 2004

careful!

zynga dot com posted:

I'm over the income threshold to contribute to a Roth IRA. I know that I could still do a backdoor Roth, but like a dummy I've already rolled several past 401ks into an IRA, so I'd be subject to the pro rata rule. I also know that I could roll those IRAs back into my current 401k to avoid those tax consequences.

Here's where I'm unsure. I don't plan on leaving my current job for a while, but my 401k is provided through Guideline, which doesn't have a lot of appealing options - basically pure index funds. That's fine, but the rest of my accounts are with Fidelity, where there are a lot of ETFs/mutual funds out there that have beaten index funds pretty solidly over the last 5 years or so. Past performance blah blah but let's say I believe that will continue, or at least funds will continue to exist that will modestly beat the average index fund going forward.

If that's true, is doing a backdoor Roth really worth rolling all of my money out of Fidelity when I could just throw it in a taxable brokerage account instead? Or am I thinking about this incorrectly?

Your entire premise for not doing it is predicated on complete nonsense. Yet, you want us to give advice as if that nonsense is true.

zynga dot com
Nov 11, 2001

wtf jill im not a bear!!!

A dossier and a state of melted brains: The Jess campaign has it all.

80k posted:

Your entire premise for not doing it is predicated on complete nonsense. Yet, you want us to give advice as if that nonsense is true.

Well, I obviously expected that as a potential answer when I asked whether I was thinking about this incorrectly. I'm just trying to fix the gap in my own understanding.

80k
Jul 3, 2004

careful!

zynga dot com posted:

Well, I obviously expected that as a potential answer when I asked whether I was thinking about this incorrectly. I'm just trying to fix the gap in my own understanding.

I'll try to be a little more helpful. Your endeavors will less fruitful in a taxable account because a.) active funds are generally a bad idea in taxable accounts due to the tendency for them to distribute capital gains... plus you wouldn't want to be "stuck" in a taxable account with a managed fund, since they are rarely forever funds (remember when FAIRX was the darling? Good luck holding onto that one during a bad decade when luck turns the other way). And b.) even if you chose fancier ETF's that "beat" the market, those often have higher turnover and may also be less than ideal in a taxable account. The broad market boring index funds are by far the best thing to hold in taxable accounts. So even if you decided to do more taxable investing, you should stick with boring index funds. The fact that you should do that anyway makes this doubly true.

KYOON GRIFFEY JR
Apr 12, 2010



Runner-up, TRP Sack Race 2021/22
a very very simplistic way to think about this is do you think your taxable investments in whatever exotic ETFs are going to grow, net the likely LTCG taxes, more than your potential Roth IRA contributions?

zynga dot com
Nov 11, 2001

wtf jill im not a bear!!!

A dossier and a state of melted brains: The Jess campaign has it all.

80k posted:

I'll try to be a little more helpful. Your endeavors will less fruitful in a taxable account because a.) active funds are generally a bad idea in taxable accounts due to the tendency for them to distribute capital gains... plus you wouldn't want to be "stuck" in a taxable account with a managed fund, since they are rarely forever funds (remember when FAIRX was the darling? Good luck holding onto that one during a bad decade when luck turns the other way). And b.) even if you chose fancier ETF's that "beat" the market, those often have higher turnover and may also be less than ideal in a taxable account. The broad market boring index funds are by far the best thing to hold in taxable accounts. So even if you decided to do more taxable investing, you should stick with boring index funds. The fact that you should do that anyway makes this doubly true.

Okay, this is very helpful - thanks! I was definitely not considering the different ways things can be taxed outside of tax-advantaged accounts. Looks I have some more reading to do.

KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:

a very very simplistic way to think about this is do you think your taxable investments in whatever exotic ETFs are going to grow, net the likely LTCG taxes, more than your potential Roth IRA contributions?

I would have initially said yes without considering the tax implications of what I said, but I see what you're getting at here.

KYOON GRIFFEY JR
Apr 12, 2010



Runner-up, TRP Sack Race 2021/22
It's net 20% off the top, you can calculate the implied rate of return - i'm too lazy to do so

KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Feb 16, 2021

punk rebel ecks
Dec 11, 2010

A shitty post? This calls for a dance of deduction.
What's the best free website or software to do my taxes?

moana
Jun 18, 2005

one of the more intellectual satire communities on the web

punk rebel ecks posted:

What's the best free website or software to do my taxes?
Depending on your income, the IRS provides free access to lots of programs, including taxact and turbotax. Freetaxusa.com is always an option as well.

withak
Jan 15, 2003


Fun Shoe
I like freetaxusa.com.

Free for federal returns, $12.95 for state.

Residency Evil
Jul 28, 2003

4/5 godo... Schumi
Is there a reason to keep giving Intuit my money versus taxhawk, other than inertia?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Busy Bee
Jul 13, 2004
What do you guy's suggest for a US Citizen working abroad for a foreign company (No 401k) and not able to contribute to Roth / Traditional IRA.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply