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
qhat
Jul 6, 2015


I don’t think it makes a difference. You’ll see the withholding tax on your statement if you own the US ETF, but I’m pretty sure it’s hidden away in the CAD ETF, but it’s still there. But withholding taxes make up a tiny drag on your return anyway, it’s seriously almost never worth losing sleep over.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mantle
May 15, 2004

pokeyman posted:

Ah, I misunderstood.

Someday I'ma get on the same train. One part I'm not sure about is how the foreign withholding tax is recovered. Is it automatic, like the fund manager doesn't withhold it? Do you get a tax slip from the fund manager that includes the relevant info? Or do you have to calculate it yourself?

According to this the amount withheld is recorded on a t5 and you can get it back as a tax credit when you file your return.

https://canadiancouchpotato.com/2012/09/17/foreign-withholding-tax-explained/

Subjunctive
Sep 12, 2006

✨sparkle and shine✨

I had the CRA deny the deduction of some US withholding because I didn’t file a US return, but they reversed that opinion and permitted the deduction on appeal so other than the cost of a few hours of accountant time it all turned out OK.

For US income you can file a W8-BEN as a foreign beneficiary to avoid the withholding at all and then it’s all taxed in your hands in Canada like anything else.

pokeyman
Nov 26, 2006

That elephant ate my entire platoon.

qhat posted:

I don’t think it makes a difference. You’ll see the withholding tax on your statement if you own the US ETF, but I’m pretty sure it’s hidden away in the CAD ETF, but it’s still there. But withholding taxes make up a tiny drag on your return anyway, it’s seriously almost never worth losing sleep over.

Not losing sleep, but as my portfolio grows and the mechanics become habit, it looks increasingly worthwhile.

Mantle posted:

According to this the amount withheld is recorded on a t5 and you can get it back as a tax credit when you file your return.

https://canadiancouchpotato.com/2012/09/17/foreign-withholding-tax-explained/

Thanks! Was looking at the wrong explainer.

Subjunctive posted:

I had the CRA deny the deduction of some US withholding because I didn’t file a US return, but they reversed that opinion and permitted the deduction on appeal so other than the cost of a few hours of accountant time it all turned out OK.

For US income you can file a W8-BEN as a foreign beneficiary to avoid the withholding at all and then it’s all taxed in your hands in Canada like anything else.

This is the kinda stuff that makes it seem less worthwhile. But I'm in no rush so maybe someday.

qhat
Jul 6, 2015


I think the only thing of concern about withholding tax is when you own an ETF like XAW which basically wraps US ETFs that invest in ex-USA securities. There’s a double taxation, one on dividends paid to the fund from foreign securities (the withholding tax is reciprocated), and then again on dividends paid to you the Canadian shareholder. The only way to get around that is to hold a Canadian ETF (like VIU) that holds ex-NA securities directly, and then hold a US total market fund separately.

qhat fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Aug 27, 2021

mila kunis
Jun 10, 2011
https://www.investmentexecutive.com/news/industry-news/liberals-promise-new-tax-sheltered-account-for-downpayment-savings/

"The First Home Savings Account would allow Canadians under 40 to set aside up to $40,000 toward the purchase of a first home, with no tax on contributions or withdrawals. Contributions to the account would be deducted from income, as with an RRSP, and remain tax-sheltered until withdrawn tax-free as with a TFSA, up to a maximum of $40,000. If funds held in the account weren’t used for a home purchase by the age of 40, they would convert to normal RRSP savings, the Liberals proposed."

This seems totally useless for actually being able to get an affordable home, but it does seem like a supercharged tfsa+rrsp?

Should I hold off on my rrsp and tfsa contributions and wait to see if this comes into effect?

McGavin
Sep 18, 2012

Lol, "Should I wait to see if the Liberals keep an election promise?" Hahaha, that's loving funny!

qhat
Jul 6, 2015


It's a bullshit way for liberals to funnel money into housing. If they really gave a poo poo about saving people money on taxes they would tack that amount onto everyone's TFSA rooms, but they won't do that because they actually want the tax money to go to homeowners.

pokeyman
Nov 26, 2006

That elephant ate my entire platoon.

mila kunis posted:

Should I hold off on my rrsp and tfsa contributions and wait to see if this comes into effect?

In addition to the correct take above re: election promises, who knows what the implementation will look like and when it'll happen. If you have TFSA room, I would keep using that for now as it's easiest to withdraw.

mila kunis
Jun 10, 2011
Yeah I mean I don't trust them either but I have a limited amount of money to go around. I guess I could hold off on the RRSP contributions but put some into my TFSA.

Speaking of the TFSA, my CRA account doesn't seem to show my contibutions over the last 2 years and show a much higher contribution room than it should. It's a little annoying because I have to double check my contributions to my TFSA accounts and subtract by hand, is there a way to directly link my TFSA accounts to the CRA so it actually tracks it?

RuBisCO
May 1, 2009

This is definitely not a lie



mila kunis posted:

Yeah I mean I don't trust them either but I have a limited amount of money to go around. I guess I could hold off on the RRSP contributions but put some into my TFSA.

Speaking of the TFSA, my CRA account doesn't seem to show my contibutions over the last 2 years and show a much higher contribution room than it should. It's a little annoying because I have to double check my contributions to my TFSA accounts and subtract by hand, is there a way to directly link my TFSA accounts to the CRA so it actually tracks it?

Not that I know of, this stuff is pretty frustrating as the information on CRA isn't nearly as reliable or updated as often as it should be.

I've always kept a separate ledger to keep track manually.

pokeyman
Nov 26, 2006

That elephant ate my entire platoon.

mila kunis posted:

Yeah I mean I don't trust them either but I have a limited amount of money to go around. I guess I could hold off on the RRSP contributions but put some into my TFSA.

Speaking of the TFSA, my CRA account doesn't seem to show my contibutions over the last 2 years and show a much higher contribution room than it should. It's a little annoying because I have to double check my contributions to my TFSA accounts and subtract by hand, is there a way to directly link my TFSA accounts to the CRA so it actually tracks it?

It should show up eventually on the CRA site without your doing anything, and it should also appear on your notice of assessment. Might be worth a call to CRA if the site hasn't updated for a couple years, they're pretty helpful.

Ultimately it's up to you to avoid over-contribution, so you should always keep track yourself. But it is nice to be able to confirm that you got the same number as CRA.

pokeyman
Nov 26, 2006

That elephant ate my entire platoon.
Also, have a look at the Home Buyer's Plan, it lets you raid your RRSP for a down payment. If you're below its maximum, might as well contribute while you wait for whatever future account types may appear.

yippee cahier
Mar 28, 2005

qhat posted:

It's a bullshit way for liberals to funnel money into housing. If they really gave a poo poo about saving people money on taxes they would tack that amount onto everyone's TFSA rooms, but they won't do that because they actually want the tax money to go to homeowners.

they’d raise the basic amount at least to the poverty line. plenty of people don’t make enough to use the TFSA.

AegisP
Oct 5, 2008

mila kunis posted:

If funds held in the account weren’t used for a home purchase by the age of 40, they would convert to normal RRSP savings, the Liberals proposed."

So, I'm curious how this would work in practice if implemented.

Would it "convert" into an RRSP by using up equivalent RRSP contribution room when you hit 41? If so, then it's boring.

Or would it "convert" by just changing whatever you contributed into it into a regular RRSP account, but not affecting your existing RRSP contributions? If so, then you should theoretically always prioritize this account over others before age 41 to gain "free" room.

qhat
Jul 6, 2015


AegisP posted:

So, I'm curious how this would work in practice if implemented.

Would it "convert" into an RRSP by using up equivalent RRSP contribution room when you hit 41? If so, then it's boring.

Or would it "convert" by just changing whatever you contributed into it into a regular RRSP account, but not affecting your existing RRSP contributions? If so, then you should theoretically always prioritize this account over others before age 41 to gain "free" room.

Thinking about it like that, yeah, it does seem like a contradiction. If it’s the former then I imagine you’d have the ability to transfer into the account from an existing RRSP meaning you can withdraw for a home and not have to pay it back, like you do with the HBP. this seems to be the most likely to me. The latter would be a huge gently caress you to over 40s, who are actually the liberals primary voter base.

Grimarest
Jan 28, 2009
Effort posting after being recommended this thread, I'm looking to buy my first property.

Here's my situation:
- 31 yo professional
- 82k salary + 10-15% bonus per year
- No kid, no SO.
- Ready to do a 50-55k down payment. Still have money in RRSP, and TFSA but not more than 30k with money set aside for the buy.
- Currently renting a 800sqft loft for 1k/month without utilities in a nice location in Montreal.

I'm looking to buy a condo. Here why:
- New renters in the block are paying 1.6k/month for a similar apartment as mine (I've been renting for 3 years).
- Looking at a condo that is around 390k for a similar space/vibe, still in Montreal.
- Preapproved for 350k, meaning with the downpayment I ''should'' be able to afford it. (lmao). I've got good credit and rates are 1.8% fixed for 5 years, or 1.2% variable.
- Cost with taxes, condo fees, mortgage and utilities would be around 2k/month. I'm currently saving easily 1k per month on top of the 1k I'm paying for the rental.

I'm concerned that prices will always be increasing even if there's a downturn in the Montreal real-estate. I've been saving to make a downpayment, and seeing the quality of the available properties degrade while the prices rise is making me very anxious about not jumping in the real-estate grinder.
It feels like paying 1/2 my take home money in a living space is a lot, but I can already manage saving that much per month. Not a whole lot would be going towards my TFSA however (200$/month).

I do not feel like downgrading my rental to something smaller, and it seems that 390k might the right price to buy something for a similar quality of life of the rental I have. If I were to move, it would be hard to rent something under 1.4k/month. For that amount, that's the mortgage I'm looking at, and a part would be spent paying the principal and not giving it away to a landlord.

The condo I visited felt pretty good, and I trust my agent which has been great to my sister who bought about 4 years ago. She thinks I will never lose money on this property, even if I were to sell it in 3 years.

I need some reality check, I've heard about not spending more than 1/3 your take home money on a living space, but I don't see how this can be managed without moving out of the city, or buying a 450sqft closet.

Is this how everyone does it?

Grimarest fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Sep 19, 2021

qhat
Jul 6, 2015


First of all, you cannot compare a rent payment and mortgage payment directly and be like it's the same so why not get a mortgage. There are other costs with owning a home and especially a condo; strata fees, property taxes, depreciation costs, general property maintenance. These costs are significant and you wouldn't have to pay them if you were renting since it's all tidily wrapped up in the rent payment. Also, 55k down on a 390k property is a high loan-to-value ratio (less than 20%), so you need mortgage insurance, more money down the drain. On top of that your mortgage interest is probably going to be by far the largest chunk of your payments at least for the foreseeable future, so you shouldn't expect a lot of equity build-up in the medium term.

Secondly, interest rates are by no mean fixed for the long term; right now you can afford the mortgage at 1.8% but it's costing you 1/2 of your take home. What is that going to look like in 5 years if interest rates normalize to say 3% or higher? Are you still going to be able to afford it? If you won't be able to, what if you're actually underwater on the mortgage, how is this going to affect your finances in the worst case event that you need to sell? I know this seems unlikely given how house prices have worked in Canada for the past decade, but it's a scenario that you need to take seriously since there is no guarantee they won't fall. Even if interest rates don't rise, if you lost your job, how much runway do you have before you start falling behind on payments?

Ultimately, there's nothing wrong with getting a mortgage, but you should be sure that you can not only afford it now, but also that you'll be able to afford it five years from now, and also that you can weather a storm while continuing to make payments.

Femtosecond
Aug 2, 2003

Does writing covered calls in your TFSA/RRSP make sense?

Normally a potential downside of writing a covered call when the stock goes up to meet your strike price or beyond and your stock is sold at the strike price, you incur a capital gain that has tax implications. You may not want to incur such a taxable capital gain at this time.

If the stock is in an RRSP/TFSA then these potential tax implications are eliminated.

Now the only downside of your covered call being executed is that you potentially miss out on some gains, depending on how high above the strike price the stock is at. Not really that big of a deal IMO.

So given that you can never get dinged by accidentally, severely increasing your taxes, why not move a portion of your holdings into an equity with very high option premiums?

For example if you had enough money to buy 100 shares of SHOP, you could place a bet that the stock doesn't reach its 6 month high of ~US$1600 by mid Dec and be paid $2000 for that.

If you hosed up and incurred a capital gain on that 100 shares of SHOP because it does reach $1600, that would be uhhh a big tax event, but since it's in a TFSA/RRSP no big deal.

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009

Femtosecond posted:

Does writing covered calls in your TFSA/RRSP make sense?

Normally a potential downside of writing a covered call when the stock goes up to meet your strike price or beyond and your stock is sold at the strike price, you incur a capital gain that has tax implications. You may not want to incur such a taxable capital gain at this time.

If the stock is in an RRSP/TFSA then these potential tax implications are eliminated.

Now the only downside of your covered call being executed is that you potentially miss out on some gains, depending on how high above the strike price the stock is at. Not really that big of a deal IMO.

So given that you can never get dinged by accidentally, severely increasing your taxes, why not move a portion of your holdings into an equity with very high option premiums?

For example if you had enough money to buy 100 shares of SHOP, you could place a bet that the stock doesn't reach its 6 month high of ~US$1600 by mid Dec and be paid $2000 for that.

If you hosed up and incurred a capital gain on that 100 shares of SHOP because it does reach $1600, that would be uhhh a big tax event, but since it's in a TFSA/RRSP no big deal.

The big concern people have with speculation in a tax advantaged account is just that a) high frequency trading will flag you and b) any losses you suffer mean you've lost contribution room forever.

So a super safe covered play on options is still somewhat risky for the latter reason above. The advantages are there also, as you've detailed.

Femtosecond
Aug 2, 2003

The big obvious flaw is um, what if the stock goes down? lol. So yeah this is obviously a bullish strategy where in the grand scheme of things you think the equity is going to go up in the long time horizon and you're happy holding the stock.

Also I used SHOP as an example, but there's surely some more affordable ones out there. I'm unsure I'd want to risk 100k+ to try to make $2000.

qhat
Jul 6, 2015


Not to mention you don’t get to claim capital losses if it’s in a tax shelter.

large hands
Jan 24, 2006
What's the trigger for the CRA to decide you're using a TFSA for day trading and tax gains as income?

Femtosecond
Aug 2, 2003

I googled for this and found this..

quote:

You can buy an option or you can write (sell) an option. RRSP investors can buy or sell call options, but call options can only be sold (written) if you already own the underlying shares in your RRSP (called a covered call option).

Option writing strategies that are deemed by the CRA to be speculative could be a problem. CRA could decide that an RRSP is carrying on a “business” and earning taxable “business income.”

“The CRA’s view is that the writing of a covered call option, whereby a registered plan sells a call option in respect of an underlying property which it already owns, does not result, in and of itself, in the registered plan being considered to be carrying on a business. In contrast, the writing of an uncovered call option, or the writing of a put option … may result in the registered plan being considered to be carrying on a business.”

https://financialpost.com/personal-finance/theres-more-to-the-rrsp-than-mutual-funds-and-etfs-but-you-have-to-tread-cautiously

Femtosecond
Aug 2, 2003

Stop using your TFSA to frequently trade stocks — the CRA may see it as taxable business income
https://financialpost.com/personal-finance/stop-using-your-tfsa-to-frequently-trade-stocks-the-cra-may-see-it-as-business-income

quote:

The factors that the CRA looks at include: the frequency of the transaction; the duration of the holdings; the intention to acquire the securities for resale at a profit; the nature and quantity of the securities; and the time spent on the activity.


Some more details here

AegisP
Oct 5, 2008
The article above references it and talks about it, but the direct reference is here. It's not a clear cut line and situation-specific.

quote:

9. Some security transactions are clearly on income account and these types of transactions are discussed in 15 to 21 below. For other security transactions it will be necessary to examine the facts of the specific case in order to determine whether a transaction is on income or capital account. The tests that the Courts have applied in making such a determination are those of "course of conduct" and "intention" and these tests are discussed in 10 to 13 below. The factors to be considered when determining whether the gain or loss on the disposition of a bond, debenture, bill, note, mortgage, hypothec or similar obligation (debt obligation) is on income account or capital account are set out in IT-114, "Discounts, Premiums and Bonuses on Debt Obligations".

10. Where the whole course of conduct indicates that

(a) in security transactions the taxpayer is disposing of securities in a way capable of producing gains and with that object in view, and
(b) the transactions are of the same kind and carried on in the same way as those of a trader or dealer in securities. the proceeds of sale will normally be considered to be income from a business and, therefore, on income account.

11. Some of the factors to be considered in ascertaining whether the taxpayer's course of conduct indicates the carrying on of a business are as follows:

(a) frequency of transactions - a history of extensive buying and selling of securities or of a quick turnover of properties,
(b) period of ownership - securities are usually owned only for a short period of time,
(c) knowledge of securities markets - the taxpayer has some knowledge of or experience in the securities markets,
(d) security transactions form a part of a taxpayer's ordinary business,
(e) time spent - a substantial part of the taxpayer's time is spent studying the securities markets and investigating potential purchases,
(f) financing - security purchases are financed primarily on margin or by some other form of debt,
(g) advertising - the taxpayer has advertised or otherwise made it known that he is willing to purchase securities, and
(h) in the case of shares, their nature - normally speculative in nature or of a non-dividend type.

12. Although none of the individual factors in 11 above may be sufficient to characterize the activities of a taxpayer as a business, the combination of a number of those factors may well be sufficient for that purpose. Further, subsection 248(1) defines the term "business" to include "an adventure or concern in the nature of trade" and the courts have held that "an adventure or concern in the nature of trade" can include an isolated transaction in shares where the "course of conduct" and "intention" clearly indicate it to be such.

Lead out in cuffs
Sep 18, 2012

"That's right. We've evolved."

"I can see that. Cool mutations."




Hello thread!

So my in-laws just gifted my partner $150K. We're renting right now, but it doesn't quite make sense to use it as a downpayment on a place to live, as anything we could afford would be a downgrade from where we're living right now. But my partner's fairly keen on getting recreational property somewhere outside Vancouver. We can probably pool that money with another couple with a similar-sized parental gift and get a nice cabin somewhere on one of the Gulf Islands.

We're also not in a rush to do this -- property (especially recreational) is kinda over-priced right now with COVID and the crazy-low interest rates. But it is something we're looking at doing within the next couple of years.

Right now it's just setting in a savings account. Between us, we have enough TFSA contribution room to almost squeeze it all into a TFSA. I'm just a little hesitant to throw it into index funds, given how volatile the market is likely to be, and the fact that we're planning on withdrawing sometime in the next year or two.

So my question is where to park the money in the meantime?

VelociBacon
Dec 8, 2009

Lead out in cuffs posted:

Hello thread!

So my in-laws just gifted my partner $150K. We're renting right now, but it doesn't quite make sense to use it as a downpayment on a place to live, as anything we could afford would be a downgrade from where we're living right now. But my partner's fairly keen on getting recreational property somewhere outside Vancouver. We can probably pool that money with another couple with a similar-sized parental gift and get a nice cabin somewhere on one of the Gulf Islands.

We're also not in a rush to do this -- property (especially recreational) is kinda over-priced right now with COVID and the crazy-low interest rates. But it is something we're looking at doing within the next couple of years.

Right now it's just setting in a savings account. Between us, we have enough TFSA contribution room to almost squeeze it all into a TFSA. I'm just a little hesitant to throw it into index funds, given how volatile the market is likely to be, and the fact that we're planning on withdrawing sometime in the next year or two.

So my question is where to park the money in the meantime?

Everyone is different etc but I think buying (part of) a recreational property and then later spending even more money as the market here continues to skyrocket would really give you a retrospective migrane. I suggest looking at BC assessment website and picking a random address and looking at what places sold for and then extrapolating that forward.

If you think you'll want to use it in the next 3 years I'd put it in a bond ETF, but do you have it in a tax advantaged account at all? Was this gifted somehow in a way that lets you do that? I hope it wasn't pulled from a TFSA and given to you cash, seems like that would just mean that money is going to be taxed on it's growth in that case.

If your horizon for using that money is longer you might be best served putting it into something like XGRO/XBAL or VGRO/VBAL where it's getting 80%/60% equity exposure and 20%/40% fixed income exposure. The risk is that if the overall market drops just as you find your dream recreational property you might feel burned taking that money out as a down payment.

pokeyman
Nov 26, 2006

That elephant ate my entire platoon.
If I definitely wanted to spend it in the next year or two, I'd go GICs and/or high yield savings accounts. If I was ok with waiting a few years should the market take an inopportune dump, I'd look at mixing in some proportion of equities.

qhat
Jul 6, 2015


Keep in mind that inflation is expected to go higher in the next year, potentially higher than 5%, so keeping it in cash or very low yield investments will actually lose you significant money. Aside from the already mentioned securities, you could also stick it in an ETF that tracks the total bond market (VAB, for example). It's nowhere near as volatile as equities and you will earn roughly 2-2.5% on your money annually.

Lead out in cuffs
Sep 18, 2012

"That's right. We've evolved."

"I can see that. Cool mutations."




Thanks, this is all helpful!



And yeah, buying property in Vancouver just doesn't make sense on our income. We could maybe stretch and get something for $750k, but a) we'd expect to get hosed on the refinancing when interest rates are higher and b) the best we could get for that would be a 3BR townhouse built in the 80s.

Outrail
Jan 4, 2009

www.sapphicrobotica.com
:roboluv: :love: :roboluv:

Lead out in cuffs posted:

And yeah, buying property in Vancouver just doesn't make sense on our income. We could maybe stretch and get something for $750k, but a) we'd expect to get hosed on the refinancing when interest rates are higher and b) the best we could get for that would be a 3BR townhouse built in the 80s.

?

Lead out in cuffs
Sep 18, 2012

"That's right. We've evolved."

"I can see that. Cool mutations."





Yeah exactly. Not in any way, shape or form.

Mantle
May 15, 2004

Lead out in cuffs posted:

Yeah exactly. Not in any way, shape or form.

It makes sense if you understand that there is a moral hazard with politicians, both personally and politically, literally being invested in the housing market going up forever.

slidebite
Nov 6, 2005

Good egg
:colbert:

Those of you with Simplii financial - are you going through 2-factor authentication every single time you log in regardless if it's a computer you've used previously or not?

Jordan7hm
Feb 17, 2011




Lipstick Apathy

slidebite posted:

Those of you with Simplii financial - are you going through 2-factor authentication every single time you log in regardless if it's a computer you've used previously or not?

No

slidebite
Nov 6, 2005

Good egg
:colbert:

Huh. Which browser are you using? I use FF and it does on both of my computers.

univbee
Jun 3, 2004




I don’t know about that site specifically, but it’s possible a scriptblocker or adblocker is somehow blocking the routine that actually caches your data.

slidebite
Nov 6, 2005

Good egg
:colbert:

Well I also use unlock origin. When I get back to my PC I'll try it with edge or something.

Thanks

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

impossiboobs
Oct 2, 2006

For me, it doesn't ask for 2FA every time I log in on my PC, but on my phone it's stopped letting me open the app from e-transfer links (only the "open in web browser" button does anything) and it makes me re-authenticate every time I use my phone's browser. It's been a couple of months, but I don't get transfers often enough that I've felt it was worth it to look into it for me.

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