|
Jmcrofts posted:Can someone explain why? Is it just to minimize transaction fees or is it something else? Gains on the contribution amount over a longer period of time. It's pretty marginal, but there's no downside if you have the lump sum in cash on hand.
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
Things Change. Some Say This Is Good, Others Say This Is Bad. Let's go to Radbot for a scorching hot taek.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
I think you can set up a 529 - just name yourself as beneficiary then switch it to the kid after you have
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:Is Ally still the go-to place to stash savings, or is there a better online bank earning ~1% interest? Ally is still good as far as I know. There's also CapitalOne360, which is the old ING Direct, which is good too.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
529, maybe, if you are considering having children.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
I work at a small shop and we are 50% match up to $18k with decent Fidelity options.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
I tricked it by doing a percentage of a set dollar amount.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
I like holding some international exposure but why are you in a 1.28% ER int'l fund when you have a nice index at 0.1% that only has a short term trading penalty? You're going to buy and hold anyway. Vanguard mid-cap index Vanguard small-cap index Vanguard large-cap index SPTN int'l index (low alloc) Vanguard bonds (lowest alloc if you really, really like bonds - you're still pretty young, not more than 10-12%)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Teeter posted:Alright, after reading through the links in the OP I learned a good bit about the three-fund lazy portfolio and the core four, then ultimately decided on approximating a Vanguard target fund using my options. I would back off your int'l exposure since hey you live in the US and you don't need that much of a hedge, maybe 25%? You should be able to evaluate the international index fund by determining what indices it tracks. Once you know, you can figure out how much to dump in it. I would prefer to have my money somewhat exposed outside of the Eurozone on the international side of things and a lot of "international" funds are eurocentric / hot developing country of the day centric. The large caps are pretty risk averse and you can tolerate more risk so I would balance a bit more to small/midcap stuff. Market cap is inversely correlated to risk/reward in theory. Your large caps get you some international exposure due to their multinational nature so that can account for some spreading of risk outside the US.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
Jahoodie posted:I'd really like to know this too, there has to be a reason for the random grab bags. Someone is getting incentive to do that, but I couldn't fathom why. I think there are a couple of potentially simple factors that could drive it: 1. Someone hears about Fund X and wants it included in plan. It's cheap/free to do so, so it gets thrown in. 2. The 401k management company has good incentives to include funds (target of certain $ under management in the fund) so they throw in a bunch of freebies in addition to the things that people actually want. 3. The 401k committee that makes decisions are idiots.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:If You Can is a great starter but I still feel people should read the Four Pillars pretty early on. It covers a lot of things that explain why index investing is good while If You Can basically just says "save 15%." I know Twitter has made us dumber but surely we're not all so dumb now that we can't read one book. is she illiterate 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Do you have kids that plan to go to college potentially? 529s are tax advantaged. Other than that, nothing wrong with a little taxable brokerage account. Edit: HSA or whatnot, I don't really understand 'em but people do that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Moneyball posted:I kind of want to invest $10 and see what happens. Maybe I'll get a class action lawsuit out of it and get $3 back! Usually a hedge fund has a sizable minimum investment but with this guy who the gently caress knows. It sounds like from the Bloomberg article that the maximum possible minimum could be as low as $100,000, which is hilariously low. You might be able to get in at an even lower amount. Please try and report back.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
If you're in the US I think your international exposure is fine. Keep in mind that many of the companies in your total stock market index have international exposure. I am more like 13-17% fixed (have one blended investment option), 20% true international, rest in US equities biased to small cap at age 29.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
more funds isnt better and your ERs are pretty tolerable even with your admin fees
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
turbohumblebrag: I've moved out of the Roth eligible income bracket and really can't be bothered to backdoor so that may also be a consideration for you if you plan to make more money at your white collar job. I wish I pushed a bit more money in to the Roth when I was eligible.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Rurutia posted:Backdoor is a huge pain in the rear end to set up if you have actual trad ira savings. exactly
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2016 12:53
|
|
|
Short term capital gains are taxed as ordinary income, so the effective tax rate is between 10-39.6% (depends on how much money you make, etc). Long term capital gains are taxed at varying rates, but yours are likely 0% or 15%. If you make up to $37,000, your tax rate for holding a year goes from 15% to 0% on sale of stock. If you make between $37,000 and $91,000, your effective tax rate goes from 25% to 15% on sale of stock. Dollar changes in value are pointless without knowing percentage changes. Is dropping $10 25%? Is it 5%?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
If you hold for a year your gains are: Initial discount + tax discount +/- gains or losses from initial purchase price If you sell immediately / in the short term your gains are: Initial discount +/- gains or losses from initial purchase price + gains from alternative investments in which you place your money (opportunity cost) If you strongly believe that the stock will lose more than your tax discount minus the opportunity cost over the year you will hold the stock, you should sell it immediately. Otherwise, with a fairly stable stock, I'd be inclined to hold. Does the stock pay dividends?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
are you saving the $300/mo in ally for your mom? I would put it in some kind of equity/bond mix (Vanguard Target 2025?) if you have a 10 year horizon Will she receive SS?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:That reminds me to ask about my 401k. I just use the target retirement date with T. Rowe Price, since my S&P 500 index option comes with this weird disclaimer: That disclaimer doesn't raise any red flags to me.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
obi_ant posted:Greetings y'all. Have you maxed out your tax advantaged space?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
I'm generally pessimistic about the continued viability of defined benefit plans.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
Government pensions are in no way safe from termination.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
Animal, not sure your rationalization for Roth v trad makes sense. Your income after retirement is likely to be low, and your trad IRA withdrawals are taxed as ordinary income when you make withdrawals. However, you will move into a high enough income bracket such that you are not allowed to directly contribute to a Roth. I would contribute to a Roth as long as possible as a hedge against tax policy changes, but it's unlikely that based on current tax policy that it's actually an optimal strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
Animal posted:So you think I should roll the old 401k into a traditional IRA and not bother with Roth? No, no - I think it's fine to stay Roth for tax hedging purposes. You'll have to move to trad at some point anyway (if you don't backdoor) so I think it's fine to just move to trad when your income increases above the Roth limits. I just want you to be aware of how the tax implications actually work - it's not quite as you described. Edit: yeah emergency fund soon
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:None of those funds have expense ratios listed. You listed the historical performance indicators. Also used spoiler tags for some reason. should pick some of the ones with negative ERs! 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
ER is expense ratio. It's a fee you pay expressed as a percentage of your total holdings in a given fund. Lower is better, as you pay the fee regardless of returns. FUSVX has an expense ratio of 0.045%. This is extremely low, so you will pay very little to hold the fund on an annual basis - anything under 0.1% is quite low.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Depends on your pension terms, I'd say.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
529, HSA or taxable.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:I'm all in domestic large cap stocks but i'm in it for the long haul and my funds have crazy low expense ratios. I think my portfolio is 100% S&P 500. Is this ok? I'm not planning on retiring or touching any of this money for, oh gosh, 35 years? I can ride some crashes and I'm certainly not going to reallocate if prices go down. You get some international exposure via the S&P since there are a lot of big multinationals, but I would allocate something to international stocks. Not sure pure large cap is the way to go either over the long haul if you have risk tolerance.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
Flooger posted:Total idiot here. Your money is always yours. Your employer contributions vest. That means that of the employer contribution amount, your wife actually owns 60%. Normally, employer contributions vest over time, to incentivize you to stay at the company. Since she is no longer working at the company, the amount vested will not increase, so regardless of what you choose to do with it, you'll get 100% of the employee contribution, 100% of the RSP, and 60% of the employer contribution. You should always roll in to an IRA, which gives you the greatest amount of control over fund selection.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
asur posted:Ralith gave one good reason. Another is that having a Traditional IRA would prevent you from backdooring a Roth IRA. Fair enough but both of these are edge cases.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Richard Noggin posted:I have ~$7k in a simple IRA from a previous employer. I now have a 457 thanks to my government job. I'd like to roll the $7k into the 457, but am unsure how it all fits together. At first glance, it appears that the $7k has to be kept in a separate account and I can only do it after two years (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rollover_chart.pdf). I have some questions regarding the process and the best way to do so. What is the benefit from (trying to) roll in to your 457?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Usually you roll in to a trad / Roth IRA rather than an employer-sponsored program.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Anyone got any feedback on the CreditKarma tax thing? I put my name on the list but am wondering if I should just go ahead and file TurboTax like I have in the past. Thoughts and experiences so far for those who have made it?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
smackfu posted:How would anyone notice if you contribute to a Roth IRA but are over the income limit? It's not part of your tax return or anything. Form 5498 is filed by your IRA trustee/issuer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
The "Equity" fund is a mix of stocks and bonds. I think based on a cursory google of your MFS fund that it's about 60% stocks and 40% bonds, putting you at ~27% bonds. That seems bond-heavy to me, and I think you're a little international heavy considering most US large cap companies have heavy international exposure. Market cap is the size of the company. Small blend to mid cap blend basically means that you're going from investing in a very long list of small companies to a similarly long list of midsized companies. Post your ERs, everything is basically meaningless without. Generally reallocating in to similar funds with lower ERs is a no-brainer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
That seems reasonable to me for now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2017 13:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 20:19 |
|
|
poe meater posted:Hmm, I read a few articles that it was pretty close to a wash. I went through the full motley fool articles and still a bit puzzled. When would someone do traditional then? Once you hit $117,000 in earned income (single), the amount you can contribute to a Roth IRA gradually decreases until you hit $132,000 earned income, at which point you cannot contribute any money to a Roth IRA, unless it's via backdoor. You are eligible for the full deduction but I don't think that it's worth it - you can run the numbers, though. It's basically calculating the rate of return on $5,500 post tax dollars versus $5,500 pre tax dollars, which then lines up against your tax deduction.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:55
|
|