Datasets:

pavanmantha

/

fiqa

like 0

What are the contents of fixed annuities?

['"An annuity is a contract. Its contents are ""a contractual obligation from the issuing company"". If you want to evaluate how your annuity is likely to fare, you\'re essentially asking whether or not its issuer will honor its contract. They\'re legally required to honor the contract, unless they go bankrupt. (Even if they do go bankrupt, you will be a creditor and may get a portion of the assets recovered by the bankruptcy process.) Generally, the issuer will take the proceeds and invest them in the stock market (or possibly in similar instruments - e.g. Berkshire-Hathaway bought a railroad and invests some money in it directly). They invest in these places because that\'s where the returns are. One of the reason that annuities may have a good rate on paper is that they may end up taking some of your principal, because many are structured as some form of survivor\'s insurance policy. Consider: If you\'re 65 years old and have some retirement savings, you\'d like to be able to spend them without fear of them running out because you live longer than you expected (e.g. you survive to your 90s). So, you could invest in the stock market and hope for a 7% return indefinitely and then plan to spend the returns - but if those returns don\'t materialize for a few years because there\'s a big stock market crash, you\'re in big trouble! Or, you could buy an annuity contract which will pay you 7% a year (or more!) until you die. Then you\'re guaranteed the returns unless the issuer goes bankrupt. (Sure, you lose all your principal, but you\'re dead, so hey, maybe you don\'t care.) The insurance company essentially sells risk-tolerance. Other annuities aren\'t structured like this, and may be marketed towards non-retirees. They\'re usually not such a good deal. If they appear to be such a good deal, it may be an illusion. (Variable annuities in particular are hard to reason about without a good deal of knowledge about how the stock market behaves on a year-to-year basis: many of them have a maximum return as well as a minimum, and the stock market may pile up a lot of its returns into one year, so after a ""crash and recovery"" cycle you might end up behind the market instead of ahead.) Annuities are a form of safety. Safety can be very expensive. If you\'re investing your own money, consider whether you need that safety. You probably needn\'t worry quite so much about the issuer being crazy-fraudulent or Ponzi-esque: you should worry mostly about whether it looks better on paper than it is."', '"This is really two questions about yield and contents. Content As others have noted, an annuity is a contractual obligation, not a portfolio contained within an investment product per se. The primary difference between whether an annuity is fixed or variable is what the issuer is guaranteeing and how much risk/reward you are sharing in. Generally speaking, the holdings of an issuer are influenced by the average ""duration"" of the payments. However, you can ascertain the assets that ""back"" that promise by looking at, for example, the holdings of a large insurance or securities firm. That is why issuers are generally rated as to their financial strength and ability to meet their obligations. A number of the market failures you mentioned were in part caused by the failure of these ratings to represent the true financial strength of the firm. Yield As to the second question of how they can offer a competitive rate, there are at least several reasons (I am assuming an immediate annuity) : 1) Return/Depletion of Principal The 7% you are being quoted is the percent of your principal that will be returned to you each year, not the rate of return being earned by the issuer. If you invest $100 in the market personally and get a 5% return, you have $105. However, the annuity\'s issuer is also returning part of your principal to you each year in your payment, as they don\'t return your principal when you eventually die. Because of this, they can offer you more each year than they really make in the market. What makes a Ponzi scheme different is that they are also paying out your principal (usually to others), but lie to you by telling you it\'s still in your account. :) 2) The Time Value of Money A promise to pay you $500 tomorrow costs less than $500 today A fixed annuity promises to pay you a certain amount of money each year. This can be represented as a rate of return calculated based on how much you have to pay to get that annual payment, but it is important to remember that the first payment will be worth substantially more in real purchasing power than the last payment you get. The longer you live, the less your fixed payment is worth in real terms due to inflation! In short, the rate of return has to be discounted for inflation, it is not a ""real"" rate of return. In other words, if you give me $500 today and I promise to pay you $100 for the next 5 years, I am making money not only because I can invest the money between now and then, but also because $100 will be worth less five years from now than it is today. With annuities, if you want your payment to rise in step with inflation, you have to pay more for that (a LOT more!). These are the two main reasons - here are a few smaller ones: 3) A very long Time Horizon If the stock market or another asset class is performing well/poorly, the issuer can often afford to wait much longer to buy or sell than an individual, and can take better advantage of historical highs and lows over the long term. 4) ""Big Boy"" investing A large, financially sound issuer can afford to take risks that an individual cannot, such as in very large or illiquid assets, such as a private company (a la Warren Buffet). 5) Efficiencies of scale Institutional investors have a number of legal advantages over individuals, which I won\'t discuss in detail here. However, they exist. Large issuers are also often in related business (insurance, mutual funds) such that they can deal in large volumes and form an internal clearinghouse (i.e. if I want to buy Facebook and you want to sell it, they can just move the stock around without doing any trading), with the result that their costs of trading are lower than those of an individual. Hope that helps!"', "For a variable annuity, you need to know the underlying investments and how your returns are credited to your account. For a fixed annuity, the issuer is responsible for the commitment to provide the promised rate to you. In a sense, how they invest isn't really your concern. You should be concerned about the overall health of the company, but in general, insurance companies tend to know their business when they stick to their strengths: writing insurance on groups and producing annuity contracts. I don't care for VAs or the fixed annuities you asked about, but I don't believe they resemble a ponzi scheme, either."]

How to determine whether 1099-MISC income is from self-employment?

['"These kinds of questions can be rather tricky. I\'ve struggled with this sort of thing in the past when I had income from a hobby, and I wanted to ensure that it was indeed ""hobby income"" and I didn\'t need to call it ""self-employment"". Here are a few resources from the IRS: There\'s a lot of overlap among these resources, of course. Here\'s the relevant portion of Publication 535, which I think is reasonable guidance on how the IRS looks at things: In determining whether you are carrying on an activity for profit, several factors are taken into account. No one factor alone is decisive. Among the factors to consider are whether: Most of the guidance looks to be centered around what one would need to do to convince the IRS that an activity actually is a business, because then one can deduct the ""business expenses"", even if that brings the total ""business income"" negative (and I\'m guessing that\'s a fraud problem the IRS needs to deal with more often). There\'s not nearly as much about how to convince the IRS that an activity isn\'t a business and thus can be thrown into ""Other Income"" instead of needing to pay self-employment tax. Presumably the same principles should apply going either way, though. If after reading through the information they provide, you decide in good faith that your activity is really just ""Other income"" and not ""a business you\'re in on the side"", I would find it likely that the IRS would agree with you if they ever questioned you on it and you provided your reasoning, assuming your reasoning is reasonable. (Though it\'s always possible that reasonable people could end up disagreeing on some things even given the same set of facts.) Just keep good records about what you did and why, and don\'t get too panicked about it once you\'ve done your due diligence. Just file based on all the information you know."']

Why do 10 year-old luxury cars lose so much value?

['"They are overpriced to begin with. One reason is the fact that they are luxury cars. A second, related reason, is that they tend to push the technology envelope. All cars depreciate drastically the minute they are driven off the lot. This a good argument for buying a car that is 1-2 years old. The higher you are, the more you can fall. Repairs and maintenance are typically still expensive on these cars, due to relative rarity and the lack of necessary expertise. Here is where that advanced technology bites you. This is a reason that a 5 year old Civic may be worth more than than a 10 year old Benz. It may simply not be worth the hassle of maintaining/repairing a luxury car. This is especially true for an aging luxury car. There are some people that only buy domestic, precisely because of the maintenance costs. Also, a 10 year old car is still a 10 year old car, regardless of the make. (There are a few notable exceptions, like the NSX.) Hondas and Toyotas have a great reputation for reliability and (long-term) total cost of ownership. ""Better"" is a subjective issue, that depends on a variety of variables. A Civic is certainly not better in terms of technology, comfort, etc. But, it is likely better in terms of maintenance, reliability, etc. Which ""better"" you focus on, is up to you."', "Few people actually buy BMW's. Most are leased, because if you're the type of person who wants to drive a BMW, you're going want a new one regularly. Here's the lifecycle of a BMW or other luxury car: By the time you hit ten years, you have a rapidly depreciating asset because the average Joe doesn't really want an old BMW and hassles that come with it or any luxury car. That said, there are great bargains in this space. I used to buy 5-6 year old Cadillacs when they weren't cool for like $7-9k, and resell them a year later for about $1,500 less that I bought them for. (lower TCO than a Civic) You need to have patience though, because maintenance is always an expensive pain in the rear with luxury cars.", "+1 They are over priced to begin with - More specifically they are expensive to create exclusivity, which raises their value to people who value that kind of thing. Perhaps folks who buy those cars aren't buying them for value or quality or performance, but are buying them for the badge and the intangible factors. I frequently hear about rich people who earned their millions driving around in cars Consumer Reports rank highly, so it isn't because they are so much better than a mid priced car. A car for $140,000 is either equipped for the A-Team or is a status symbol. The status symbol notion is very expensive, but fades very quickly, hence the mighty depreciation.", "There is usually a bunch of reasons for this, some psychological and some entirely practical. Let's start with the latter: If I wanted an older luxobarge, I'd buy something from the early to mid 1990s in good condition. These cars tend to be a little less complex and thus a little easier to repair, plus you can find them for prices that makes them to 'disposable'.", '"I think this can be answered by answering the question ""Who buys 10 year old cars?"". Generally speaking those buyers are very price conscious. They are looking to save money on transportation rather than following the herd of people participating in the car payments merry-go-round. The cost of parts, repairs, and gasoline for those cars do not go down over time. Remember that many of those cars require the use of premium gasoline. This drastically reduces demand for those vehicles, thus lowers the price. Luckily I have a really good and reasonable mechanic near me, and I can float repairs and the higher gas. I love driving my 1999 Mercedes and it is one of the least expensive cars that I have owned while also being one of the most comfortable."', "Personally, I buy newer luxury cars for two reasons. 1) Status symbol Newer cars have the latest looks, performance, and features like heated side mirrors and sensors that adjust cruse control speed when in heavy traffic etc. 2) Older cars have more wear and tear. No one has spent any significant amount of time in the car before and therefore you know the history of what the car has been through, like buying a new pair of pants. You know that no one has pissed in them ;). After I have pissed in and tore up my now older luxury car, I sell it off and get a new one. Cars wear out and as they get older, they need parts replaced. My brother's Mazda, for example, just blew the head gasket after buying the car new and driving 130k miles over a four year period. Part of the luxury for owning a new car is the luxury of time, not having your car spend any significant amount of time in a garage being worked on, unless you buy a Land Rover of course ;).", "The answer is very simple. Part of the luxury is having the cutting edge technology with the very latest features. The price premium is not just from increased build quality; it's simply a perception. Additionally, 10 years takes its toll on a car. The smooth suspension gets rougher over time, and all the little features start to break down. Part of the price of that car factors in the expense of expected repairs. That's true of every car, but the repairs are more expensive when there are lots of gadgets to break down, especially on imports.", 'They start at a higher price and repairs are more expensive than with a standard car. From my experience, many luxury cars get too expensive to keep after about 10 years due to increased maintenance costs.', "I believe one of the main reasons cars -- luxury or otherwise -- depreciate so quickly is that many auto accidents can cause serious engine/frame damage but are easily cosmetically repaired. If you smash up the car but get the body fixed, and you don't go through insurance, it will be indistinguishable from the same car that hasn't been in a crash."]

Automatic Extension online filing request gets denied w/ code R0000-052-01 - why?

["There are penalties for failure to file and penalties for failure to pay tax. The penalties for both are based on the amount of tax due. So you would owe % penalties of zero, otherwise meaning no penalties at all. The IRS on late 1040 penalties: Here are eight important points about penalties for filing or paying late. A failure-to-file penalty may apply if you did not file by the tax filing deadline. A failure-to-pay penalty may apply if you did not pay all of the taxes you owe by the tax filing deadline. The failure-to-file penalty is generally more than the failure-to-pay penalty. You should file your tax return on time each year, even if you’re not able to pay all the taxes you owe by the due date. You can reduce additional interest and penalties by paying as much as you can with your tax return. You should explore other payment options such as getting a loan or making an installment agreement to make payments. The IRS will work with you. The penalty for filing late is normally 5 percent of the unpaid taxes for each month or part of a month that a tax return is late. That penalty starts accruing the day after the tax filing due date and will not exceed 25 percent of your unpaid taxes. If you do not pay your taxes by the tax deadline, you normally will face a failure-to-pay penalty of ½ of 1 percent of your unpaid taxes. That penalty applies for each month or part of a month after the due date and starts accruing the day after the tax-filing due date. If you timely requested an extension of time to file your individual income tax return and paid at least 90 percent of the taxes you owe with your request, you may not face a failure-to-pay penalty. However, you must pay any remaining balance by the extended due date. If both the 5 percent failure-to-file penalty and the ½ percent failure-to-pay penalties apply in any month, the maximum penalty that you’ll pay for both is 5 percent. If you file your return more than 60 days after the due date or extended due date, the minimum penalty is the smaller of $135 or 100 percent of the unpaid tax. You will not have to pay a late-filing or late-payment penalty if you can show reasonable cause for not filing or paying on time. If the IRS owes you a refund, April 15 isn't much of a deadline. I suppose the real deadline is April 15, three years later - that's when the IRS keeps your refund and it becomes property of the Treasury. Of course, there's little reason to wait that long. Don't let the Treasury get all your interest."]

How to handle missing W2 from failed direct deposit only company?

["Yes, there's a way. I actually wrote a blog post about it. Its a new service from the IRS which allows you pulling your account online. IRS also has an instruction page just for this case here."]

When a publicly traded company splits into two how are common shares fairly valued, distributed?

["How are shareholders sure to receive a fair percentage of each company? At the time the split occurs, each investor owns the same proportion of each new company that they owned in the first. What the investor does with it after that (selling one, for example) is irrelevant from a fairness perspective. Suppose company A splits into companies B and C. You own enough stock to have 1% of A. It splits. Now you have a bunch of shares of B and C. How much? Well, you have 1% of B and 1% of C. What if all the profitable projects are in B? Then shares of B will be worth more than those of C. But it should be the case that the value of your shares of B plus the value of your shares of C are equal to the original value of your shares of A. Completely fair. In fact, if the split was economically justified, then B + C > A. And the gains are realized proportionally by all equityholders. Remember, when a stock splits, every share splits so that everyone owns both companies in the same proportion as everyone else. Executives don't determine what the prices of the resulting companies are...that is determined by the market. A fair market will value the child companies such that together they are worth what the original was."]

VAT and duties payable when importing personal goods from Switzerland and the Channel Islands to the EU?

['"http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/customs/tax-and-duty.htm#3 explains the Import VAT situation quite well. As for who enforces and collects it, if you\'re talking about buying online and having it shipped to you then you\'ll notice on the parcel a Customs sticker declaring the contents and value. It is the responsibility of the courier company to collect any duty due from you and pass it on to HMRC. In practice what this means is that you receive a card or note from the courier saying ""we\'re impounding your package until you pay the import duty"" and they usually charge a fee on top of the duty itself. Of course you can always go out there yourself and bring something back, but then it is your responsibility to declare it at the customs checkpoint when you enter the country."']

When is the right time to buy a car and/or a house?

["Buy a house when you can, but keep driving your current car until it dies. In ten years' time, a house should be worth more than you paid for it, while a new car will be worth next to nothing. And research shows that buying possessions like cars doesn't actually make you happier, even though you think it will.", '"Buying a house is often more emotional than financial. Which makes that kind of advice tough to offer. Staying with the finance side - You wrote ""2 bedrooms is enough for me."" Is it enough for your girlfriend/fiancee? Is she on the same schedule for kids as you are? 2 bedrooms means that with just one child you are less able to host a guest and the second child will need to share the bedroom. Nothing wrong with that, just making sure you are aware of these things. If the long term plan is to move to a new house, a ten year horizon for the second house sounds good to me. I\'ll make one brief comment on rent vs buy - it\'s easy to buy too big and discover you are paying for rooms you don\'t use. I have a house I\'ll be glad to get rid of when our daughter goes off to college. A dining room and formal living room go unused save for 3 or 4 days a year. It already sounds like you\'ll avoid this mistake. Your question - the right time - when you are ready, with the downpayment, income, and desire to do so. You should at least have a feeling you plan to stay there for a time, else the cost of buying/selling would exceed any potential gain."', "Obviously, the best thing financially would be to continue using your present car, unless it impacts you financially on a regular basis. For example, maintenance or breakdowns impacting your ability to work. An unreliable car also impacts your freedom, for example preventing you from taking road-trips you might want to take or taking up free time with maintenance. Give thought to what it is about your present car that you dislike, both to determine the value you gain from a new car and what's most important to you. Anytime you buy a car, you generally lose thousands of dollars simply driving it off the lot. This is the profit which goes to dealers, salespeople, etc... and not part of the actual value of the car. Cars also depreciate over time, with most of the depreciation happening in the first few years of operation. Many of the newer model cars have additional expenses. (For example, replacement $200 keys or electronic systems that can only be repaired at special facilities.) In addition, if you have insurance (other than the minimum third-party required by law), consider the rate increases and add up the long-term impact of that. Imagine you had invested that money instead at 8% interest over the lifetime of the car. If you don't have insurance, consider what you would do in the unfortunate situation where you were at fault in a collision. Could you afford to lose your investment? Even with safe responsible driving, there is always the potential for road/weather conditions or mechanical failures. If you determine there is sufficient value to be gained from changing vehicles, I would recommend that you buy a vehicle with history from someone privately, doing appropriate background checks and consulting friends or family who know about vehicles and can provide feedback. Do research into the models which interest you ahead of time, read online reviews. Every vehicle generally has known advantages and disadvantages which can take years to discover, so buying an older vehicle gives you the advantage of knowing what to expect. I would say there is probably a reasonable middle ground between using a 1991 vehicle you don't like (that's as old as you are) and getting a relatively new model. Look at what you value in the vehicle, consider all the costs, and find the balance that works best for you. Vehicles from 2000-2005 years are quite affordable and still 10-15 years newer than your car.", '"My recommendation is to pay off your student loans as quickly as possible. It sounds like you\'re already doing this but don\'t incur any other large debts until you have this taken care of. I\'d also recommend not buying a car, especially an expensive one, on credit or lease either. Back during the dotcom boom I and many friends bought or leased expensive cars only to lose them or struggle paying for them when the bottom dropped out. A car instantly depreciates and it\'s quite rare for them to ever gain value again. Stick with reliable, older, used cars that you can purchase for cash. If you do borrow for a car, shop around for the best deal and avoid 3+ year terms if at all possible. Don\'t lease unless you have a business structure where this might create a clear financial advantage. Avoid credit cards as much as possible although if you do plan to buy a house with a mortgage you\'ll need to maintain some credit history. If you have the discipline to keep your balance small and paid down you can use a credit card to build credit history. However, these things can quickly get out of hand and you\'ll wonder why you suddenly owe $10K, $20K or even more on them so be very careful with them. As for the house (speaking of US markets here), save up for at least a 20% down payment if you can. Based on what you said, this would be about $20-25K. This will give you a lot more flexibility to take advantage of deals that might come your way, even if you don\'t put it all into the house. ""Stretching"" to buy a house that\'s too expensive can quickly lead to financial ruin. As for house size, I recommend purchasing a 4 bedroom house even if you aren\'t planning on kids right away. It will resell better and you\'ll appreciate having the extra space for storage, home office, hobbies, etc. Also, life has a way of changing your plans for having kids and such."']

When to register for a bank account for a C-Corp with no official money

["Technically, it's only when you need to pass money through. However consider that the length the account has been open builds history with the financial institution, so I'd open ASAP. Longer history with the bank can help with getting approved for things like business credit lines, business cards, and other perks, though if you're not making money with that business, seek out a bank that does not charge money to have a business account open with them."]

S-Corp partnership startup. How to pay owners with minimal profit?

['"If you\'re really interested in the long-term success of your business, and you can get by in your personal finances without taking anything from the business for the time being, then don\'t. There is no ""legal requirement"" to pay yourself a prevailing wage if doing so would put the company out of business. it is common for a company\'s principals not to draw wages from the business until it is viable enough to sustain payroll. I was in that situation when I first began my business, so the notion that somehow I\'m violating a law by being fiscally responsible for my own company is nonsense. Be wise with your new business. You didn\'t state why you feel the need to take some kind of payment out, but this can be a crucial mistake if it imperils your business or if that money could be better spent on marketing or some other areas which improve revenues. You can always create a salary deferral agreement between yourself and your own company which basically states that the company owes you wages but you are, for the time being, willing to defer accepting them until such time that the company has sufficient revenues to pay you. That\'s one solution, but the simplest answer is, if you don\'t need the money you\'re thinking of paying yourself, don\'t do it. Let that money work for you in the business so that it pays off better in the long run. Good luck!"', "We don't make enough to really consider it a salary, but I've heard using a draw without a salary is a bad idea. As any other illegal action, not paying yourself a reasonable salary when being a corporate officer is indeed a bad idea. I have no idea what I need to do to actually get some money in our pockets. The answer is simple. You need to earn more money. Since it is S-Corp, it doesn't matter if you keep the profits on the corporate account or distribute - the profits will be taxed to you. You are also, as I said above, required by law to pay yourself a reasonable salary. Reasonable meaning corresponding to market rates. Paying a CPA or a Software Engineer a minimum wage will not be reasonable. That is, of course, if you're profitable, you're not required to pay yourself more money than the corporation actually has. Just to be clear, my answer refers to the question asked, and the confusing answer above that made a claim that has no substantiation in the law. I do not intend to write a thesis about pros and cons of using S-Corp every time a question about reasonable salary is asked.", 'S-Corp income is passed through to owners and is taxed on their 1040 as ordinary income. If you take a wage (pay FICA) and then take additional distributions these are not subject to FICA. A lot of business owners will buy up supplies/ necessary expenses right before the end of the tax year to lower their tax liability.']

When are payroll taxes due in the US?

["It depends on the size of the payroll, not on the number of employees. Probably you need to file Form 941 quarterly under this scenario. You may or may not need to deposit taxes more frequently. If you must deposit, then you need to do it electronically. I excerpted this from the instructions for Form 941: If your total taxes (line 10) are less than $2,500 for the current quarter or the preceding quarter, and you did not incur a $100,000 next-day deposit obligation during the current quarter. You do not have to make a deposit. To avoid a penalty, you must pay the amount in full with a timely filed return or you must deposit the amount timely. ... If you are not sure your total tax liability for the current quarter will be less than $2,500 (and your liability for the preceding quarter was not less than $2,500), make deposits using the semiweekly or monthly rules so you won't be subject to failure to deposit penalties. If your total taxes (line 10) are $2,500 or more for the current quarter and the preceding quarter. You must make deposits according to your deposit schedule. See section 11 of Pub. 15 (Circular E) for information and rules about federal tax deposits. I would say that probably for two employees, you need to deposit by the 15th of each month for the prior month, but you really need to check the limits above and the deposit schedule in Pub 15 (as referenced above) based on your actual payroll size. Note that if you have a requirement to deposit, that must be done either through EFTPS or by wire-transfer. The former is free but requires registration in advance of your first payment (they snail-mail you a PIN that you need to log-in) and it requires that you get your payment in by the night before. The latter does not incur a charge from the IRS, but your bank will likely charge you a fee. You can do the wire-transfer on the due date, however, so it's handy if don't get into ETFPS in time. This is all for federal. You may also need to deposit for your state, and then you'll need to check the state's rules."]

Risks associated with investing in dividend paying stocks for short term income. Alternatives?

['Your back of the envelope calculation shows an income of about 5.5% per year, which is much better than a bank. The risk of course is that in a few years when you want to sell the stock, the price may not be at the level you want. The question is what are you giving up with this plan. You have 80K in cash, will cutting it to 30K in cash make it harder for your business to survive? If your income from the business starts slowly, having that 50K in cash may be better. Selling the stock when the business is desperate for money may lock in losses.', "I wouldn't focus too much on dividends itself; at the end of the day what matters is total gain, because you can convert capital gain into income by selling your assets (they have different tax implications, but generally capital gains tend to be more tax efficient). I think the more important question is how much volatility you can tolerate. Since your investment horizon is short & your risk tolerance is low (as in if you suddenly get much lower income than you planned from your investment you'll be in trouble), you probably want assets that have low volatility. To achieve that, I'd consider the following if I were you: tl;dr If I were you I'd just hold a general investment portfolio with a lower risk profile rather than focusing on dividend generating assets.", 'Usually when a company is performing well both its share price and its dividends will increase over the medium to long term. Similarly, if the company is performing badly both the share price and dividends will fall over time. If you want to invest in higher dividend stocks over the medium term, you should look for companies that are performing well fundamentally and technically. Choose companies that are increasing earnings and dividends year after year and with earnings per share greater than dividends per share. Choose companies with share prices increasing over time (uptrending). Then once you have purchased your portfolio of high dividend stocks place a trailing stop loss on them. For a timeframe of 1 to 3 years I would choose a trailing stop loss of 20%. This means that if the share price continues going up you keep benefiting from the dividends and increasing share price, but if the share price drops by 20% below the recent high, then you get automatically taken out of that stock, leaving your emotions out of it. This will ensure your capital is protected over your investment timeframe and that you will profit from both capital growth and rising dividends from your portfolio.']

Can I negotiate a credit card settlement by stopping payments?

['"This would be on your credit for ~8 years. If it goes according to your plan, it will take 6 months to a year to do the settlement by getting behind enough to let it go to collections and then settling. The write-off will then be on your credit record for 7 years before it ""falls off"". Your cash out refinance would have to cover you for at least the next 8 years to be valuable. And you have a lot of assumptions to get there: In short, there\'s one way (or only a few ways) this works out well in your favor. There are many ways that this has the chance to hurt you. I don\'t like ""investments"" with those kind of odds."', '"At no point is it ever a good idea to ""stop making payments to show them [you] mean business"". When you signed up for the credit card account, you agreed to pay what you charged, and any applicable interested accrued on the accounts. You are legally responsible for that debt, and you can be sued, if they are so inclined. Many times, settlement agencies are employed because a risk assessment operator (or whatever they\'re called at your cc company) calculated that they are currently financially better off settling for a reduced balance than attempting to chase you for the full amount. As soon as the terms of your refinance hits your credit history, that changes. To reiterate and make it clear: This is a very dangerous approach to breaking credit card debt, and I would not advise that anybody proceed with it. EDIT: If you offer 50% of the balance in a lump sum payment, they decline, and you continue with non-payment, they have reason to believe that you are financially capable of making payments, and are much more likely to seek legal action."', "This strategy will have long lasting effects since negative items can persist for many years, making financing a home difficult, the primary source of household credit. It is also very risky. You can play hard, but then the creditor may choose you to be the one that they make an example out of by suing you for a judgement that allows them to empty your accounts and garnish your wages. If you have no record of late payments, or they are old and/or few, your credit score will quickly shoot up if you pay down to 10% of the balance, keep the cards, and maintain that balance rate. This strategy will have them begging you to take on more credit with offers of lower interest rates. The less credit you take on, the more they'll throw at you, and when it comes time to purchase a home, more home can be bought because your interest rates will be lower."]

Assessing risk, and Identifying scams in Alternative Investments

['"I have personally invested $5,000 in a YieldStreet offering (a loan being used by a company looking to expand a ridesharing fleet), and would certainly recommend taking a closer look if they fit your investment goals and risk profile. (Here\'s a more detailed review I wrote on my website.) YieldStreet is among a growing crop of companies launched as a result of legislative and regulatory changes that began with the JOBS Act in 2012 (that\'s a summary from my website that I wrote after my own efforts to parse the new rules) but didn\'t fully go into effect until last year. Most of them are in Real Estate or Angel/Venture, so YieldStreet is clearly looking to carve out a niche by assembling a rather diverse collection of offerings (including Real Estate, but also other many other categories). Unlike angel/venture platforms (and more like the Real Estate platforms), YieldStreet only offers secured (asset-backed) investments, so in theory there\'s less risk of loss of principal (though in practice, these platforms haven\'t been through a serious stress test). So far I\'ve stuck with relatively short-term investments on the debt crowdfunding platforms (including YieldStreet), and at least for the one I chose, it includes monthly payments of both principal and interest, so you\'re ""taking money off the table"" right away (though presumably then are faced with how to redeploy, which is another matter altogether!) My advice is to start small while you acclimate to the various platforms and investment options. I know I was overwhelmed when I first decided to try one out, and the way I got over that was to decide on the maximum I was willing to lose entirely, and then focus on finding the first opportunity that looked reasonable and would maximize what I could learn (in my case it was a $1,000 in a fix-and-flip loan deal via PeerStreet)."', '"10 to 20% return on investment annually. ""When I hear that an investment has a 10%+ return on it I avoid it because..."". In my opinion, and based on my experience, 10% annually is not an exageration. I start to ask questions only if one talks about return of 30% annually or more. These kind of returns are possible, but very rare. What sort of things do we need to look out for with alternative investment? First the quality of the website and the documentation provided. Then the resume of the founders. Who are those guys? I check their LinkedIn profile. If they have none, I am out. A LinkedIn profile is a minimum if you manage an investment company. I also look for diversification and this is the case with Yieldstreet. How do we assess the risks associated with alternative investments? I would never put more than 10% of my capital in any investment, alternative ones included. I also try to find financial information on the promoter itself. In Yieldstreet case check the legal advisor. I remember an international fraud case I analyse. The promoter I investigated had seven small trust involved: in British Virgin Islands, in Panama, in Holland, in Portugal, in the United States and Canada plus a banking account in Switzerland and the biggest shareholding company in the Isle of Man. No need to talk about what happened after. The investors were all non residents in the juridictions involved and no legal recourse were possible. They lost everything. These promoters regularly change juridictions to avoid detection. As far as Yieldstreet is concerned, what I read and checked seems interesting. Thanks for your question. I will check it out myself more. I am also a very cautious investor. To evaluate alternative investments is difficult , but no need to be afraid or to avoid them. We are accredited investors after all."']

Safe method of paying for a Gym Membership?

['"Shady isn\'t quite the right word. They know that most of their customers are going to quit soon after they begin -- as in ""before the end of January"" -- so they lock you in while you\'re motivated. And of course they\'re going to make it difficult for you to quit. No choice but to read their contract, understand it completely, follow their rules, and meet their deadlines. There\'s lots of freedom for them and lots of restrictions for you. It\'s like this if you\'re not the one writing up the contract. However ... do you have a YMCA around? Our YMCA has an initiation fee, but beyond that it\'s month to month. Most flexible gym membership I\'ve heard of. If you lapse for too long they\'ll make you pay another initiation fee to rejoin, but there\'s no penalty for canceling. Not all Y\'s are like that, but check around to see."', '"I\'ve worked in gyms for 9 years. Here\'s a few things I\'ve seen: 1)Contracts aren\'t necessarily a terrible thing if you know that you are going to stay for a while, just know the terms you\'re signing up for. 2)Be aggressive and relentless with the membership salesman, don\'t be afraid to put your own price out there and if you don\'t get it walk away. Don\'t want the super high sign-up fee, say you wont join unless that is gone or lower. (often these sign-up fees are commissions for the salesman, one time i had a guy slip me a $100 under the table to drop the sign-up fee and monthly rate saving him at least $500 a year) 3)Pick newer gyms because they will be more in a need of new memberships thus giving in to lower prices. 4)If you don\'t want to sign a contract just say so, you\'d be amazed how often someone gets out of signing a contract just because they asked and threatened not to join because of it. 5)Be aware of annual fees, a trend in the industry now is to have a super low membership dues but charge the member an annual ""gym improvement"" or ""rate guarantee fee"". 6)Join with a buddy, ask for a buddy discount if you sign-up at the same time. 7)Finally consider why you are joining a gym, I\'ve seen it so often that someone joins a gym and then gets frustrated because they never use it because they weren\'t getting the results you wanted. Maybe your better off spending a little more and going to a private personal training studio or a group exercise studio. Independent bootcamps are a hot now. Ultimately it\'s about you getting what you want out of it, so do what is going to give you the best chance to get the results you want."', "I've often encountered the practices you describe in the Netherlands too. This is how I deal with it. Avoid gyms with aggressive sales tactics My solution is to only sign up for a gym that does not seem to have one-on-one sales personnel and aggressive sales tactics, and even then to read the terms and conditions thoroughly. I prefer to pay them in monthly terms that I myself initiate, instead of allowing them to charge my account when they please. [1] Avoid gyms that lack respect for their members Maybe you've struggled with the choice for a gym, because one of those 'evil' gyms is very close to home and has really excellent facilities. You may be tempted to ask for a one-off contract without the shady wording, but I advise against this. Think about it this way: Even though regular T&C would not apply, the spirit with which they were drawn up lives on among gym personnel/management. They're simply not inclined to act in your best interest, so it's still possible to run into problems when ending your membership. In my opinion, it's better to completely avoid such places because they are not worthy of your trust. Of course this advice goes beyond gym memberships and is applicable to life in general. Hope this helps. [1] Credit Cards aren't very popular in the Netherlands, but we have a charging mechanism called 'automatic collection' which allows for arbitrary merchant-initiated charges.", 'New York state actually has laws protecting gym members from predatory gym membership pricing. Your state may also have laws like that as well.', 'Quite often the local university has decent gym facilities with super-competitive rates, even if you are not a student there, and you can usually join for a single term and pay by cash. They lack some of the fancier things and might be not as shiny, but I want my membership fees to pay for equipment, not interior design.', '"I once was reviewing one of those contracts with plenty of bad clauses in it, sitting across from the salesman whose commission depending on me signing it. I started crossing out all the bad clauses, initialed them and said I would sign it if he\'d initial the changes as well. Oh, and there was one clause that said something like ""THIS CONTRACT MAY NOT BE MODIFIED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT..."" Of course, I crossed it out as well. I signed, he signed. Everyone was happy. Fortunately I never had to deal with any of the issues, but what\'s the worse they could do?"', 'The safest way is to not sign contracts with terms that are onerous to you.']

How do cashier's checks work and why are they good for scams?

['"There are two different issues at play here, and they are completely separate from each other: A bank or cashier\'s check is ""safer"" than a regular personal or business check because it avoids problem #1. Problem #2 exists with all kinds of paper checks. I assume the reason the warnings are about cashier\'s check moreso than personal checks, is simply because people already know to wait for personal checks to clear before handing over merchandise to the buyer. People are less likely to do that when receiving cashier\'s checks, but perhaps they still should if there is any doubt about the validity of the check. One could argue that a cashier\'s check actually provides a false sense of security due to this (to the receiver). On the flip side, if you are the payer, then a cashier\'s check could be thought of as more secure than a personal check because you don\'t have to reveal your bank account information to a stranger."', "Ok, few things to understand first: Secondly, think about the way a scam usually flows. A person (scammer) with an actual bank account with money issues a valid cashiers check, trick someone else (victim) into receiving it (typically in exchange for a percent) and passing along a portion to another account (back to the scammer). The scammer then reports the first transaction as fraudulent and the bank takes back that transaction. Now the victim is stuck with the second transaction, and without the funds from the first. Meanwhile the scammer has both the original funds and the percentage from the second one. In a way they're attractive for scammers because they're so trusted."]

Repairs to a house in order to rent it that were paid by the beneficiary, but is still owned by a Trust

['"The Trustee has allowed me to act as his ""agent"", continuing to pay bills, and take care of much of the administrative affairs for my mother\'s estate since I did all of it for years before she passed away. I was not paid for any of this work. ... The expenses were more than $30K last year, and there is still a punch list to go this year. The trust should reimburse your expenses and deduct them on the trust tax return. Since the Trust owned the property in 2015, and I will receive ownership this month, can last year\'s expenses incurred for the Trust be deducted again future income for my property this year? Not exactly. The trust will file its own tax return and will report the income/loss attributed to the beneficiaries per the trust rules. What is attributed to you will flow to your Schedule E. From there you own it and if it is a passive activity where the loss is limited - you can carry it forward and offset with future gain. The trustee will have to deal with all the paperwork. Do 1099-misc forms need to be filed for the contractors who worked to get it ready for rental? It is my understanding that since 2010 (and before 2010) landlords who are not in real-estate trade or business are not required to send out 1099. But it won\'t hurt if you do, also. In any case - for all of these issues you should talk to a tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State)."']

Economics of buy-to-let (investment) flats

['Surely the yield should be Yield = (Rent - Costs) / Downpayment ? As you want the yield relative to your capital not to the property value. As for the opportunity cost part you could look at the risk free rate of return you could obtain, either through government bonds or bank accounts with some sort of government guarantee (not sure what practical terms are for this in Finland). The management fee is almost 30% of your rent, what does this cover? Is it possible to manage the property yourself, as this would give you a much larger cushion between rent and expenses.', 'Lucky you - here where I live that does not work, you put money on the table year 1. Anyhow... You HAVE to account for inflation. THat is where the gain comes from. Not investment increase (value of item), but the rent goes higher, while your mortgage does not (you dont own more moeny in 3 years if you keep paying, but likely you take more rent). Over 5 or 10 years the difference may be significant. Also you pay back the mortgage - that is not free cash flow, but it is a growth in your capital base. Still, 1 flat does not make a lot ;) You need 10+, so go on earning more down payments.', "Seems like a bad deal to me. But before I get to that, a couple of points on your expenses: Onward. You value a property by calculating its CAP rate. This is what you're calculating, except it does NOT include interest like you did -- that's a loan to you, and has no bearing on whether the unit itself is a good investment. It also includes estimations of variable expenses like maintenance and lack of income from vacancies. People argue vociferously on exactly how much to calculate for those. Maintenance will vary by age of the building and how damaging your tenets are. Vacancies vary based on how desirable the location is, how well you've done the maintenance, and how low the rent is. Doing the math based on your numbers, with just the fixed expenses: 8400 rent - 2400 management fee - 100 insurance = 5900/year income. 5900/150000 = 0.0393 = 3.9% CAP rate. And that's not even counting the variable expenses yet! So, what's a good CAP rate? Generally, 10% CAP rate is a good deal, and higher is a great deal. Below that you have to start to get cautious. Some places are worth a lower rate, for instance when the property is new and in a good location. You can do 8% on these. Below 6% CAP rate is usually a really bad investment. So, unless you're confident you can at least double the rent right off the bat, this is a terrible deal. Another way to think about it You're looking to buy with your finances in just about the best position possible -- a huge down payment and really low interest. Plus you haven't accounted for maintenance, taxes (if any), and vacancies. And still you'd make only a measly 1.2% profit? Would you buy a bond that only pays out 1.2%? No? What about a bond that only pays 1.2%, but also from time to time can force YOU to pay into IT a much larger amount every month?", "but the flat would be occupied all the time. Famous last words. Are you prepared to have a tenant move in, and stop paying rent? In the US, it can take 6 months to get a tenant out of the apartment and little chance of collecting back rent. I don't know how your laws work, but here, they do not favor the landlord. The tiny sub 1% profit you make while funding principal payments is a risky proposition. It seems to me that even normal repairs (heater, appliances, etc) will put you to the negative. On the other hand, if this property has bottomed in terms of price and it rises in value, you may have a nice profit. But if you are just renting it out, it feels like it's too close to call. By the way, if you can go with a 30yr fixed, I'd suggest that. This would get you to a better cash flow sooner. A shorter mortgage simply means more money to principal each month. EDIT - as far as equity goes, at the beginning it seems the equity build up is really from your pocket, definitely so by switching from the 30 to the 15. What is your goal? The assumption I may have made is you wish to be a real estate investor with multiple properties. Doing so means saving up for the next down payment. Given the payoff time even if the property ran a high profit, I imagine you'd want to focus on cash flow, minimize the monthly expense, maximize what you can take each month to save for the next down payment. It's your choice, years from now to have one paid property, or 3 properties each with that 30% down payment, and let time be your friend."]

Work as a contractor for my current employer rather than become a full time employee after my graduation for health insurance continued coverage

["There are several assumptions you made, that don't match the current laws: Costs: COBRA:"]

fastest way to move USD to EUR

["You're asking three different things: What is the fastest way, what is the cheapest way and what is the easiest way. You will not find one method that is all three at once. The fastest way is a wire transfer. The cheapest way that I've encountered is a foreign exchange service like XE. The easiest way is probably Paypal since the money is already in Paypal."]

How to minimize damage from sale of savings account

['"Bank of America has been selling off their local branches to smaller banks in recent years. Here are a few news stories related to this: Along with the branch buildings, the local customers\' savings and checking accounts are sold to the new bank. It is interesting that you were told that your savings account is being sold, but that your checking account will remain with BofA. I guess it depends on the terms of the particular sale. Here are your options, as I see it: Let the savings account move to the new bank, and see what the new terms are like. You might actually like the new bank. If you don\'t, you can shop around and close your account at the new bank after it has been created. Close your account now, before the move. If you have a different bank you\'d like to move to, there is no need to wait. Since your checking account is apparently staying with BofA, you could move all your money from your savings account to your checking account, closing your savings account. Then after ""mid August"" when the local branch switches to the new bank and everyone else\'s savings account has moved, you can call up BofA and tell them you want to move some of the money from your checking account into a new savings account. If you really have your heart set on staying with BofA, option 3 looks like a good, easy choice. To address your other concerns: Bank of America is a big credit card company, so I doubt that your credit card is being sold off. Your credit card account should stay as-is. Even if your savings account and checking account are at a different bank, there is no need to switch credit cards. Your savings and checking accounts have nothing to do with your credit report or score, so there is no concern there. If you end up wanting to switch to a new credit card with a different bank, there are minor hits to your credit score involved with applying for a new card and closing your current card, but if I were you I would not worry about your credit score in this. Switch credit cards if you want a change, and keep your credit card if you don\'t."']

Old Cancelled Cards

['"FICO 08, a newer fico formula that many lenders are simultaneously switching to now, ignores artificially lengthened credit history/score by piggybacking. So don\'t feel left out in that regard. Average age of accounts is affected when closed accounts fall off your credit report, which can take 7 years, not just by closing them. But I\'m not familiar with the latest ""weightings"" of these things, so its tough to say how significant it will be when that happens. There are also newer FICO formulas, that may become relevant 7 years from now, so it is definitely something to be conscious of but they aren\'t immediately consequential, since you can do other things to improve your credit worthiness in the near term."', "Closed accounts are used when calculating Average Age of Accounts (AAoA) by FICO. They will drop off your report 7 years after their closure, at which time your AAoA will decrease and most likely lower your credit score. Keeping your oldest card with an annual fee (AF) is a tough question. Since the exact calculations are a secret, it's hard to quantify the value of that card. Keep in mind that if you do decide to close it now (or right before the next AF) it will continue to count for the next 7 years. What you can do is the following: Assume you won't be applying for any new cards in the next 7 years. Look at all your current accounts and calculate the AAoA of all of them that would still be on your report 7 years from now. Calculate it with and without your oldest card. The difference will show you the effect closing the card today will have. There is a potential way to raise your AAoA depending on if you have an AMEX card. AMEX reports all accounts as being open from your original 'member since' date. If your oldest AMEX (ever, not necessarily still open) is older than your AAoA, opening a new AMEX will actually raise your average. age of accounts is 15% of your score. note that some websites that calculate your AAoA for you (like creditkarma) don't count closed accounts, but since FICO does the age those websites generate should be ignored."]

How to avoid tax when taking a windfall in small chunks?

['"How can I avoid this, so we are taxed as if we are making the $60k/yr that we want to receive? You can\'t. In the US the income is taxed when received, not when used. If you receive 1M this year, taking out 60K doesn\'t mean the other 940K ""weren\'t received"". They were, and are taxable. Create a pension fund in the corporation, feed it all profits, and pay out $60k/yr of ""pension"". I doubt that the corporation could deduct a million a year in pension funding. You cannot do that. You can only deposit to a pension plan up to 100% of your salary, and no more than $50K total (maybe a little more this year, its adjusted to inflation). Buy a million dollars in ""business equipment"" of some sort each year to get a deduction, then sell it over time to fund a $60k/yr salary. I doubt such a vehicle exists. If there\'s no real business purpose, it will be disallowed and you\'ll be penalized. Your only purpose is tax avoidance, meaning you\'re trying to shift income using your business to avoid paying taxes - that\'s illegal. Do crazy Section 79 life insurance schemes to tax-defer the income. The law caps this so I can only deduct < $100k of the $1 million annually, and there are other problems with this approach.\\ Yes. Wouldn\'t go there. Added: From what I understand, this is a term life insurance plan sponsored by the employer for the employee. This is not a deferral of income, but rather a deduction: instead of paying your term life insurance with your own after tax money, your employer pays with their pre-tax. It has a limit of $50K per employee, and is only available for employees. There are non-discrimination limitations that may affect your ability to use it, but I don\'t see how it is at all helpful for you. It gives you a deduction, but its money spent, not money in your pocket. End added. Do some tax avoidance like Facebook does with its Double Irish trick, storing the income in some foreign subsidiary and drawing $60k/yr in salary to be taxed at $60k/yr rates. This is probably cost-prohibitive for a $1MM/yr company. You\'re not Facebook. What works with a billion, will not work with a million. Keep in mind that you\'re a one-man business, things that huge corporations like Google or Facebook can get away with are a no-no for a sole-proprietor (even if incorporated). Bottom line you\'ll probably have to pay the taxes. Get a good tax professional to help you identify as much deductions as possible, and if you can plan income ahead - plan it better."', "I agree with the other posters that you will need to seek the advice of a tax attorney specializing in corporate taxation. Here is an idea to investigate: Could you sell the company, and thereby turn the profits that are taxed as ordinary income into a long-term capital gain (taxed at 15%, plus state income tax, if any)? You can determine the value of a profitable business using discounted cash flow analysis, even if you expect that the revenue stream will dry up due to product obsolescence or expiry of licensing agreements. To avoid the capital gains taxes (especially if you live in a high-tax state like California), you could also transfer the stock to a Charitable Remainder Trust. The CRT then sells the shares to the third-party acquirer, invests the proceeds and pays you annual distributions (similar to an annuity). The flip side of a sale is that now the acquiring party will be stuck with the taxes payable on your company's profits (while being forced to amortize the purchase price over multiple years -- 15, if I recall correctly), which will factor into the valuation. However, it is likely that the acquirer has better ways to mitigate the tax impact (e.g. the acquirer is a company currently operating at a loss, and therefore can cancel out the tax liabilities from your company's profits). One final caveat: Don't let the tax tail wag the business dog. In other words, focus your energies on extracting the maximum value from your company, rather than trying to find convoluted tax saving strategies. You might find that making an extra dollar in profits is easier than saving fifty cents in taxes."]

Reconciling transactions reimbursing myself for expenses as self-employed (UK)

['"For anyone that\'s curious, I had a number of chats with Quickbooks who recommended I import only the relevant business transactions from my personal account & personal credit card in order to lower the tax liability. This way money ""paid"" from the business account to myself rightly shows up as a transfer and not as income. This means when generating a tax report, it calculates the correct rate of tax to be paid based on income minus allowable expenses, regardless which account they came from."', 'Any money that ScottMcGready gives to the company is a personal loan that must be repaid by the company at some point without tax consequences. Any money that the company gives to ScottMcGready is either salary (Scott pays income tax, company counts this as cost), or a dividend (Scott pays dividend tax), or a loan (Scott must repay the loan).']

Is being a landlord a good idea? Is there a lot of risk?

['"Risk is the capital you have staked in pursuit of profit. The danger is that you lose what you have risked. For some bets (risks), you can get insurance to cover for losses. Now the ""game"" of Landlord and Tenant requires you to play fully by the rules set forth by your legislators. In your case, that is the legislators of the State of Texas. Without knowing those rules, you could be liable (open to civil prosecution) for violating those rules. Tenants could be savvy to those rules or savvy enough to hire someone, a lawyer, who knows those rules. As well, in the game of Landlord and Tenant, you must ascertain the creditworthiness of your would-be tenant. If the tenant fails to pay rent, that tenant can detain the residence. You will incur additional outlays to gain possession of your property (ownership in your rental). Now the game of Landlord vs Landlord is different. You can\'t pick up houses easily enough and even if you could, likely the expense of doing so could wipe out any would profits from having the house as a rental. So, in Landlord vs Landlord, you get constrained by where your rental sits. Thus you must forecast what will the neighborhood look like in five, ten, fifteen years."', '"I have been a landlord in Texas for just over 3 years now. I still feel like a novice, but I will give you the benefit of my experience. If you are relying on rental properties for current income versus a long term return you are going to have to do a good job at shopping for bargains to get monthly cash flow versus equity growth that is locked up in the property until you sell it. If you want to pull a lot of cash out of a property on a regular basis you probably are going to have to get into flipping them, which is decidedly not passive investing. Also, it is easy to underestimate the expenses associated with rental properties. Texas is pretty landlord friendly legally, however it does have higher than usual property taxes, which will eat into your return. Also, you need to factor in maintenance, vacancy, tenant turnover costs, etc. It can add up to a lot more than you would expect. If you are handy and can do a lot of repairs yourself you can increase your return, but that makes it less of a passive investment. The two most common rules I have heard for initially evaluating whether an investment property is likely to be cash flow positive are the 1% and 50% rules. The 1% rule says the expected monthly rent needs to be 1% or greater of the purchase price of the house. So your hypothetical $150K/$10K scenario doesn\'t pass that test. Some people say this rule is 2% for new landlords, but in my experience you\'d have to get lucky in Texas to find a house priced that competitively that didn\'t need a lot of work to get rents that high. The 50% rule says that the rent needs to be double your mortgage payment to account for expenses. You also have to factor in the hassle of dealing with tenants, the following are not going to happen when you own a mutual fund, but are almost inevitable if you are a landlord long enough: For whatever reason you have to go to court and evict a tenant. A tenant that probably lost their job, or had major medical issues. The nicest tenant you ever met with the cutest kids in the world that you are threatening to make homeless. Every fiber of your being wants to cut them some slack, but you have a mortgage to pay and can\'t set an expectation that paying the rent on time is a suggestion not a rule. or the tenant, who seemed nice at first, but now considers you ""the man"" decides to fight the eviction and won\'t move out. You have to go through a court process, then eventually get the Sheriff to come out and forcibly remove them from the property, which they are treating like crap because they are mad at you. All the while not paying rent or letting you re-let the place. The tenant isn\'t maintaining the lawn and the HOA is getting on your butt about it. Do you pay someone to mow the grass for them and then try to squeeze the money out of the tenant who ""never agreed to pay for that""? You rent to a college kid who has never lived on their own and has adopted you as their new parent figure. ""The light in the closet went out, can you come replace the bulb?"" Tenants flat out lying to your face. ""Of course I don\'t have any pets that I didn\'t pay the deposit for!"" (Pics all over facebook of their kids playing with a dog in the ""pet-free"" house)"', "If you are able to buy a 150K home for 50K now that would be a good deal! However, you can't you have to borrow 100K in order to make this deal happen. This dramatically increases the risk of any investment, and I would no longer classify it as passive income. The mortgage on a 150K place would be about 710/month (30 year fixed). Reasonably I would expect no more than 1200/month in rent, or 14,400. A good rule of thumb is to assume that half of rental revenue can be counted as profit before debt service. So in your case 7200, but you would have a mortgage payment of 473/month. Leaving you a profit of 1524 after debt service. This is suspiciously like 2K per year. Things, in the financial world, tend to move toward an equilibrium. The benefit of rental property you can make a lot more than the numbers suggest. For example the home could increase in value, and you can have fewer than expected repairs. So you have two ways to profit: rental revenue and asset appreciation. However, you said that you needed passive income. What happens if you have a vacancy or the tenant does not pay? What happens if you have greater than expected repairs? What happens if you get a fine from the HOA or a special assessment? Not only will you have dip into your pocket to cover the payment, you might also have to dip into your pocket to cover the actual event! In a way this would be no different than if you borrowed 100K to buy dividend paying stocks. If the fund/company does not pay out that month you would still have to make the loan payment. Where does the money come from? Your pocket. At least dividend paying companies don't collect money from their shareholders. Yes you can make more money, but you can also lose more. Leverage is a two edged sword and rental properties can be great if you are financial able to absorb the shocks that are normal with ownership.", "Based on what you've said I think buying a rental is risky for you. It looks like you heard that renting a house is profitable and Zillow supported that idea. Vague advice + a website designed for selling + large amounts of money = risky at the very least. That doesn't mean that rental property is super risky it just means that you haven't invested any time into learning the risks and how you can manage them. Once you learn that your risk reduces dramatically. In general though I feel that rental property has a good risk/reward ratio. If you're willing to put in the time and energy to learn the business then I'd encourage you to buy property. If you're not willing to do that then rentals will always be a crap shoot. One thing about investing in rental property is you have the ability to have more impact on your investment than you do dropping money in the stock market which is good and bad.", '"Rather than thinking of becoming a landlord as a passive ""investment"" (like a bank account or mutual fund), it may be useful to think of it as ""starting a small part-time business"". While certainly many people can and do start their own businesses, and there are many success stories, there are many cases where things don\'t work out quite as they hoped. I wouldn\'t call starting any new business ""low risk"", even one that isn\'t expected to be one\'s main full-time job, though some may be ""acceptable risk"" for your particular circumstances. But if you\'re going to start a part-time business, is there any particular reason you\'d do so in real estate as opposed to some other activity? It sounds like you\'d be completely new to real estate, so perhaps for your first business you\'re starting you\'d want it to be something you\'re more familiar with. Or, if you do want to enter the real estate world (or any other new business), be sure to do a lot of research, come up with a business plan, and be prepared for the possibility of losing money as with any investment or new business."', 'Buying a property and renting it out can be a good investment if it matches your long term goals. Buying an investment property is a long term investment. A large chunk of your money will be tied up with the property and difficult to access. If you put your money into dividend producing stocks you can always sell the stock and have your money back in a matter of days this is not so with a property. (But you can always do a Home equity line of credit (HELOC)) I would also like to point out landlording is not a passive endeavor as JohnFx stated dealing with a tenant can be a lot of work. This is not work you necessarily have to deal with, it is possible to contract with a property management company that would place tenants and take care of those late night calls. Property management companies often charge 10% of your monthly rent and will eat a large portion of your profits. It could be worth the time and headache of tenant relations. You should build property management into you expenses anyway in case you decide to go that route in the future. There are good things about owning an investment property. It can produce returns in a couple of ways. If you choose this route it can be lucrative but be sure to do your homework. You must know the area you are investing very well. Know the rent, and vacancy rates for Single family homes, look at multifamily homes as a way of mitigating risk(if one unit is vacant the others are still paying).']

Are account holders with a bank better able to receive a loan from that bank?

['"Banks are businesses, and as such should have the right to refuse service, so they should probably be able to choose one customer over another at will. [I say ""should"" because business owners protecting themselves against litigation related to discrimination could restrict their freedom as business owners.] However, banks are businesses and if the customers are identical, both will be approved (or not) according to credit records. Does not make sense to approve one person with a given credit record and refuse someone with a similar record. Unless they barely qualify. Since no two credit histories are identical, there are surely edge cases. Finally, if a customer is a long term customer with large deposits and/or significant amounts of business with the bank, the bankers will likely be inclined to do more business."']

What is your effective tax rate if you work from home in Montreal for a company in Toronto?

["Assuming that you don't own the business, it would seem to apply. The CRA says: If you were a resident of Quebec on December\xa031,\xa02016, and you did not have a business with a permanent establishment outside Quebec, your refundable Quebec abatement is 16.5% of the basic federal tax on line\xa055 of Schedule\xa01. If you had income from a business (including income you received as a limited or non-active partner) and the business has a permanent establishment outside Quebec, or you were not a resident of Quebec on December 31, 2016, and the business has a permanent establishment in Quebec, use Form T2203, Provincial and Territorial Taxes for 2016\xa0- Multiple Jurisdictions, to calculate your abatement. For people whose income isn't coming from businesses they own, this seems quite clear.", 'For tax purposes, what matters is your province of residence at December 31st. Quebec Tax abatement therefore applies if you were living in Quebec, regardless of your employer, assuming you are an employee. As for effective tax, your question misses some data and does not quite make sense as effective tax is the result of dividing your total taxes paid after deductions and tax credits by your total income. As such, one cannot tell you your effective tax rate without knowing taxes paid after deductions and tax credits and total income.']

Germany: Employee and Entrepreneur at same time (for getting AppStore payments)

['"(Selling apps is AFAIK business, not freelancing - unless the type of app you produce is considered a freelancing subject. The tax office will give you a questionnaire and then decide). As Einzelunternehmer, you can receive the payments for the apps to the same account where your wages go. However, there are lots of online accounts that do not cost fees, so consider to receive them on a separate account so you have the business and private kind of separate (for small Einzelunternehmer, there is no legal separation between business and private money - you have full liability with your private money for the business). The local chamber of commerce can tell you everything about setting up such a business, ask them (you\'ll probably have to become a member there anyways). They have information as well on VAT (Umsatzsteuer, USt) which you need to declare unless you get an exemption (probably possible), and about Gewerbesteuer (the income tax of the business) etc. For the tax, you have ""subforms"" for the income tax e.g. for wages and for business income, so you just submit both with the main form. You\'ll get an appropriate tax number when registering the business. Social security/insurance: as long as the app selling is only a side business, the social insurance payments for your main job completely cover the side job as well. You need to make sure that your employment contract is compatible with the app business, though. A quick search indicates that there is a tax treaty between Germany and the Ukraine, Wikipedia says there are no contracts about social insurance in effect (yet)."', 'In Germany you can register a Einzelunternehmen and receive payments into your personal bank account with a German bank. Apple will certainly be able to transfer to accounts in Germany as payments go via the European SEPA standard. Tax wise if you are living in Germany you will need to pay tax in Germany, so this is really the easiest way of doing it.']

A friend wants to use my account for a wire transfer. Is this a scam or is it legitimate?

['"This is another version of an old scam -- ""let me have a check deposited in your account because I can\'t open one for some reason, and I\'ll share some of the money with you."" Here the scammer is promising to ""start a business"" with you as a way to gain your confidence and trust. The first danger sign is that you only know this person from online. They are not someone you are friends with in the ""real"" world. They could be anybody. They used the name of a big company as a way to make what they\'re doing sound legitimate, but it\'s all a fraud. They could be depositing a faked Exxon check into your account, which could land YOU in huge trouble. Here\'s the thing -- The only way Exxon (or any other company) can deposit money in a bank under someone\'s name is if that person provides the account and routing numbers to an account that already exists. No company can just create an account in another person\'s name. That\'s Hollywood movie stuff, but it\'s not how banking works. To open an account, the bank would need identification on the account holder, so your ""friend"" already has an account if Exxon has allegedly deposited money. Further, Exxon isn\'t going to take back money that has already been deposited. In fact, they can\'t take it back. If the account is in his name, they can\'t do anything to the account or with the account. This is a situation you should run away from and never look back. Nothing about this story sounds right or legitimate, but this is one of the oldest scams out there since the beginning of the Internet. You would be well advised to stay VERY far away from your supposed friend, because they\'re anything but your friend. You are being SCAMMED. Don\'t be a victim. Stop communicating with this person immediately, and DON\'T give them any personal information of any kind. They\'re crooks! I hope this helps. Good luck!"', "I know people who work in the gulf and most contracts are of the 14 days on/ 14 days (or so) off flavor. I've never heard of someone being onboard a ship or platform for a year. I bet this is a scam.", "100% scam. This is classic of mixing real (Exxon) with fiction. This gives credibility to story. Don't give any thing, there is no damage yet. If you take the bait, there are multiple ways to get money from you.", '"A friend since July online and big business talks and trust/money forwards. Usually a question ""is this a scam or legitimate?"" is hard to answer since obviously scams are modelled after legitimate stories (or they\'d easily fail). If there were bookmakers for ""scam or legitimate"", this one would easily gather odds of 10000:1. The only plausible reason for this to be legitimate would be to defraud the scam-or-legitimate bookmakers. At any rate, Exxon is a large company and has to obey labor laws. They cannot set up operations in a manner where their workers may not have access to their salary for prolonged times without easy remedy. Drop communications immediately, don\'t open them, don\'t read them. They hook you with emotional investment. They will redouble efforts if it appears you are slipping out of their reach. Explanations will become more plausible, more pressing, more emotionally charged. You are a big promising fish and they won\'t let you swim off without a serious struggle to rehook you. Hand your communication so far to law enforcement. That may help with not having to figure this out on your own."', '"Just one further point to add to what everyone else has said. There are no oil rigs or platforms ""off the shores of Liverpool"". Liverpool is on the west coast of England, on the oil-free Irish Sea. The UK\'s oil industry is in the North Sea, to the north-east. Aberdeen would be the correct city."', '"As a woman who was once married to someone who worked offshore in the North Sea, in the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of Nova Scotia, in fact all over the world...and my husband\'s rig was contracted through Exxon (by the way, Exxon contracts rigs, but doesn\'t own any), this is most certainly a scam. Even if you do not believe all the above information, I will tell you this. Offshore oil companies will either have schedules consisting of two weeks on/two weeks off or one month on/one month off. If he is in the Gulf of Mexico, it is almost certainly two weeks on/two off. Which means this ""person"" who is your ""friend"" is lying to you, because contract or not, no employer holds any employee on the rig for an entire year. In addition, he can leave the rig anytime he wants to, due to a personal emergency. And no, once a paycheck is deposited in an employee\'s account, they cannot take it back. LOL!! I would like to see them try!! Don\'t do this. It will only cause you heartbreak. And since all of the posters recommending that you NOT fall for this POS line of bull have nothing to gain, guess who is telling the truth? It\'s not your ""FRIEND""!"', '"This is not only a scam but it is potentially fraud that may get you in trouble. This ""friend"" of yours will wire you some money in which you do not know where this money is really from. It\'s obvious from other answers that his story is fictitious. Thus it is likely that this money was stolen through another scam/hack in which now he wants to wash this money through your bank account. If it turns out that is was stolen, any money you withdrawal for your ""cut"", will have to be returned and your account will be frozen."', "In many countries it is a legal requirement or in some other way mandatory for the banks to ban the owner(s) of an account to allow a third party to use the account. In some countries if you willing give someone access in this way you get no compensation what so ever and you'll be lucky if they catch the crooks and even luckier if you get any of your money back. Don't forget the possibility of jail time due to the criminal activities going on under your name."]

Avoid Capital Gains on Rental

["Don't let the tax tail wag the investment dog. There is risk in exchanging this (known) property for another (unknown) property. That risk may be more than $9000 worth of risk. Tax considerations are important, but most important is that your investments make money. If you intend to continue as a landlord, you had better be sure you are finding a better deal elsewhere if you are going to trade this property up. I should also mention that you have a 5 year window in which you need to have lived in the home for 2 years. You have time and might be able to sell for a higher price if you wait a little longer.", 'Your question is best asked of a tax expert, not random people on the internet. Such an expert will help you ask the right questions. For example you did not point out the country or state in which you live. That matters. First point is that you will not pay tax on 60K, its expensive to transact real estate, so your net proceeds will be closer to 40K. Also you can probably the deduct the costs of improvements. You implied that you really like this rental property. If that is the case, why would you sell...ever? This home could be a central part of your financial independence plan. So keep it until you die. IIRC when it passes to your heirs, a new cost basis is formed thereby not passing the tax burden onto them. (Assuming the property is located in the US.)', "While it may not be your preferred outcome, and doesn't eliminate the income, in the event you find yourself in the path described here you have a way to defer gains to the future. but I would then want to buy another house as a rental If you sell this house and buy another investment property (within strict time windows: 45 days to written contract and closed in 180 days), you can transfer your basis and defer your gains via what is called a 1031 like-kind exchange", '"Just brainstorming here, but my gut feeling is it should be possible to sell your home to yourself with the sole purpose of resetting your basis. Taken at face value it feels illegal, but since I think we all would agree that you could sell your house to a third party and purchase the identical house next door for the same price (thus resetting your basis), why can\'t you purchase the same home right back? If one is legal, it seems odd for the other not to be. That being said, I have no idea how to legally do it. Perhaps you truly need a third party to step in which you sell it to, and then buy it back from them sometime in the future. Or perhaps you could start an LLC and have it purchase your home from you. Either way, I highly suggest finding an expert real estate attorney/accountant before attempting this, and don\'t be surprised if you get multiple opposite opinions. I suspect this is a gray area which will highly depend on how tax ""aggressive"" you are willing to be."', 'What you are looking for is a 1031 exchange. https://www.irs.gov/uac/like-kind-exchanges-under-irc-code-section-1031 Whenever you sell business or investment property and you have a gain, you generally have to pay tax on the gain at the time of sale. IRC Section 1031 provides an exception and allows you to postpone paying tax on the gain if you reinvest the proceeds in similar property as part of a qualifying like-kind exchange. Gain deferred in a like-kind exchange under IRC Section 1031 is tax-deferred, but it is not tax-free. You may also sell your house for bitcoin and record the sales price on the deed with an equal or lesser amount that you bought it for.']

Official Bank Check

["The legal department at the Bank left me a message telling me that the bank check was paid & the recipient got the funds. Call up the bank and find out who the recipient was. Generally it can only be cashed by the person whose name is on it - the original business partner to whom it was intended. It is unlikely to be cashed by the attorney, unless he misrepresented the facts to the bank and got the funds. My question is how could he have cashed it without the original bank check? The other possibility is your mom lost this check, went to the bank and requested them to cancel this and reissue a fresh banker's check and give it to the business partner - in which case the check you had was worthless. You would need to work with the bank and ask them for details. However without the details of the original bank check that you found, it would be difficult for the bank to help you.", "How? Basically all banks nowadays allow online deposits from a smartphone - you take a picture from the front and back of the check, and submit it, and that's it. You still have the paper check, and it looks pristine, but it is deposited (and the paper is worthless)."]

Economics: negative consumer sentiment following failure to upsell

["There are several different participants in the transaction, and you may not be aware of all the issues: In some business (fast food) they are required to ask if you want to super size, they are expected to do this at every transaction, but aren't paid more if you buy more. The employee can also decide that too much pressure to up-sell may push you to purchase the item online. That will cost them a commission, the store location a sale, and maybe drive you to a different company. It is also possible they don't have the training to be able to explain the difference between the items."]

Investing in a offshore bank account

['when investing in index funds Index fund as the name suggests invests in the same proportion of the stocks that make up the index. You can choose a Index Fund that tracks NYSE or S&P etc. You cannot select individual companies. Generally these are passively managed, i.e. just follow the index composition via automated algorithms resulting in lower Fund Manager costs. is it possible to establish an offshore company Yes it is possible and most large organization or High Net-worth individuals do this. Its expensive and complicated for ordinary individuals. One needs and army of International Tax Consultants / International Lawyers / etc but do I have to pay taxes from the capital gains at the end of the year? Yes Canada taxes on world wide income and you would have to pay taxes on gains in Canada. Note depending on your tax residency status in US, you may have to pay tax in US as well.']

Should I finance rental property or own outright?

["To answer some parts of the question which are answerable as-is: Yes, mortgage interest is deductible. So is depreciation. See this question and others. It would be a good idea to put some money away for tax season, just as you should save some money to cover unexpected property expenses. But as @JoeTaxpayer says, this is a good problem to have, assuming you own the property, it's low-maintenance, your tenant is good, and your rent is at market levels.", "In general you do not want to show a taxable gain on rental properties if you can avoid it. One of the more beneficial advantages of owning cash flowing rental properties, is that the income is tax deferred because of the depreciation. I say deferred, because depreciation affects the cost basis of your property. Also since you are considering financing, it sounds like you don't need the cash flow currently. You usually can get better returns by financing and buying more rental properties, especially with investment mortgages at historical lows (Win via inflation over time)"]

How to start personal finances?

["I'm assuming you're in Germany or Europe based on your question, but here's an American's perspective that should pertain you you as well: Once you have a steady income and an emergency fund large enough to keep you from going bankrupt, then start learning about retirement and investment options.", "Personal finances are not intuitive for everyone, and it can be a challenge to know what to do when you haven't been taught. Congratulations on recognizing that you need to make a change. The first step that I would recommend is what you've already done: Assemble your bank statements so you can get an accurate picture of what money you currently have. Keep organized folders so you can find your bank statements when you need them. In addition to the bank statements for your checking and savings accounts, you also need to assess any debt that you have. Have you taken out any loans that need to be paid back? Do you have any credit card debt? Make a list of all your debts, and make sure that you have folders for these statements as well. Hopefully, you don't have any debts. But if you are like most people, you owe money to someone, and you may even owe more money than you currently have in your bank accounts. If you have debts, fixing this problem will be one of your goals. No matter what your debt is, you need to make sure that from now on, you don't spend more money than you take in as income. To do this, you need to make a budget. A budget is a plan for spending your money. To get started with a budget, make a list of all the income you will receive this month. Add it up, and write that amount at the top of a page. Next, you want to make a list of all the expenses you will have this month. Some of these expenses are more or less fixed: rent, utility bills, etc. Write those down first. Some of the expenses you have more control over, such as food and entertainment. Give yourself some money to spend on each of these. You may also have some larger expenses that will happen in the future, such as a tuition or insurance payment. Allocate some money to those, so that by the time that payment comes around, you will have saved enough to pay for those expenses. If you find that you don't have enough income to cover all of your expenses in a month, you need to either reduce your expenses somewhere or increase your income until your budget is at a point where you have money left over at the end of each month. After you've gotten to this point, the next step is figuring out what to do with that extra money left over. This is where your goals come into play. If you have debt, I recommend that one of your first goals is to eliminate that debt as fast as possible. If you have no money saved, you should make one of your goals saving some money as an emergency fund. See the question Oversimplify it for me: the correct order of investing for some ideas on what order you should place your goals. Doing the budget and tracking all of your spending on paper is possible, but many people find that using the right software to help you do this is much easier. I have written before on choosing budgeting software. All of the budgeting software packages I mentioned in that post are from the U.S., but many of them can successfully be used in Europe. YNAB, the program I use, even has an unofficial German users community that you might find useful. One of the things that budgeting software will help you with is the process of reconciling your bank statements. This is where you go through the bank statement each month and compare it to your own record of spending transactions in your budget. If there are any transactions that appear in the statement that you don't have recorded, you need to figure out why. Either it is an expense that you forgot to record, or it is a charge that you did not make. Record it if it is legitimate, or dispute the expense if it is fraudulent. For more information, look around at some of the questions tagged budget. I also recommend the book The Total Money Makeover by Dave Ramsey, which will provide more help in making a budget and getting out of debt.", '"A few practical thoughts: A practical thing that helps me immensely not to loose important paperwork (such as bank statements, bills, payroll statement, all those statements you need for filing tax return, ...) is: In addition to the folder (Aktenordner) where the statements ultimately need to go I use a Hängeregistratur. There are also standing instead of hanging varieties of the same idea (may be less expensive if you buy them new - I got most of mine used): you have easy-to-add-to folders where you can just throw in e.g. the bank statement when it arrives. This way I give the statement a preliminary scan for anything that is obviously grossly wrong and throw it into the respective folder (Hängetasche). Every once in a while I take care of all my book-keeping, punch the statements, file them in the Aktenordner and enter them into the software. I used to hate and never do the filing when I tried to use Aktenordner only. I recently learned that it is well known that Aktenordner and Schnellhefter are very time consuming if you have paperwork arriving one sheet at a time. I\'ve tried different accounting software (being somewhat on the nerdy side, I use gnucash), including some phone apps. Personally, I didn\'t like the phone apps I tried - IMHO it takes too much time to enter things, so I tend to forget it. I\'m much better at asking for a sales receipt (Kassenzettel) everywhere and sticking them into a calendar at home (I also note cash payments for which I don\'t have a receipt as far as I recall them - the forgotten ones = difference ends up in category ""hobby"" as they are mostly the beer or coke after sports). I was also to impatient for the cloud/online solutions I tried (I use one for business, as there the archiving is guaranteed to be according to the legal requirements - but it really takes far more time than entering the records in gnucash)."', '"There are many paths to success, but they all begin with education. You made the first big step just by visiting here. We have 17,000 questions, arranged by tag so you can view those on a given topic. You can sort by votes to see the ones that have the best member acceptance. I\'ll agree with Ben that one of the best ones is ""The correct order of investing."" We both offered answers there, and that helps address a big chunk of your issue. The book recommendations are fine, you\'ll quickly find that each author has his/her own slant or focus on a certain approach. For example, one financial celebrity (note - in the US, there are private advisors, usually with credentials of some sort, there are those who work for brokers and also offers help, there are financial bloggers (I am one), and there are those who are on the radio or TV who may or may not have any credentials) suggests that credit cards are to be avoided. The line in another answer here, ""You\'re not going to get rich earning 1% on a credit card,"" is a direct quote of one such celebrity. I disputed that in my post ""I got rich on credit card points!"" The article is nearly 2 years old, the account accumulating the rewards has recently passed $34,000. This sum of money is more wealth than 81% of people in the world have. The article was a bit tongue in cheek (sarcastic) but it made a point. A young person should get a credit card, a good one, with no fee, and generous rewards. Use the card to buy only what you can pay back that month. At year end, I can download all my spending. The use of the card helps, not hinders, the budgeting process, and provides a bit of safety with its guarantees and theft protection. Your question really has multiple facets. If these answers aren\'t helpful enough, I suggest you ask a new question, but focus on one narrow issue. ""Paying off debt"" ""Getting organized"" ""Saving"" ""Budgeting"" all seem to be part of your one question here."']

What options exist to make money in the US on a work-restricted visa?

['"Income generated from online sales is not considered ""passive income"", so you need to be authorized to work in the U.S. Those without work authorization can acquire passive income (through investments, lending, competition/contest earnings, etc.) In order to sell products on eBay (the description you\'ve given leads me to believe that this is operated as a business), you need to be authorized to work in the U.S., and register a business. See:"', "Are you planning to not pay taxes? Any time someone has income in the U.S., it is subject to U.S. taxes. You must file tax returns (and pay taxes if necessary) if you have income above a certain threshold, regardless of whether you're not authorized to work or not. If you plan to intentionally not pay taxes, then that's a whole other matter from working without authorization. Working without authorization is an immigration issue. It probably violates the conditions of your status, which will make you to automatically lose your status. That may or may not affect when you want to want to visit, immigrate to, or get other immigration benefits in the U.S. in the future; and at worst you may be deported. It's a complicated topic, but not really relevant for this site."]

Is threatening to close the account a good way to negotiate with the bank?

["If this matters to you a lot, I agree you should leave. My primary bank account raised chequing account and transaction fees. I left. When I was closing my account the teller asked for the reason (they needed to fill out a form) and I explained it was the monthly fees. Eventually, if a bank gets enough of these, they will change. I want to get back those features for the same price it cost when I opened it They are in their rights to cancel features or raise prices. Just as you are in your rights to withdraw if they don't give you a deal. The reason why I mention this is that this approach is comical in some instances. A grocery store may raise the price of carrots. Typically you either deal with it or change stores. Prices rise occasionally. thus they will lose a lot of money from my savings From my understanding, a bank makes a large chunk of their money from fees. Very little is from the floating kitty they can have because of your savings. If you have an investment account with your bank (not recommended) or your mortgage, that would matter more. I've had friends who have left banks (and moved their mortgages) because of the bank not giving them a better rate. Does the manager have any pressure into keeping the account to the point of giving away free products to keep the costumer or they don't really care? Depends. I've probably say no. One data point is an anecdote; it is expected in a client base of thousands that a few will leave for seemingly random reasons. Only if mass amounts of clients leave or complain will the manager or company care. A note: some banks waive monthly account or service fees if you keep a minimal account balance. I have one friend who keeps X thousand in his bank account to save the account fee; he budgets a month ahead of time and savings account rates are 0% so this costs him nothing.", "Take your business elsewhere, where the products and services are priced at a level you agree to pay. This does two things. First, you end a bad business relationship. Why bad? Because you're not happy with the deal. Second, it sends an unambiguous signal to the losing bank that you were unhappy with their service. If they offer an exit survey, complete it, and be sure to tell them what made you unhappy with their service. In a free market economy, if consumers all take their business where the terms are favorable, supply and demand would force the banks to compete for consumers' business.", '"To avoid going on and on in the comments I\'m going to add this point that seems to be missing from the other answers. ""Banks often offer me deals while negotiating to open an account (since they are under high pressure to open an account)"" Would these happen to be the regionally advertised account opening deals like a $200 new checking account bonus if you deposit at least $x and leave it for at least 90 days? This kind of deal is not unique to you. This is not offered to you because of your unique negotiating ability. You need to understand the authority of the person you\'re dealing with. Products are designed in the corporate arm of the bank. Once a product is ready, it\'s rolled out to branches to be sold; sometimes with some fancy sign-up bonus. A checking account is a product, just like an iPhone. Apple took the headphone jack out of the iPhone 7, no amount of negotiating with the Genius at the Apple store will put it back for you. Vote with your wallet, show the bank you\'re unhappy by leaving."', '"I would hold off on making that threat (closing your account). First, because as others have said, it\'s not likely to help. And second, assuming you\'re willing to make good on that threat, you should only play that card as a final absolute last resort, because if it fails, and you close your account, there is little to nothing else you can try to get what you want. First, talk one-on-one with a personal banker at your local BA branch. You might be surprised at how helpful they can be. Next, try talking to customer service on the phone. After that, you might try sending a letter to corporate HQ. A lot depends on the particular ""feature"" you are talking about and why they removed it. It could be that 1) the bank finds the feature is just too costly provide for free, 2) there may be a technical reason why they can no longer provide it, 3) it could be as simple as that few to none of their customers (excluding you) are actually using the feature, or 4) it could be that due to changing regulation, or market forces, no bank is offering that feature anymore. Also, while they may not care specifically about your business, the local branch has an incentive to not drive customers away if it can be reasonably avoided."', '"From the bank\'s perspective, they are offering a service and within their rights to charge appropriately for that service. Depending on the size of their operation, they may have considerable overhead costs that they need to recoup one way or another to continue operating (profitably, they hope). Traditionally, banks would encourage you to save with them by offering interest growth on your deposits. Meanwhile they would invest your (and all of their customer\'s) funds in securities or loans to other patrons that they anticipate will generate income for them at a faster rate than the interest they pay back to you. These days however, this overly simplified model is relatively insignificant in consumer banking. Instead, they\'ve found they can make a lot more profit by simply charging fees for the handling of your funds, and when they want to loan money to consumers they just borrow from a central bank. What this means is that the size of your balance (unless abnormally huge) is of little interest to a branch manager - it doesn\'t generate revenue for them much faster than a tiny balance with the same number of transactions would. To put it simply, they can live without you, and your threatening to leave, even if you follow through, is barely going to do anything to their bottom line. They will let you. If you DO have an abnormally huge balance, and it\'s all in a simple checking or savings account, then it might make them pause for thought. But if that\'s true then frankly you\'re doing banking wrong and should move those funds somewhere where they can work harder for you in terms of growth. They might even suggest so themselves and direct you to one of their own ""personal wealth managers""."']

How to keep control of shared expenses inside marriage?

['"JoeTaxpayer\'s answer mentions using a third ""house"" account. In my comment on his answer, I mentioned that you could simply use a bookkeeping account to track this instead of the overhead of an extra real bank account. Here\'s the detail of what I think will work for you. If you use a tool like gnucash (probably also possible in quicken, or if you use paper tracking, etc), create an account called ""Shared Expenses"". Create two sub accounts under that called ""his"" and ""hers"". (I\'m assuming you\'ll have your other accounts tracked in the software as well.) I haven\'t fully tested this approach, so you may have to tweak it a little bit to get exactly what you want. When she pays the rent, record two transactions: When you pay the electric bill, record two transactions: Then you can see at a glance whether the balances on ""his"" and ""hers"" match."', '"Why not start a third account, the ""house"" account? However you decide to fund it, equally or in proportion to income, you both chip in, and the payments for all joint expenses come from there. Rent, utilities, food, phone, cable."', "Being new does not allow me yet to vote on your question, but what a good question it is. We share our opinion in separating finances in our very well going mariage. Currently I have found a sort of okay solution in two websites. These are http://www.yunoo.nl and http://www.moneytrackin.com/. You can actually tag spendings with multiple tags. I don't like the idea that the data is on a remote server, but since I have not found a proper local software solution, I just naively trust their promise that your data is save. Then again our financial situation is not that special.", 'Websites like neobudget dot com or mint dot com can help you see where your money is going, especially if you use mostly checks, debit cards, or credit cards for your purchases. They are less useful if you use cash often.', "I'd say its time to merge finances!", 'Call me old fashioned, but that sounds less like a marriage and more like a business partnership. Maybe there are business tools that would be useful.']

Is it usual for a tradesperson not to charge VAT?

['Assuming this to be in the UK, and I suspect the rules are similar elsewhere, this indeed may be true. There is a threshold beneath which a business does not have to register for VAT - currently a turnover of £81,000. A non VAT registered business does not charge VAT but also cannot reclaim the VAT on their business expenses. For some businesses below the threshold it is worthwhile registering because the amount they can reclaim is significant. However, there are also many small businesses that do a lot of cash only jobs so as to not put the money through the books and therefore avoid any tax liability. There are also many who will get the the customer to buy materials direct to avoid including these in their turnover. Like every type of tax rule there is a grey area between people trying to avoid paying more tax than is needed and dodgy deals to avoid paying their fair share of tax.']

What tax year does my income get assigned to if my client sends the payment in December but I receive it in January?

['Confused? see your CPA']

Does being on the board of a bankruptcy-declaring company affect my credit rating?

["The answer to your question is governed by the structure of the company and your ownership or lack thereof in the business. Australian business can be structured the same way U.S. ones are, as a sole proprietorship, partnership, LLC, or company. If you are only on the board and have no equity, you cannot be affected. You must have some amount of equity in the business to have any chance of being affected. If the business is a sole proprietorship, then the single individual running the business is personally responsible for all debt and the inability to pay obligations would result in personal bankruptcy which would in all likelihood affect your credit score (it would in the U.S.). If it is a partnership, then anyone holding stock in the company is likewise personally responsible for a portion of the debt, and can be subject to bankruptcy and credit score implications. If the business is structured as a limited liability company or a corporation, a stakeholder's personal finances are separate from the business's and their credit score cannot be affected."]

Prize Money, Taxes and Foreign / International Students

["The committee folks told us Did they also give you advice on your medication? Maybe if they told you to take this medicine or that you'd do that? What is it with people taking tax advice from random people? The committee told you that one person should take income belonging to others because they don't know how to explain to you which form to fill. Essentially, they told you to commit a fraud because forms are hard. I now think about the tax implications, that makes me pretty nervous. Rightly so. Am I going to have to pay tax on $3000 of income, even though my actual winning is only $1000? From the IRS standpoint - yes. Can I take in the $3000 as income with $2000 out as expenses to independent contractors somehow? That's the only solution. You'll have to get their W8's, and issue 1099 to each of them for the amounts you're going to pay them. Essentially you volunteered to do what the award committee was supposed to be doing, on your own dime. Note that if you already got the $3K but haven't paid them yet - you'll pay taxes on $3K for the year 2015, but the expense will be for the year 2016. Except guess what: it may land your international students friends in trouble. They're allowed to win prizes. But they're not allowed to work. Being independent contractor is considered work. While I'm sure if USCIS comes knocking, you'll be kind enough to testify on their behalf, the problem might be that the USCIS won't come knocking. They'll just look at their tax returns and deny their visas/extensions. Bottom line, next time ask a professional (EA/CPA licensed in your State) before taking advice from random people who just want the headache of figuring out new forms to go away."]

What factors go into choosing residency?

["A couple of thoughts. Tax benefits are the usual reasons to decide on one residency or another. International tax law is complex, and it's probably best to consult a professional. Certainly without knowing which the other country is I would not want to hazard a guess. If he is really not going to be taxed on the other country, residing there would seem sensible. But... In Canada residency for tax purposes is established for an entire year. If you are resident for more than six months your salary for the year is taxable. Conversely if you are present for less than six months you are not taxable. (This may have changed - it's been twenty years since I did this.) The other issue is healthcare. If you are not resident in Ontario you are not eligible for free healthcare, I believe. He might have to purchase supplemental insurance if he returns occasionally."]

Back of Check Images are Blank and not Endorsed

['"In general, a lack of endorsement (meaning nothing written by the receiver on the back of the check) is equivalent to it being endorsed ""as deposit only"" to a bank that the depositor has an account with. (See Uniform Commercial Code §4-205.) That is, the bank that receives a deposit without any endorsement promises to the banks that process the check along the line all the way back to your bank, that they properly deposited the money into the account of the entity that the check was made out to. With checks being processed with more and more automation, it\'s getting fairly common for there to be little writing needed on the check itself, as the digital copy gets submitted to the banking system for clearing. If you\'re concerned about there being some sort of fraud, that perhaps the entity that you\'re sending money to isn\'t the ones that should be getting it, or that they\'re not actually getting the money, or something like that, that\'s really an entirely different concern. I would expect that if you were saying that you paid something, and the payee said that you hadn\'t, that you would dispute the transaction with your bank. They should be able to follow the electronic trail to where the money went, but I suspect they only do so as part of an investigation (and possibly only in an investigation that involved law enforcement of some type). If you\'re just curious about what bank account number your deposit went into, then it just looks like you\'re the one trying to commit some sort of fraud (even if you\'re just being curious), and they don\'t have much incentive to try to help you out there."']

UK Limited Company paying third party medical costs

["According to HMRC's manual BIM42105, you can't deduct expenses of this kind when calculating your profits for corporation tax: No deduction is allowed for expenditure not incurred wholly and exclusively for trade purposes So at the least, the company will have to pay corporation tax on this donation at some point, assuming it ever makes any profits. There's also the risk that HMRC would say that what is really happening is that you are making a personal donation to this person and the company is giving you income to allow you to do it. In that case, you'd be liable to income tax and employees national insurance, and the company liable to employers national insurance. It should then be deductible from corporation tax, though.", "One possibility to consider would be making an arrangement with a registered UK charity where you would donate the necessary amount for the specific purpose of covering medical costs of that particular person. Charitable donations are expressly deductible from business profits. Some charities may be genuinely interested in helping people from developing countries get quality medical help that's not available in those countries. There may be some organizations in the proposed beneficiary's country that have contacts among the UK charities. PS. I am not a lawyer or an accountant, nor do I claim to be either. The above is not a legal or accounting advice. Consider seeking professional assistance."]

State tax issues for NJ resident with DC tax withheld, and likely refunded

['If you already filed the DC return, you can try and wait with filing the NJ return until you get the answer from DC. You can file an extension request with the NJ division of taxation here. Or, you can file without claiming the credit, and worst case amend later and claim it if DC refuse to refund. I find it highly unlikely that DC will decide that a person staying for a couple of months over the year in hotels will count as a resident.']

U.S. nonresident alien: Is my state tax refund taxable?

["Federal income tax refunds received during 2016 are not taxable income for 2016 (or any other year) on either the Federal or the State tax return. The State income tax refund for 2015 received during 2016 is not taxable income on the State tax return for 2016. It is taxable income on the Federal tax return for 2016 only to the extent that you received a tax benefit (reduction in Federal income tax due) from deducting State income tax as an Itemized Deduction on your 2015 Federal return. If you didn't deduct State income tax because you deducted State sales tax instead, then the State income tax refund is not taxable income on the Federal tax return."]

Roth IRA - Vanguard or Fidelity? If a college student had to pick one?

["The minimum at Schwab to open an IRA is $1000. Why don't you check the two you listed to see what their minimum opening balance is? If you plan to go with ETFs, you want to ask them what their commission is for a minimum trade. In Is investing in an ETF generally your best option after establishing a Roth IRA? sheegaon points out that for the smaller investor, index mutual funds are cheaper than the ETFs, part due to commission, part the bid/ask spread.", "Well, a couple things to keep in mind: Even if you have enough to meet the minimum initial amount, you need to have at least that much income in the year you make the contribution. You'll probably be best served saving up in a savings account so that by the time you have an income (and can thus make contributions), you have enough cash to meet the minimum initial contribution."]

Insurance, healthcare provider, apparent abuse, lack of transparency

['"Just as with any other service provider - vote with your wallet. Do not go back to that doctor\'s office, and make sure they know why. It\'s unheard of that a service provider will not disclose the anticipated charges ahead of time. A service provider saying ""we won\'t tell you how much we charge"" is a huge red flag, and you shouldn\'t have been dealing with them to begin with. Now you know. how can we ever get health care costs under control if there\'s so little transparency? I\'m assuming you\'re in the US. This is not going to change, since there\'s no profit in not screwing the customers. As long as health-care is a for-profit industry, you should expect everyone in it being busy figuring out a way for money to move from your wallet to their. That\'s what capitalism is about."', "I wouldn't classify your treatment as abuse. Medical billing has become more complex not less complex. You need to learn to ask even more questions regarding expenses, you probably need to see these price quotes in writing. You did several things correctly. Staying in-network generally is best because many plans have two deductible limits: In-network, and out-of-network. You need to make sure that the insurance company does credit you with having paid the new patient fee. That will qualify as an expense toward the deductible and your maximum out of pocket for the year. Some doctors offices don't send to insurance companies items that they know will not be covered, not remembering that these costs are critical under the High deductible plans with a health savings account. Doctors offices have problems determining how much the cost to you will be. It depends not just on the insurance company but also which type of plan you have, which sub-plan you have, and are you covered by more than one plan. Not to mention individual deductibles, family deductibles, and annual out-of-pocket amount. All this is wanted prior to the doctor seeing the patient. Most doctors offices will work with you, they know that each insurance plan treats each medical billing code differently, sometimes they make a mistake. Talk to them."]

Is it safer to send credit card number via unsecured website form or by e-mail? What safer options are there?

['Buy a prepaid gift card, such as a MasterCard or Visa gift card. You can find them at the grocery store, a pharmacy, or your local bank. Provide this on their online form. If anyone steals your gift card information, you will have already used the funds for your purchase and there is no further risk to you.', "Some (most) credit cards have a way to get a one-time use number. If that is an available option for one of your cards, that is probably the way to do the very risky transaction. These numbers can be good for only one purchase, or for multiple purchases with a single vendor. This will limit your exposure because they won't have access to your entire account. Also review your fraud protections with your credit card. With the single use number, it won't matter if you use the electronic form or the email. Just make sure you keep the confirmation email or a screen capture of the form.", "Here's one option: Telephone is a lower-tech yet relatively more secure means for transmitting your payment information when a secure web site isn't available. And yet another option: You could send them an encrypted email, but this would require tools (e.g. GPG), setup (public keys), and expertise on their end which they are unlikely to already have. However, ChrisInEdmonton raised a good point in his comment. How can you consider them to be a reputable seller when they don't take basic precautions to protect customers' payment information online? The seller may with good faith charge your card the correct amount and deliver the goods that you expect, but how will they protect your credit card information once in their hands? Would you trust their internal systems if they can't even set up an HTTPS web site?", '"Most people cannot use pgp/gpg and setting it up would, in order to do that correctly, require voice fingerprint verification. Don\'t. Just write a word doc and either encrypt it when saving using the ""save as"" function or encrypt it using zip and email that to them. Then call them and tell them the password. Done."', '"Your biggest risk with a vendor like this is not that your Credit Card Number will be stolen in transit, it is that it will be stolen from the vendor. I agree with @mhoran that using a one-time number is the best plan, provided you have a bank that offers such numbers. Bank of America calls it ""Shop Safe"" while Citibank calls it ""Virtual Account Numbers"". I think Discover card has something similar, but less useful, in that they aren\'t really one-time use, and I think American Express discontinued their service. AFAIK no one else offers anything like it. If you can\'t get a one-time number, then I was going to suggest buying a Visa gift card, until I put together the fact that you are making a purchase in Asia and the gift cards are not authorized for international payments (due to PATRIOT act restrictions). Visa does offer the V.me service which might help, but I doubt your vendor participates (or would even be allowed to participate) if they don\'t offer a secure order form. You can open a pre-paid Visa card account, which is probably what I\'d do. You can buy pre-paid Visa cards the same way you buy Visa gift cards, the difference being you have to register the pre-paid cards (thanks, PATRIOT act) before you can use them. But it\'s not that big a deal to register one, you just fill out the online form your your SSN etc and you\'re good to go. Load it up with enough money to cover your purchase and the FX fees and then cut it up."']

As a shareholder, what are the pros and cons of a Share Consolidation and Return of Capital?

['"The basic theoretical reason for a company to return money to shareholders is that the company doesn\'t need the money for its own purposes (e.g. investment or working capital). So instead of the company just keeping it in the bank, it hands it back so that shareholders can do what they think fit, e.g. investing it elsewhere. In some cases, particularly ""private equity"" deals, you see companies actively borrowing money to payout to shareholders, on the grounds that they can do so cheaply enough that it will improve overall shareholder returns. The trade-off with this kind of ""leveraging up"" is that it usually makes the business more risky and every so often you see it go wrong, e.g. after an economic downturn. It may still be a rational thing to do, but I\'d look at that kind of proposal very carefully. In this case I think things are quite different: the company has sold a valuable asset and has spare cash. It\'s already going to use some of the money to reduce debt so it doesn\'t seem like the company is becoming more risky. Overall if the management is recommending it, I would support it. As you say, the share consolidation seems like just a technical measure and you might as well also support that. I think they want to make their share price seem stable over time to people who are looking at it casually and won\'t be aware of the payout - otherwise it\'d suddenly drop by 60p and might give the impression the company had some bad news. The plan is to essentially cancel one share worth ~960p for every payout they make on 16 shares - since 16x60p = 960p payout this should leave the share price broadly unchanged."']

Does this sound like a great idea regarding being a landlord and starting a real estate empire?

['The idea you present is not uncommon, many have tried it before. It would be a great step to find landlords in your area and talk to them about lessons learned. It might cost you a lunch or cup of coffee but it could be the best investment you make. rent it out for a small profit (hopefully make around 3 - 5k a year in profit) Given the median price of a home is ~220K, and you are investing 44K, you are looking to make between a 6 and 11% profit. I would not classify this as small in the current interest rate environment. One aspect you are overlooking is risk. What happens if a furnace breaks, or someone does not pay their rent? While some may advocate borrowing money to buy rental real estate all reasonable advisers advocate having sufficient reserves to cover emergencies. Keep in mind that 33% of homes in the US do not have a mortgage and some investment experts advocate only buying rentals with cash. Currently owning rental property is a really good deal for the owners for a variety of reasons. Markets are cyclical and I bet things will not be as attractive in 10 years or so. Keep in mind you are borrowing ~220K or whatever you intend to pay. You are on the hook for that. A bank may not lend you the money, and even if they do a couple of false steps could leave you in a deep hole. That should at least give you pause. All that being said, I really like your gumption. I like your desire and perhaps you should set a goal of owning your first rental property for 5 years from now. In the mean time study and become educated in the business. Perhaps get your real estate license. Perhaps go to work for a property management company to learn the ins and outs of their business. I would do this even if I had a better paying full time job.', 'A lot of people do this. For example, in my area nice townhouses go for about $400K, so if you have $80,000 you can buy one and rent it. Here are the typical numbers: So you would make $350 per month or $4,200 per year on $80,000 in capital or about 5% profit. What can go wrong: (1) The property does not rent and sits vacant. You must come up with $2100 in mortgage payments, taxes, and insurance every month without fail or default. (2) Unexpected expenses. A new furnaces costs over $5,000. A new roof costs $7,000. A new appliance costs $600 to $2000 depending on how upscale your property is. I just had a toilet fixed for a leaky plunger. It cost me $200. As you can see maintenance expenses can quickly get a lot higher than the $50 shown above... and not only that, if you fix things as cheaply as possible (as most landlords do), not only does that decrease the rentability of the property, but it causes stuff to break sooner. (3) Deadbeats. Some people will rent your property and then not pay you. Now you have a property with no income, you are spending $2100 per month to pay for it, AND you are facing steep attorney fees to get the deadbeats evicted. They can fight you in court for months. (4) Damage, wear and tear. Whenever a tenant turns over there is always a lot of broken or worn stuff that has to be fixed. Holes in the wall need to be patched. Busted locks, broken windows, non-working toilets, stains on the carpet, stuck doors, ripped screens, leaky showers, broken tiles, painting exterior trim, painting walls, painting fences, etc. You can spend thousands every time a tenant changes. Other caveats: Banks are much more strict about loaning to non home owners. You usually have to have reserve income. So, if you have little or no income, or you are stretched already, it will be difficult to get commercial loans. For example, lets say your take-home pay is $7,000 and you have no mortgage at all (you rent), then it is fine, the bank will loan you the money. But lets say you only have $5,000 in take home pay and you have an $1,800 mortgage on your own home. In that case it is very unlikely a bank will allow you to assume a 2nd mortgage on a rental property. The more you try to borrow, the more reserve income the bank will require. This tends to set a limit on how much you can leverage.', 'This is a reasonable idea and many people have done it. But there are some risks that you need to mitigate. This is a viable business model, but it is a business and you need to treat it as such and expect to work quite hard at it.', '"This is a common and good game-plan to learn valuable life skills and build a supplemental income. Eventually, it could become a primary income, and your strategic risk is overall relatively low. If you are diligent and patient, you are likely to succeed, but at a rate that is so slow that the primary beneficiaries of your efforts may be your children and their children. Which is good! It is a bad gameplan for building an ""empire."" Why? Because you are not the first person in your town with this idea. Probably not even the first person on the block. And among those people, some will be willing to take far more extravagant risks. Some will be better capitalized to begin with. Some will have institutional history with the market along with all the access and insider information that comes with it. As far as we know, you have none of that. Any market condition that yields a profit for you in this space, will yield a larger one for them. In a downturn, they will be able to absorb larger losses than you. So, if your approach is to build an empire, you need to take on a considerably riskier approach, engage with the market in a more direct and time-consuming way, and be prepared to deal with the consequences if those risks play out the wrong way."', '"This is a well worn path and not a bad idea. There are quite a few pitfalls but there are a lot of resources to learn for other people\'s mistakes. Having a plan and doing your research should help you avoid most of them. Here is some general advice to help get you started on the right foot. Know the market you are investing in. The city should have more than one major employer. The population should be rising and hopefully there are other positive economic indicators. Check the city\'s and state\'s chamber of commerce for useful information. You do not want to be stuck holding a bunch of upside down property in Detroit. Accurately calculate expenses. Set aside money for repairs. budget 5% of the rent or 100 a month for repairs if no repairs happen that money goes into the repair fund for the future. Set aside money for capital expenditures if the roof has a 10 years of life left in 10 years you better be ready to replace it same with any major appliances. Your area should have a baseline vacancy rate 5-8% in my area. That says out of a year your property will be vacant for around 6% of the year or 21 days for turnover. You should build that cushion into the budget as well setting aside a portion of the rent to cover that lean period. Some property management will offer ""eviction insurance"" which is basically them enforcing that savings. Financing maybe difficult a lot of banks like to see 25% down payments on investments. You will also face higher interest rates for investment properties. Banks generally also like to see enough money to cover 6 months worth of expenses in your account for all property. Some banks will not give financing for investment property to someone without 1-2 years of landlord experience. All in all finding money will be hard when you gets started and your terms may be less than ideal. (hopefully make around 3 - 5k a year in profit) If that includes loan pay-down and is not just cash-flow you are probably in the right ballpark. I can find $100-$200 dollars cash-flow a month on single family home in my area. Once loan pay-down is included your numbers are close. It sounds like you have a good attitude and a good plan. A book that I really enjoyed and I think may be useful is ""Start Small, Profit Big in Real Estate"" by Jay DeCima. I think of it as required reading for do-it-yourself real estate investors. Good luck and happy investing"', '"This can be done, and there have been many good suggestions on things to do and watch out for. But to my shock I don\'t see anyone offering any words of caution about property managers! Whatever you do, don\'t assume they have your best interests at heart. Do not assume that ""no news is good news"" and that if you aren\'t hearing of problems and are just collecting rent checks, everything must be fine. You can easily end up with tenants you would never have allowed yourself, or tenants with pets that you would not have allowed, etc. Especially if the manager doesn\'t want you to have a vacancy and potentially lose you as a client, they may very well lower their standards just to get the place occupied. And a year or two or three later, you may find yourself looking at a very large repair bill and wonder how on earth it could have happened when you supposedly had someone looking out for your property! There are quality, ethical property managers out there. They are not all bad to be certain. But whatever you do, check up on them. And with multiple properties - especially if in multiple areas/states etc. - this can be nearly a full time job in itself. As the saying goes, ""Trust, but verify"". I have never found this to apply more than with rental properties and property management. Don\'t leave anything significant to them 100%. You can\'t even assume that a rule like ""all expenses over $50 must be cleared by me first"", as that can simply mean that they don\'t bother to come to you for certain kinds of repairs that would cost more than that, or that they just get them ""taken care of"" by their own person (done poorly, illegally, etc.) and never tell you. Never trust their choice of tenants blindly. Visit the place yourself at least every few months - a quick driveby at a minimum or better if you can, arrange a reason to walk through the house personally. Check the back yard, never assume that the front yard is indicative of anything else. Never assume that a ""no pets"" rule will be followed, or that tenants wouldn\'t lie to the management about having pets. Never assume that the tenants won\'t move additional people into the property as well. Always expect a bare minimum of 1 month vacancy every year, and an additional minimum of 1 month\'s rental revenue in unexpected maintenance/repairs every year. This is at a minimum! You might do much better than this, and have a high quality tenant in place for years who costs next to nothing in extra maintenance. But do not count on it. Rental real estate investing looks so simple on paper, where it\'s just numbers. But reality has a very rude habit of surprising you when you least expect it. After all, no one expects the Spanish Inquisition! Good luck!"', "I have done something similar to this myself. What you are suggesting is a sound theory and it works. The issues are (which is why it's the reason not everyone does it) : The initial cost is great, many people in their 20s or 30s cannot afford their own home, let alone buy second properties. The time to build up a portfolio is very long term and is best for a pension investment. it's often not best for diversification - you've heard not putting all your eggs in one basket? With property deposits, you need to put a lot of eggs in to make it work and this can leave you vulnerable. there can be lots of work involved. Renovating is a huge pain and cost and you've already mentioned tennants not paying! unlike a bank account or bonds/shares etc. You cannot get to your savings/investments quickly if you need to (or find an opportunity) But after considering these and deciding the plunge is worth it, I would say go for it, be a good landlord, with good quality property and you'll have a great nest egg. If you try just one and see how it goes, with population increase, in a safe (respectable) location, the value of the investment should continue to rise (which it doesn't in a bank) and you can expect a 5%+ rental return (very hard to find in cash account!) Hope it goes well!", '"BEFORE you invest in a house, make sure you account for all the returns, risks and costs, and compare them to returns, risks and costs of other investments. If you invest 20% of a house\'s value in another investment, you would also expect a return. You also probably will not have the cost interest for the balance (80% of ???). I have heard people say ""If I have a rental property, I\'m just throwing away money - I\'ll have nothing at the end"" - if you get an interest-only loan, the same will apply, if you pay off your mortgage, you\'re paying a lot more - you could save/invest the extra, and then you WILL have something at the end (+interest). If you want to compare renting and owning, count the interest against the rental incoming against lost revenue (for however much actual money you\'ve invested so far) + interest. I\'ve done the sums here (renting vs. owning, which IS slightly different - e.g. my house will never be empty, I pay extra if I want a different house/location). Not counting for the up-front costs (real estate, mortgage establishment etc), and not accounting for house price fluctuations, I get about the same ""return"" on buying as investing at the bank. Houses do, of course, fluctuate, both up and down (risk!), usually up in the long term. On the other hand, many people do lose out big time - some friends of mine invested when the market was high (everyone was investing in houses), they paid off as much as they could, then the price dropped, and they panicked and sold for even less than they bought for. The same applies if, in your example, house prices drop too much, so you owe more than the house is worth - the bank may force you to sell (or offer your own house as collateral). Don\'t forget about the hidden costs - lawn mowing and snow shoveling were mentioned, insurance, maintenance, etc - and risks like fluctuating rental prices, bad tenants, tenants moving on (loss of incoming, cleaning expenses, tidying up the place etc)...."']

Pros/cons of drawing income in retirement from sole-owner corporation vs. sole-proprietorship?

['"Not really, no. The assumption you\'re making—withdrawals from a corporation are subject to ""[ordinary] income tax""—is simplistic. ""Income tax"" encompasses many taxes, some more benign than others, owing to credits and exemptions based on the kind of income. Moreover, the choices you listed as benefits in the sole-proprietor case—the RRSP, the TFSA, and capital gains treatment for non-registered investments—all remain open to the owner of a small corporation ... the RRSP to the extent that the owner has received salary to create contribution room. A corporation can even, at some expense, establish a defined benefit (DB) pension plan and exceed individual RRSP contribution limits. Yes, there is a more tax-efficient way for small business owners to benefit when it comes time to retirement. Here is an outline of two things I\'m aware of: If your retirement withdrawals from your Canadian small business corporation would constitute withdrawal from the corporation\'s retained earnings (profits), i.e. income to the corporation that had already been subject to corporate income tax in prior years, then the corporation is able to declare such distributions as dividends and issue you a T5 slip (Statement of Investment Income) instead of a T4 slip (Statement of Remuneration Paid). Dividends received by Canadian residents from Canadian corporations benefit from the Dividend Tax Credit (DTC), which substantially increases the amount of income you can receive without incurring income tax. See TaxTips.ca - Non-eligible (small business) dividend tax credit (DTC). Quote: For a single individual with no income other than taxable Canadian dividends which are eligible for the small business dividend tax credit, in 2014 approximately $35,551 [...] could be earned before any federal* taxes were payable. * Provincial DTCs vary, and so combined federal/provincial maximums vary. See here. If you\'re wondering about ""non-eligible"" vs. ""eligible"": private small business corporation dividends are generally considered non-eligible for the best DTC benefit—but they get some benefit—while a large public corporation\'s dividends would generally be considered eligible. Eligible/non-eligible has to do with the corporation\'s own income tax rates; since Canadian small businesses already get a big tax break that large companies don\'t enjoy, the DTC for small businesses isn\'t as good as the DTC for public company dividends. Finally, even if there is hardly any same-year income tax advantage in taking dividends over salary from an active small business corporation (when you factor in both the income tax paid by the corporation and the individual), dividends still allow a business owner to smooth his income over time, which can result in a lower lifetime average tax rate. So you can use your business as a retained earnings piggy bank to spin off dividends that attract less tax than ordinary income. But! ... if you can convince somebody to buy your business from you, then you can benefit from the lifetime capital gains exemption of up to $800,000 on qualifying small business shares. i.e. you can receive up to $800K tax-free on the sale of your small business shares. This lifetime capital gains exemption is a big carrot—designed, I believe, to incentivize Canadian entrepreneurs to develop going-concern businesses that have value beyond their own time in the business. This means building things that would make your business worth buying, e.g. a valued brand or product, a customer base, intellectual property, etc. Of course, there are details and conditions with all of what I described, and I am not an accountant, so please consult a qualified, conflict-free professional if you need advice specific to your situation."']

First time consultant, doubts on Taxation

['1.If the compensation that I receive is over 10 lakhs, how much would be deducted as tax No tax will be deducted by the company. You have to calculate the tax and pay in Advance by yourself. There are quite a few Banks that give you online facility to pay your tax. There is no service tax. Otherwise the tax slabs are right. The current budget has slightly revised the tax brackets. 2.So are these the right taxes and % that Need to be paid? If not do let me know the correct deductions. Yes. Revised brackets for financial year 2014-2015 are NIL for first 2.5 lakhs. Other brackets are unchanged. 4.What others legal options I have to decrease the tax liability? As an employee of my ex company I had once taken an FD (that reduced my tax) The options are same as salaried, i.e. you can claim exemption under 80C or on interest of housing loan, etc. As a consultant certain expenses can also be deducted. You should also talk to a CA who can help you with this as there will be some paperwork involved.', '"I would look into the possibility that the promise ""that no taxes will be withheld"" is all about your status as a \'consultant\'. They may be meaning you to be treated like a business they buy services from. In Canada the distinction is very watery and I presume the same in India. If you agree to become a business, then you must look into how that business income will be taxed."', 'This is how a consulting engagement in India works. If you are registered for Service Tax and have a service tax number, no tax is deducted at source and you have to pay 12.36% to service tax department during filing (once a quarter). If you do not have Service tax number i.e. not registered for service tax, the company is liable to deduct 10% at source and give the same to Income Tax Dept. and give you a Form-16 at the end of the financial year. If you fall in 10% tax bracket, no further tax liability, if you are in 30%, 20% more needs to be paid to Income Tax Dept.(calculate for 20% tax bracket). The tax slabs given above are fine. If you fail to pay the remainder tax (if applicable) Income Tax Dept. will send you a demand notice, politely asking you to pay at the end of the FY. I would suggest you talk to a CA, as there are implications of advance tax (on your consulting income) to be paid once a quarter.']

Free “Rich Dad” education, with “free gift”: Is it legitimate, or is it a sales ploy?

['"Robert Kiyosaki\'s is basically a get-rich quick author. But to answer your question: It is a sales pitch in disguise. See Marketplace\'s report on a Kiyosaki seminar, which reveals that the free work shop is a sales pitch for a 3-day work shop which costs several hundred dollars. And the 3-day workshop is a sales pitch for ""advanced"" training which can cost as much as $45,000 (presumably in Canadian dollars, as the report was done in Canada). He does touch on some basic sound principles, but it\'s mixed with a lot of really bad (and in some cases illegal) advice. You\'ll do much better to invest your time and money in reading materials that aren\'t advertised via infomercials. Kiyosaki may well be rich, but it\'s from selling his Rich Dad-branded material, not from investing in real estate, or any other investment portfolio See also John T. Reed\'s guru rating, and his review of Kiyosaki\'s book, Rich Dad, Poor Dad."', "As with any business, there's a huge learning curve. Rich Dad gives you the fundamentals.. which are sound.. you then need to spend time getting the nitty gritty details of the business ... be it real estate, stock investing etc. Kiyosaki is a wealthy man... I've listened to some of his podcasts and he know what he's talking about.. AND.. he's been in the business for 20+ years.", "Kiyosaki says his methods of actions are not suitable for the average investor. They are meant for those wanting to excel at investing, and are willing to work for it. Personally, I wouldn't want to own ten apartments, because it sounds like a terrible headache. I would much rather have a huge portfolio of index funds. I believe that Kiyosaki's method allegedly perform better than the passive 'invest-diversify-hold' strategy, but would require a new mindset and dedication, and are risky unless you are willing to invest a lot of time learning the fine details. I prefer to dedicate my time elsewhere.", "I have taken the free Kiyosaki evening course, and it does give some good information. It is an upsell to the $500 weekend course, which I also took. That course taught me enough about real-estate investing to get started. I have not yet had the need to pursue his other, more expensive courses. Read his books, take the $500 course, read other people's books on real estate investing, talk to other like-minded individuals, and gain some experience. I understand real estate better than I understand paper assets because I spent more time studying real estate. If you want to invest in real estate, study it first. If you want to invest in paper assets, study those first."]

Is the MBA an overrated degree/qualification?

['"For some situations, an MBA can be overrated in the sense that given the cost of time and money, it isn\'t going to be a great return in some cases. There can be tens of thousands of dollars and a couple of years to get an MBA that some people believes should automatically make them worth $x more in their salary and life should be simple. I\'d likely inquire as to what expectations do you have for what an MBA will do for you. Are you expecting to make connections in getting the degree? Are you expecting to learn about how to run a business from the coursework? Are you expecting something else? Depending on what you are expecting, I could see MBA as being anything from a great choice to a lousy choice for people. As noted by Pete Belford\'s comment, an MBA from a ""degree mill"" would be all but worthless. Where you go can reflect the value of the education as some universities are known for their program about this such as Ivy League schools."', "The quality of the MBA is really what decides if it's worth it. You have to make sure the school where you are going to is highly regarded or even prestigious. There is a big difference between what you find prestigious and others find prestigious. The student believing it is an awesome school is not enough, the companies and recruiters must believe it too. Make sure you do your homework on the ranking of the MBA program. Additionally, your undergraduate plays a role how well your MBA is perceived. A decent undergraduate degree complemented with an MBA from a highly ranked school will put you in a trajectory for a high salary and a management position.", "There is a distinct difference between 'having a degree' and 'being genuinely smart and business savvy'. If you're genuinely smart and business savvy you could theoretically break into the business world with no degree and make a decent salary. The trouble there is that many people aren't smart and business savvy until they get a degree. On the other hand, it's very possible to get a degree and be completely oblivious about how to conduct your career (poor resume / interviewing skills, no business sense etc). In that case an MBA might not be totally useful (but probably still will be to a degree). However, if you ARE smart about how you conduct your career, an MBA should help you immensely.", 'It depends on what you want it for If it is just salary then maybe not, for instance, some MBA programs may suggest their graduates make $100,000 per year, but you work in an oil field barely finishing high school and make $300,000 a year. If you go for the MBA right now, you may miss your chance to work in the oil industry for another few years (or weeks), but at the same time, the MBA lasts forever (although, real world experience is also relevant) and it may give you a leg up when you are 50 years old in the unemployment line (or maybe not, because you are overqualified) everything in life is a cost/benefit analysis Passing the GRE lasts for five years, so keep that in mind']

Self employed as IT consultant and as massage therapist: Do I need 2 HST numbers?

['Given your clarifying points, it sounds like you are running both businesses as one combined business. As such, you should be able to get just a single HST number and use that. However, let me please urge you to contact a professional accountant and possibly a lawyer, as it is very unusual to be performing these services without a business license, and you may be exposing yourself to civil penalties and placing your personal assets (e.g. your house) at risk. Additionally, it may be beneficial for you to run these as businesses as you can likely write off (more of) your expenses.']

Taxable Website Ad Revenue

["I'm not a tax advisor, but I've done freelance work, so... If any of your side-business revenue is reported on a 1099, you're now a business owner, which is why Schedule C must be filled out. As a business owner, minimum wage doesn't apply to you. All revenue is income to you, and you owe taxes on the profit, after subtracting legitimate (verifiable) business expenses. You'll want to talk to a real tax advisor if you're going to start expensing mileage, part of your house (if you use a home office), etc. Don't forget that you'll owe self-employment tax (the employer's half of your payroll tax). You can't save money on business taxes by paying yourself a wage and then counting it as an expense to the business. You'll definitely want to talk to a tax expert if you start playing around with finances as an (the) owner of the business. Income that is not reported on a 1099 should be reported as hobby income.", "If the $5000 is income, then you need to pay income taxes on it. That's simply the way it works. Hourly rate has nothing to do with whether or not you pay taxes. If it helps, try to think of the $5000 as the first $5000 you make for the year. Now it's covered by your standard deduction and you're not paying taxes on it."]

UK - reclaim VAT on purchases for freelance work

["If you mostly do work for businesses/individuals who are VAT registered it's a no-brainer to become VAT registered yourself... Although you will have to charge your customers VAT (and pass this on to HMRC) because they are VAT-registered they will reclaim the amount so it won't actually 'cost' them anything. At the same time, you can reclaim all the VAT you're currently being charged on your business expenditure (business equipment, tickets to business events, business software, accountancy/other business services you pay for, web hosting etc etc etc) However, if most of your clients are not VAT-registered it's not worth you registering. You would have to charge your customers an extra 20% (and they wouldn't be able to claim it back!) and you would have to pass this on to HMRC. Although you could still claim for goods and services you purchase for business use, essentially you'd just be another tax collector for HMRC. That said, at the end of the day it's up to you! VAT returns are quarterly and dead simple. Just keep a spreadsheet with your invoices (output tax) and receipts (input tax) and then do some basic maths to submit the final numbers to HMRC. No accountant required!", "You are either VAT registered or you are not VAT registered. If you are not VAT registered, then you are not allowed to charge customers VAT, and you cannot reclaim VAT that you are paying. You are however allowed to deduct the cost of goods including VAT from your expenses. So if you buy a computer for £1000 + £200 VAT, and you can deduct the computer as an expense to reduce your profits that you pay income tax for, then the expense is £1,200 and not just £1,000. If you are VAT registered, then you MUST charge every customer 20% VAT. Business customers don't mind at all, but private customers will be happier if you don't charge VAT because your bills will be a lot lower. You take all the VAT that you received, then subtract all the VAT that you paid for business expenses and that you have invoices for, and send the remainder to HMRC four times a year. (The reason that businesses don't mind paying VAT is because they can in turn deduct the VAT they pay you from the VAT that they received and for every pound they give you, they give one pound less to HMRC). Note that when you have expenses that are deductible from your profits, you can now only deduct the cost excluding VAT. On the other hand, the VAT you receive doesn't count as income and doesn't lead to profits that you need to pay income tax for. It's your decision whether you want to be VAT registered or not, unless your revenue exceeds some limit (somewhere between £70,000 and £80,000 per year) where you must register for VAT."]

What gives non-dividend stocks value to purchasers? [duplicate]

['Dividends are not fixed. A profitable company which is rapidly expanding, and thus cash-strapped may very well skip dividends, yet that same fast growth makes it valuable. When markets saturate, and expansion stops, the same company may now have a large free cash flow so it can pay dividends.', '"A share of stock is a share of the underlying business. If one believes the underlying business will grow in value, then one would expect the stock price to increase commensurately. Participants in the stock market, in theory, assign value based on some combination of factors like capital assets, cash on hand, revenue, cash flow, profits, dividends paid, and a bunch of other things, including ""intangibles"" like customer loyalty. A dividend stream may be more important to one investor than another. But, essentially, non-dividend paying companies (and, thus, their shares) are expected by their owners to become more valuable over time, at which point they may be sold for a profit. EDIT TO ADD: Let\'s take an extremely simple example of company valuation: book value, or the sum of assets (capital, cash, etc) and liabilities (debt, etc). Suppose our company has a book value of $1M today, and has 1 million shares outstanding, and so each share is priced at $1. Now, suppose the company, over the next year, puts another $1M in the bank through its profitable operation. Now, the book value is $2/share. Suppose further that the stock price did not go up, so the market capitalization is still $1M, but the underlying asset is worth $2M. Some extremely rational market participant should then immediately use his $1M to buy up all the shares of the company for $1M and sell the underlying assets for their $2M value, for an instant profit of 100%. But this rarely happens, because the existing shareholders are also rational, can read the balance sheet, and refuse to sell their shares unless they get something a lot closer to $2--likely even more if they expect the company to keep getting bigger. In reality, the valuation of shares is obviously much more complicated, but this is the essence of it. This is how one makes money from growth (as opposed to income) stocks. You are correct that you get no income stream while you hold the asset. But you do get money from selling, eventually."', '"One way to value companies is to use a Dividend discount model. In substance, it consists in estimating future dividends and calculating their present value. So it is a methodology which considers that an equity is similar to a bond and estimates its current value based on future cash flows. A company may not be paying dividends now, but because its future earnings prospects are good may pay some in the future. In that case the DDM model will give a non-zero value to that stock. If on the other hand you think a company won\'t ever make any profits and therefore never pay any dividends, then it\'s probably worth 0! Take Microsoft as an example - it currently pays ~3% dividend per annum. The stock has been listed since 1986 and yet it did not pay any dividends until 2003. But the stock has been rising regularly since the beginning because people had ""priced in"" the fact that there was a high chance that the company would become very profitable - which proved true in the long term (+60,000% including dividends since the IPO!)."', '"Also note that a share of voting stock is a vote at the stockholder\'s meeting, whether it\'s dividend or non-dividend. That has value to the company and major stockholders in terms of protecting their own interests, and has value to anyone considering a takeover of the company or who otherwise wants to drive the company\'s policy. Similarly, if the company is bought out, the share will generally be replaced by shares in whatever the new owning company is. So it really does represent ""a slice of the company"" in several vary practical ways, and thus has fairly well-defined intrinsic value linked to the company\'s perceived value. If its price drops too low the company becomes more vulnerable to hostile takeover, which means the company itself will often be motivated to buy back shares to protect itself from that threat. One of the questions always asked when making an investment is whether you\'re looking for growth (are you hoping its intrinsic value will increase) or income (are you hoping it will pay you a premium for owning it). Non-dividend stocks are a pure growth bet. Dividend-paying stocks are typically a mixture of growth and income, at various trade-off points. What\'s right for you depends on your goals, timeframe, risk tolerance, and what else is already in your portfolio."', 'Instead of giving part of their profits back as dividends, management puts it back into the company so the company can grow and produce higher profits. When these companies do well, there is high demand for them as in the long term higher profits equates to a higher share price. So if a company invests in itself to grow its profits higher and higher, one of the main reasons investors will buy the shares, is in the expectation of future capital gains. In fact just because a company pays a dividend, would you still buy it if the share price kept decreasing year after year? Lets put it this way: Company A makes record profits year after year, continually keeps beating market expectations, its share price keeps going up, but it pays no dividend instead reinvests its profits to continually grow the business. Company B pays a dividend instead of reinvesting to grow the business, it has been surprising the market on the downside for a few years now, it has had some profit warnings lately and its share price has consistently been dropping for over a year. Which company would you be interested in buying out of the two? I know I would be interested in buying Company A, and I would definitely stay away from Company B. Company A may or may not pay dividends in the future, but if Company B continues on this path it will soon run out of money to pay dividends. Most market gains are made through capital gains rather than dividends, and most people invest in the hope the shares they buy go up in price over time. Dividends can be one attractant to investors but they are not the only one.', 'A Company start with say $100. Lets say the max it can borrow from bank is $100 @ $10 a year as Interest. After a years say, On the $200 the company made a profit of $110. So it now has total $310 Option 1: Company pays back the Bank $100 + $10. It further gave away the $100 back to shareholders as dividends. The Balance with company $100. It can again start the second year, borrow from Bank $100 @ 10 interest and restart. Option 2: Company pays back the Bank $100 + $10. It now has $200. It can now borrow $200 from Bank @ $20. After a year it makes a profit of $250. [Economics of scale result $30 more] Quite a few companies in growth phase use Option 2 as they can grow faster, achieve economies of scale, keep competition at bay, etc Now if I had a share of this company say 1 @ $1, by end of first year its value would be $2, at the end of year 2 it would be $3.3. Now there is someone else who wants to buy this share at end of year 1. I would say this share gives me 100% returns every year, so I will not sell at $2. Give me $3 at the end of first year. The buyer would think well, if I buy this at $3, first year I would notionally get $.3 and from then on $1 every year. Not bad. This is still better than other stocks and better than Bank CD etc ... So as long as the company is doing well and expected to do well in future its price keeps on increasing as there is someone who want to buy. Why would someone want to sell and not hold one: 1. Needs cash for buying house or other purposes, close to retirement etc 2. Is balancing the portfolio to make is less risk based 3. Quite a few similar reasons Why would someone feel its right to buy: 1. Has cash and is young is open to small risk 2. Believes the value will still go up further 3. Quite a few similar reasons', '"As an owner of a share of a business you also ""own"" profits made by the business. But you delegate company management to reinvest those profits, on your behalf, to make even more profits. So your share of the business is a little money-making machine that should grow, without you having to pay taxes on the dividends and without you having to decide where to reinvest your share of the profit."', '"Yes, I agree with you. Saying that the value of the stock will grow as the company grows and acquires more assets ... I don\'t see why. Okay, I\'m a nice guy and I want to see other people do well, but what do I care how much money they\'re making if they\'re not giving any of it to ME? Frankly I think it\'s like people who buy commemorative plates or beanie babies or other ""collectibles"" as an investment. As long as others are also buying them as an investment, and buying and reselling at a profit, the value will continue to go up. But one day people say, Wait, is this little stuffed toy really worth $10,000? and the balloon bursts. Confer Dutch tulips: http://www.damninteresting.com/the-dutch-tulip-bubble-of-1637/ As I see it, what gives a non-dividend-paying stock value is mostly the expectation that at some time in the future it will pay dividends. This is especially true of new start-up companies. As you mentioned, there\'s also the possibility of a takeover. It wouldn\'t have to be a hostile takeover, any takeover would do. At that point the buying company either buys the stock or exchanges it for shares of their own. In the first case you now have cash for your investment and in the second case you now have stock in a dividend-paying company -- or in another non-dividend-paying company and you start the cycle over."', '"Most companies are taken over. One can reasonably guess that company X will be taken over for a price P, at some future point in time. Then the company has a value today, that is less than price P, by a large enough margin so that the investor will likely ""make out"" when the company finally is taken over at some unknown point in time. The exception is a company like Microsoft or Apple that basically grow too large to be taken over. But then they eventually start paying dividends when they become ""mature."" Again, the trick, during the non-dividend paying period (e.g. ten or fifteen years ago) is to guess what dividends will be paid in some future time, and price the stock low enough today so that it will be worthwhile for the buyer."']

Does the stock market create any sort of value?

['"You are correct that a share of stock in a company has zero intrinsic value. Even if the company typically pays dividends, there\'s no guarantee that it will continue to do so. A share\'s only worth comes from: So that\'s one step better than a Ponzi scheme, because in a Ponzi scheme there\'s not actually any value present behind the scenes, making option (2) literally impossible. In this way company stock is similar to paper money. It\'s only worth something because people believe it\'s worth something. Slightly better than company stock is company bonds. Since a bond is a contract between you and the company, if the company should go out of business then bondholders at least get to stand near the front of the line when the company\'s assets are liquidated. I work in finance, and the vast majority of my colleagues agree that the secondary stock market (what the average citizen simply calls ""the stock market"") is a giant confidence game. And yet it\'s so profitable to believe in the value of equities the way everyone else does, that we all happily pretend these ones and zeroes we move around have actual value."', '"I probably don\'t understand something. I think you are correct about that. :) The main way money enters the stock market is through investors investing and taking money out. Money doesn\'t exactly ""enter"" the stock market. Shares of stock are bought and sold by investors to investors. The market is just a mechanism for a buyer and seller to find each other. For the purposes of this question, we will only consider non-dividend stocks. Okay. When you buy stock, it is claimed that you own a small portion of the company. This statement has no backing, as you cannot exchange your stock for the company\'s assets. For example, if I bought $10 of Apple Stock early on, but it later went up to $399, I can\'t go to Apple and say ""I own $399 of you, here you go it back, give me an iPhone."" The only way to redeem this is to sell the stock to another investor (like a Ponzi Scheme.) It is true that when you own stock, you own a small portion of the company. No, you can\'t just destroy your portion of the company; that wouldn\'t be fair to the other investors. But you can very easily sell your portion to another investor. The stock market facilitates that sale, making it very easy to either sell your shares or buy more shares. It\'s not a Ponzi scheme. The only reason your hypothetical share is said to be ""worth"" $399 is that there is a buyer that wants to buy it at $399. But there is a real company behind the stock, and it is making real money. There are several existing questions that discuss what gives a stock value besides a dividend: The stock market goes up only when more people invest in it. Although the stock market keeps tabs on Businesses, the profits of Businesses do not actually flow into the Stock Market. In particular, if no one puts money in the stock market, it doesn\'t matter how good the businesses do. The value of a stock is simply what a buyer is willing to pay for it. You are correct that there is not always a correlation between the price of a stock and how well the company is doing. But let\'s look at another hypothetical scenario. Let\'s say that I started and run a publicly-held company that sells widgets. The company is doing very well; I\'m selling lots of widgets. In fact, the company is making incredible amounts of money. However, the stock price is not going up as fast as our revenues. This could be due to a number of reasons: investors might not be aware of our success, or investors might not think our success is sustainable. I, as the founder, own lots of shares myself, and if I want a return on my investment, I can do a couple of things with the large revenues of the company: I can either continue to reinvest revenue in the company, growing the company even more (in the hopes that investors will start to notice and the stock price will rise), or I can start paying a dividend. Either way, all the current stock holders benefit from the success of the company."', "When you own stock in a company, you do literally own part of the business, even if it's a small portion. Anyone amassing over 50% of shares really does have a controlling interest. No, you can't trade a handful of AAPL shares back to Apple for an iPod, but you can sell the shares and then go buy an iPod with the proceeds. Stock prices change over time because the underlying companies are worth more or less and people are willing to pay more or less for those shares. There is no Ponzi scheme because each share you own can be bought or sold on the open market. Dividends come from the company profits, not from other investors. On the other hand, money only has value because everyone believes it has value. There's the real conspiracy.", '"With regards to ""the stock market,"" there are actually two markets involved here: PRIMARY MARKET Value is created in the primary market where capital is exchanged for a residual interest in an opportunity. As a theoretical example, if a person operating solo (or with a small team) were to discover or create a breakthrough product, such as an retro-aging pill, that person likely wouldn\'t have the financial means to fully capitalize on his new-found idea. Others with more capital may also soon discover his idea or improve upon it and exploit it before he has a chance to. For a real life example, a person studying at a California university during the 1990s discovered a method to index internet webpages and was approached by some students after a talk on the subject. He returned to his native southern Europe country seeking funds to develop the web-indexing business and failed to do so. Two of the students that approached him found capital readily available from investors in their campus sphere; their business is today one of the biggest in the world. They had exchanged part of their residual interest for capital to develop their business. The primary market of the stock market works mostly same in creating value. It is also dependent upon the secondary market. SECONDARY MARKET The secondary market indicates the day-to-day value of an enterprise. That market allows shareholders to manage their risk appetites and the enterprise\'s operators to execute their shareholders\' interest for gains. In most cases, a secondary market reference will be used for pricing a primary market issuance. Without that reference, capital would be allocated less efficiently creating additional costs for all involved, issuers and investors. Consider what would happen if you sought to purchase a house and the mortgage lenders had no indication what the property was worth. This would make capital very expensive or possibly deny you access to credit. By having an indication, all involved are better off. That is value creating. There are some large developed economies\' equity markets, such as that in Germany, where many large enterprises stay privately held and credit financing, mostly from banks, is used. The approach has proven successful as well. So why do some nations\' financial markets still rely on capricious stock markets when private credit financing may do just fine in many cases? It\'s largely a matter of national culture. Countries such as the Netherlands, the UK and the US have long had active equity markets in continuous use that investors have trusted for centuries. CONCLUSION When leaders of an enterprise wish to grow the business to a large size with investment from the stock market, they aren\'t limited by the size of their banks\' capital. Those leaders and their prospective investors will rely on the secondary market to determine values. In addition, if the leaders raise equity instead of debt capital, they are usually accorded more flexibility to take risks since shareholders usually have their own flexibility to transfer those risks to other investors if for any number of reasons they choose to do so. Stock markets create value in many other ways. The above are the main ways."', "Let's say that you bought a share of Apple for $10. When (if ever) their stock sold for $10, it was a very small company with a very small net worth; that is, the excess of assets over liabilities. Your $10 share was perhaps a 1/10,000,000th share of a tiny company. Over the years, Apple has developed both software and hardware that have real value to the world. No-one knew they needed a smartphone and, particularly, an iPhone, until Apple showed it to us. The same is true of iPads, iPods, Apple watches, etc. Because of the sales of products and services, Apple is now a huge company with a huge net worth. Obviously, your 1/10,000,000th share of the company is now worth a lot more. Perhaps it is worth $399. Maybe you think Apples good days are behind it. After all, it is harder to grow a huge company 15% a year than it is a small company. So maybe you will go into the marketplace and offer to sell your 1/10,000,000th share of Apple. If someone offers you $399, would you take it? The value of stocks in the market is not a Ponzi scheme, although it is a bit speculative. You might have a different conclusion and different research about the future value of Apple than I do. Your research might lead you to believe the stock is worth $399. Mine might suggest it's worth $375. Then I wouldn't buy. The value of stocks in the market is based on the present and estimated future value of living, breathing companies that are growing, shrinking and steady. The value of each company changes all the time. So, then, does the price of the stock. Real value is created in the stock market when real value is created in the underlying company.", '"It\'s not a ponzi scheme, and it does create value. I think you are confusing ""creating value"" and ""producing something"". The stock market does create value, but not in the same way as Toyota creates value by making a car. The stock market does not produce anything. The main way money enters the stock market is through investors investing and taking money out. The only other cash flow is in through dividends and out when businesses go public. & The stock market goes up only when more people invest in it. Although the stock market keeps tabs on Businesses, the profits of Businesses do not actually flow into the Stock Market. Earnings are the in-flow that you are missing here. Business profits DO flow back into the stock market through earnings and dividends. Think about a private company: if it has $100,000 in profits for the year then the company keeps $100,000, but if that same company is publicly traded with 100,000 shares outstanding then, all else being equal, each of those shares went up by $1. When you buy stock, it is claimed that you own a small portion of the company. This statement has no backing, as you cannot exchange your stock for the company\'s assets. You can\'t go to an Apple store and try to pay with a stock certificate, but that doesn\'t mean the certificate doesn\'t have value. Using your agriculture example, you wouldn\'t be able to pay with a basket of tomatoes either. You wouldn\'t even be able to pay with a lump of gold! We used to do that. It was called the barter system. Companies also do buy shares back from the market using company cash. Although they usually do it through clearing-houses that are capable of moving blocks of 1,000 shares at a time."', '"In general, I think you\'re conflating a lot of ideas. The stock market is not like a supermarket. With the exception of a direct issue, you\'re not buying your shares from the company or from the New York Stock Exchange you\'re buying from an owner of stock, Joe, Sally, a pension fund, a hedge fund, etc; it\'s not sitting on a shelf at the stock market. When you buy an Apple stock you don\'t own $10 of Apple, you own 1/5,480,000,000th of Apple because Apple has 5,480,000,000 shares outstanding. When a the board gets together to vote on and approve a dividend the approved dividend is then divided by 5.48 billion to determine how much each owner receives. The company doesn\'t pay dividends out to owners from a pot of money it received from new owners; it sold iPhones at a profit and is sending a portion of that profit to the owners of the company. ""When you buy stock, it is claimed that you own a small portion of the company. This statement has no backing, as you cannot exchange your stock for the company\'s assets."" The statement does have backing. It\'s backed by the US Judicial system. But there\'s a difference between owning a company and owning the assets of the company. You own 1/5,480,000,000 of the company and the company owns the company\'s assets. Nevermind how disruptive it would be if any shareholder could unilaterally decide to sell a company\'s buildings or other assets. This is not a ponzi scheme because when you buy or sell your Apple stock, it has no impact on Apple, you\'re simply transacting with another random shareholder (barring a share-repurchase or direct issue). Apple doesn\'t receive the proceeds of your private transaction, you do. As far as value goes, yes the stock market provides tons of value and is a staple of capitalism. The stock market provides an avenue of financing for companies. Rather than taking a loan, a company\'s board can choose to relinquish some control and take on additional owners who will share in the spoils of the enterprise. Additionally, the exchanges deliver value via an unbelievable level of liquidity. You don\'t have to go seek out Joe or Sally when you want to sell your Apple stock. You don\'t need to put your shares on Craigslist in the hope of finding a buyer. You don\'t have to negotiate a price with someone who knows you want to sell. You just place an order at an exchange and you\'re aligned with a buyer. Also understand that anything can move up or down in value without any money actually changing hands. Say you get your hands on a pair of shoes (or whatever), they\'re hot on the market, very rare and sought after. You think you can sell them for $1,000. On tonight\'s news it turns out that the leather is actually from humans and the CEO of the company is being indicted, the company is falling apart, etc. Your shoes just went from $1,000 to $0 with no money changing hands (or from $1,000 to $100,000 depending on how cynical you are)."', 'The stock market exists for two reasons. It lets companies raise money to invest, and it lets company owners cash out and get money instead of part-ownership of a company when they are ready to do so. But to accomplish these goals effectively, it needs many more transactions than just those kinds of transaction, because you have to be able to find a buyer when you need one and to have a market price. So there are also a lot of transactions that are just to try to make short-term profit. But we need those transactions to provide the market liquidity to let the stock market work properly for its actual purposes.', "When you own a share, you also own a vote (in most cases). That vote is your means of controlling the assets and management of the company. If you had enough votes and wanted to trade a share for an iPhone or liquidate the company entirely, you could do it. The only thing that prevents you from doing that is that companies are not set up to handle the transaction that way. Stock holders are usually trying to buy investments, not iPhones. There are companies that have more cash in the bank than the market cap (total value) of their stock. They usually don't remain as public companies for long in that case. An investor or group of investors buy them up and split the cash. If you had enough shares of Apple, you could do that to; or, just trade one for an iPhone.", "You are right, it is a Ponzi scheme unless it pays all of the profits as dividends. Here's why: today's millenials are saving a lot less, and instead they choose to be spenders. It's just that their mentality is different. If the trend continues there will be more spenders and less savers. That means that in 20 years from now, a company might sell more and make more profits, but because there are less investors on the market it will worth less (judging by supply and demand this has to be true). Doesn't that seem like a disconnect to you guys? Doesn't that just prove that all those profits are not really yours, but instead you're just sitting on the side making bets about them? If I own a company from the point where it goes public and while the value goes up I hold on to it for 50 years. Let's say for 45 years it made tons of profits but never paid a cent in dividend, and then in 5 years it goes out of business. What happened to all the profits they made throughout the 45 years? If you owned a restaurant that made a profit for 45 years and then went bankrupt you are fine, you took your profits every year because why on earth would you reinvest 100% of the profit forever? But what if you could sell 49.9% of that restaurant on the stock market, get all of that IPO money and still keep all of the profits while claiming that you reinvest it forever? That's exactly what they do! They just buy expensive things for personal use, from fancy cars to private jets, they just write it down as an investment and you can't see what the money was spent on because you are not a majority stakeholder, you have no power. It was not like this forever, companies used to pay all of their profits in dividends and be valued according to that. Not anymore. Now they are just in it for the growth, it will keep growing as long as people keep buying into it, and that's the exact definition of a Ponzi scheme."]

Market Hours and Valuations

['"Company values (and thus stock prices) rely on a much larger time frame than ""a weekend"". First, markets are not efficient enough to know what a companies sales were over the past 2-3 days (many companies do not even know that for several weeks). They look at performance over quarters and years to determine the ""value"" of a company. They also look forward, not backwards to determine value. Prior performance only gives a hint of what future performance may be. If a company shut its doors over a weekend and did no sales, it still would have value based on its future ability to earn profits."', "Stock values are generally reflective of a company's overall potential; and to some extent investor confidence in the prospect of a continued growth of that potential. Sales over such a short period of time such as a single weekend do not noticeably impact a stock's valuation. A stock's value has more to do with whether or not they meet market expectations for sales over a certain period of time (generally 1 quarter of a year) than it does that they actually had sales (or profits) on any given day. Of course, catastrophic events, major announcements, or new product releases do sometimes cause significant changes in a stock's value. For this reason you will often see stocks have significant volatility in periods around earnings announcements, merger rumors, or when anything unexpected happens in the world that might benefit or hurt their potential sales and growth. But overall a normal, average weekend of sales is already built into the price of a stock during normal trading."]

Borrowing 100k and paying it to someone then declaring bankruptcy

['This is fraud and could lead to jail time. The vast majority of people cannot obtain such loans without collateral and one would have to have a healthy income and good credit to obtain that kind of loan to purchase something secured by a valuable asset, such as a home. Has this been done before? Yes, despite it being the US, you may find this article interesting. Hopefully, you see how the intent of this hypothetical situation is stealing.', 'This is called a fraudulent conveyance because its purpose is to prevent a creditor from getting repaid. It is subject to claw back under US law, which is a fancy way of saying that your friend will have to pay the bank back. Most jurisdictions have similar laws. It is probably a crime as well, but that varies by jurisdiction.', 'Note that in the UK at least this scam - not so dissimilar from what you propose - seems be perfectly legal behaviour: Evidence to date is that both of you can expect to walk away without much consequence.', "This sounds like a crazy idea, but in reality people don't make the wisest decisions when considering bankruptcy in Australia. My suggestion would be to get some advice from an insolvency specialist."]

Does getting a 1099 from another state count as working in another state if I was physically in my home state?

['This depends on the state law. In case of the State of New York - these are the criteria for sourcing the NY income: As a sole proprietor or partnership, your New York source income includes: Business activities As a nonresident sole proprietor or partnership, you carry on a business, trade, profession, or occupation within New York State if you (or your business): As you can see, the qualification depends on the way you do business, and the amount of business transactions you have in New York. If it is not clear to you - talk to a CPA/EA licensed to practice in the State of New York to give you an advice.', "You might need to check yes... but I would check out New York's nonresident income tax requirements... My guess is yes if you meet the requirements, but I am not an expert nor do I work in the accounting or legal field. Check out New York's nonresident tax page explaination"]

American taxes if living outside the US and get paid by US company on a US bank account

["I agree with Joe, having the money deposited to the US bank account may land you in trouble. Technically, a US business paying a foreigner must withhold 30% of the payment, unless a tax treaty says otherwise. The US business should do that based on your W8-BEN/W8-ECI form that you should have given to the business before being paid. I'm guessing, that by paying to your US bank account, you (and your American counterpart) are trying to avoid this withholding. That may cause trouble for both of you. I would suggest you talking to a professional (EA/CPA licensed in the State where the business is located) and having the situation resolved ASAP. You may not be liable for the US taxes at all, but because of incorrectly reporting the income/expense - you and the US business may end up paying way more than the $0 you otherwise would have, in penalties.", 'Technically, if you earn in US (being paid there, which means you have a work visa) and live in other country, you must pay taxes in both countries. International treaties try to decrease the double-taxation, and in this case, you may pay in your country the difference of what you have paid in US. ie. your Country is 20% and USA is 15%, you will pay 5%, and vice-versa. This works only with certain areas. You must know the tax legislation of both countries, and I recommend you seek for advisory. This site have all the basic information you need: http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Foreign-Earned-Income-Exclusion Good luck.']

What does HMRC (the UK tax agency) view as valid expenses for travel?

["Food is almost never a valid expense. Reason for it is simple - if you were not conducting business you would have to eat too. Ad 1. I don't see why travel in that case would not be a valid expense, as the only reason for you to travel there is for business reasons. Ad 2. Unlikely as there is a duality of purpose. So while part of it may be business, you are also getting personal benefit from the visit (coffee/cakes etc) so that generally is a no. Ad 3. No, while you can claim for entertainment of employees (to sensible extends), that doesn't work when entertaining clients. Ad 4. If any part of the trip is for leisure then you cannot claim it as business expense, sorry! If there is any duality of use then it's not a business expense. And food, as always, is a no go."]

Indian citizen working from India as freelancer for U.S.-based company. How to report the income & pay tax in India?

["You can receive money directly into your savings bank account. It is perfectly legal. FYI the Bank as part of regulation would report this to RBI. As the funds are received for the services you have rendered, You are liable to pay tax on the income. The income is taxed as professional income similar to the income of Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants etc. If you are paying your colleagues, it would be treated as expense. Not only this, you can also treat any phone calls you make, or equipment your purchase [laptop, desk etc] as expense. The difference become your actual income and you would be taxed as per the rate for individuals. It's advisable you contact an accountant who would advise you better for a nominal fee [few thousand rupees] and help you pay the tax and file the returns. With or without accountant It is very important for you to record all payments and expenses in a book of accounts.", 'There is no reason for you to open a firm. However, it will help you, if you operate separate bank account for business and personal purposes. You can run your business as proprietorship business. Your inward remittance is your income. You can deduct payment made to your colleagues as salary. You should pay them by way of cheques or bank transfer only. You are also entitled to deduct other business expenses provided you keep proper receipt of the same such as broadband connection charges, depreciation on equipment and more importantly, rent on your house. If your total receipt from such income exceeds INR 60,00,000 you will need to withhold tax on payment made to your colleagues as also subject to audit of your accounts. If you want to grow your business, suggest you should take an Import / Export Code in your own name. You can put any further question in this regard.']

Additional credit card with different limit on same account?

['You can look into getting a business credit card. When I had my Chase business credit card, I could add authorized users to the main account and set a spending limit on each card.', '"Generally not. Since authorized user cards are the same account and the difference between the two (the original and the AU card) are minimal. Note, there\'s nothing technically stopping banks from offering this as a feature, two cards do have identifiers that indicate they\'re separate cards, but the banks concern for your needs stops at how much they can bleed from you, and ""helping you control your spending"" is not part of that."']

Strategies for paying off my Student loans

["My advice is that if you've got the money now to pay off your student loans, do so. You've saved up all of that money in one year's time. If you pay it off now, you'll eliminate all of those monthly payments, you'll be done paying interest, and you should be able to save even more toward your business over the next year. Over the next year, you can get started on your business part time, while still working full time to pile up cash toward your business. Neither you nor your business will be paying interest on anything, and you'll start out in a very strong position. The interest on your student loans might be tax deductible, depending on your situation. However, this doesn't really matter a whole lot, in my opinion. You've got about $22k in debt, and the interest will cost you roughly $1k over the next year. Why pay $1k to the bank to gain maybe $250 in tax savings? Starting a business is stressful. There will be good times and bad. How long will it take you to pay off your debt at $250 a month? 5 or 6 years, probably. By eliminating the debt now, you'll be able to save up capital for your business even faster. And when you experience some slow times in your business, your monthly expenses will be less.", "Considering I'm in a nearly identical situation, I'll speak to my personal strategy and maybe there's some value for you as well. You have ~$22k in loans, which you say you could pay off today. So, what I read is that you're sitting there with a $22k investment and want to know which investment to make: pay down debt, invest in yourself/start up, or some variation between those options. Any investor worth his salt will ask a couple of questions: what is my risk, and what is my gain? Paying off your student loans offers no financial risk at the cost of opportunity risk, and gains you returns of 3.4%, 6.8%, 3.4%, 4.5%, and 6.8%. Those percentage gains are guaranteed and the opportunity risk is unknown. Investing in a startup is inherently risky, with the potential for big payoffs. But with this investment, you are accepting a lot of risk for potentially some gain (it could be the next Apple, it could also fail). So, with your situation (like mine), I'd say it's best to accept the easy investment for now and fully vet out your tech start up idea in the meantime.", "Starting up a company is fun, stressful, and exciting. It's also often a lot harder than you expect. Income, revenue, and cash flow are big concerns, and you need to be able to eat while you're hunting down your first paying customers. Don't pay off all the debt if that will leave you without any money for living expenses. Perhaps a compromise is in order? Pay off the high-interest loans first, and continue to make payments on the lower-interest loans while you start up. It doesn't have to be all or nothing."]

Is there a White-list of Trusted Online Vendors?

['"I\'m going to go with ""ridiculous notion."" :) The vast majority of businesses are legitimate, run by honest people trying to earn a living for themselves and their employees. These days, almost all of them accept credit cards. Crooked businesses are a very small minority. When a bad business over charges you, you dispute the charge, and you get your money back. But that\'s not all that happens. The bad merchant pays penalties for this, and if it happens more than a couple of times, the merchant loses their merchant account with their bank, which means that they lose their ability to accept credit card payments anymore. A crooked business is not able to rob people via credit card for very long at all. A whitelist would certainly not be able to include every legitimate business. And a blacklist would never be able to be kept up-to-date, as bad businesses come and go continuously; as soon as a business was added to the blacklist, they would lose their merchant account and would no longer need to be on the list. What you are describing is very rare. My brother once had a bad experience with a tech support company where they were repeatedly charging him for a service they never performed. But a credit card chargeback took care of it. If that company made a habit of that, I\'m sure that they got in trouble with their bank. Instead, the most common credit card fraud happens when crooks use your credit card at perfectly legitimate businesses. But your whitelist/blacklist wouldn\'t help you with that at all."']

Using a cash account can someone trade all day on it?

['No, you cannot. The cash settlement period will lock up your cash depending on the product you trade. Three business days for stocks, 1 business day for options, and you would need waaaaaay more than $5,000 to trade futures.', "According to Regulation T, you can make as many day trade (round trip) stock purchases using a cash account as long as you have the funds to cover each and every round trip sale. However, the funds generated from the sales cannot be used again to purchase new stocks until the settlement period (T-2 or T-3) is over. For example, say you have $10000 dollars in your cash account and no securities. You buy 1000 shares of XYZ stock in the morning at one dollar per share and you sell the stock 30 minutes later because it went up say by 50 cents. According to Regulation T, you cannot use the money generated from the sale of your 1000 shares until after the settlement date. However, you can use the remaining $9000 dollars in your account to execute other trades just as the first trade. You can do this as many times as you want as long as you have funds available to pay for the transaction the same day it's executed. The only thing to worry about and that isn't clear, is, what happens if you perform this action more than 3 times in a week? Does it mean that your cash account now becomes a margin account subject to margin account rules because you executed more than three round trip trades in a five day rolling period?"]

Why doesn't change in accounts receivable on balance sheet match cash flow statement?

['"I\'m not an expert, but here is my best hypothesis. On Microsoft\'s (and most other company\'s) cash flow statements, they use the so-called ""indirect method"" of accounting for cash flow from operations. How that works, is they start with net income at the top, and then adjust it with line items for the various non-cash activities that contributed to net income. The key phrase is that these are accounting for the non-cash activities that contribute to net income. If the accounts receivable amount changes from something other than operating activity (e.g., if they have to write off some receivables because they won\'t be paid), the change didn\'t contribute to net income in the first place, so doesn\'t need to be reconciled on the cash flow statement."', '"Increase in A/R in balance sheet includes the A/R of acquired businesses. Change in A/R in cash flow statement might say ""excluding effects of business acquisitions""."', "It is difficult to reconcile historical balance sheets with historical cash flow statements because there are adjustments that are not always clearly disclosed. Practitioners consider activity on historical cash flow statements but generally don't invest time reconciling historical accounts, instead focusing on balancing projected balance sheets / cash flow statements. If you had non-public internal books, you could reconcile the figures (presuming they are accurate). In regards to Mike Haskel's comment, there's also a section pertaining to operating capital, not just effects on net income.", '"QUICK ANSWER What @Mike Haskel wrote is generally correct that the indirect method for cash flow statement reporting, which most US companies use, can sometimes produce different results that don\'t clearly reconcile with balance sheet shifts. With regards to accounts receivables, this is especially so when there is a major increase or decrease in the company\'s allowances for doubtful accounts. In this case, there is more to the company\'s balance sheet and cash flow statements differences per its accounts receivables than its allowances for doubtful accounts seems responsible for. As explained below, the difference, $1.25bn, is likely owing more to currency shifts and how they are accounted for than to other factors. = = = = = = = = = = DIRTY DETAILS Microsoft Corp. generally sells to high-quality / high-credit buyers; mostly PC, server and other devices manufacturers and licensees. It hence made doubtful accounts provisions of $16mn for its $86,833mn (0.018%) of 2014 sales and wrote off $51mn of its carrying balance during the year. Its accounting for ""Other comprehensive income"" captures the primary differences of many accounts; specifically in this case, the ""foreign currency translation"" figure that comprises many balance sheet accounts and net out against shareholders\' equity (i.e. those assets and liabilities bypass the income statement). The footnotes include this explanation: Assets and liabilities recorded in foreign currencies are translated at the exchange rate on the balance sheet date. Revenue and expenses are translated at average rates of exchange prevailing during the year. Translation adjustments resulting from this process are recorded to other comprehensive income (“OCI”) What all this means is that those two balance sheet figures are computed by translating all the accounts with foreign currency balances (in this case, accounts receivables) into the reporting currency, US dollars (USD), at the date of the balance sheets, June 30 of the years 2013 and 2014. The change in accounts receivables cash flow figure is computed by first determining the average exchange rates for all the currencies it uses to conduct business and applying them respectively to the changes in each non-USD accounts receivables during the periods. For this reason, almost all multinational companies that report using indirect cash flow statements will have discrepancies between the changes in their reported working capital changes during a period and the dates of their balance sheet and it\'s usually because of currency shifts during the period."']

When does Ontario's HST come into effect?

['"It looks like the HST will be in effect in Ontario on July 1st, 2010. As to whether it will replace GST with HST for all services, it looks like some sectors may get special treatment: Ontario may exempt mutual funds from HST (National Post). But it doesn\'t look final yet. However, I would suggest that most service-based businesses in Ontario need to prepare to start charging 13% HST instead of 5% GST. It will be the law. On the ""goods"" side of the new harmonized tax, it looks like certain goods will still be exempt from the provincial portion. Here\'s a quote from the Ontario Budget 2009 News Release: ""Books, diapers, children\'s clothing and footwear, children\'s car seats and car booster seats, and feminine hygiene products would be exempt from the provincial portion of the single sales tax."" Here\'s some additional information on the introduction of the HST, from the province: General Transitional Rules for Ontario HST. And finally, another interesting article from the Ottawa Business Journal: Preparing For Ontario Sales Tax Harmonization – It\'s Not Too Early UPDATE: I just received an insert from Canada Revenue Agency included with my quarterly GST statement. Titled ""Harmonization of the Sales Tax in Ontario and British Columbia"", it contains a section titled ""What this means for you"" (as in, you the business owner). Here\'s an excerpt: [...] All Ontario and B.C. registrants would need to update their accounting and point-of-sale systems to accomodate the change in rate and new point-of-sale rebates for the implementation date of July 1, 2010. The harmonization of the sales tax in Ontario and B.C. may affect the filing requirements of registrants outside of these two provinces. Registrants will report their HST according to their current GST filing frequency. As a result of the harmonization, there will be changes to the rebates for housing and public service bodies. More information will be released as it becomes available. Visit the CRA web site often, at www.cra.gc.ca/harmonization, for the most up-to-date information on the harmonization of the sales tax and how it may affect you. [...] Last, I found some very detailed information on the HST here: NOTICE247 - Harmonized Sales Tax for Ontario and British Columbia - Questions and Answers on General Transitional Rules for Personal Property and Services. Chances are anything you want to know is in there."', 'In general you must charge HST on and after July 1, 2010. However, in the case of delivered sales, you must charge HST if the transfer of goods will happen on or after July 1,2010. Example: A person comes into my hypothetical store on June 29, 2010 and buys a couch. They opt to have it delivered by my truck on July 2, 2010. I should charge HST on this purchase, not GST/PST. References:', '(community wiki) Ontario special HST sales tax transition rebate cheques: When and how much? What will happen to quarterly GST cheques when HST starts in Ontario? Ontario HST rebate: When would I qualify? Ontario gas prices & HST: What will happen to prices at the pump on July 1, 2010? How will Ontario’s HST apply to books / textbooks, which were PST exempt before? How can I minimize the impact of the HST? How does the HST affect a condominium purchase? Will I need to pay HST on condo maintenance fees? My Ontario small business collects only PST (beneath GST threshold). How will HST affect me?']

When does a low PE ratio not indicate a good stock?

['"Yes, there are situations where a stock is a bad buy in spite of a low PE. PE ratio tells you the current share price divided by the prior 4 quarters earnings per share. It does not consider: Imagine someone walked up to you and said, ""Do you want to buy a piece of my business? I\'ll sell you 1% of it for $1000. Last year the business earned $25000."" A quick calculation shows a PE of 4 [$1000/($25000 *.01)]. Even though this PE is comparatively low, you wouldn\'t buy in without a lot more info. What kinds of things might you ask? PE is one tiny component of an informed investment decision."', 'PE can be misleading when theres a good risk the company simply goes out of business in a few years. For this reason some people use PEG, which incorporates growth into the equation.', '"Some companies have a steady, reliable, stream of earnings. In that case, a low P/E ratio is likely to indicate a good stock. Other companies have a ""feast or famine"" pattern, great earnings one year, no earnings or losses the following year. In that case, it is misleading to use a P/E ratio for a good year, when earnings are high and the ratio is low. Instead, you have to figure out what the company\'s AVERAGE earnings may be for some years, and assign a P/E ratio to that."']

Are in-kind donations from my S-Corp tax-deductible in any way?

['"You should probably have a tax professional help you with that (generally advisable when doing corporation returns, even if its a small S corp with a single shareholder). Some of it may be deductible, depending on the tax-exemption status of the recipients. Some may be deductible as business expenses. To address Chris\'s comment: Generally you can deduct as a business on your 1120S anything that is necessary and ordinary for your business. Charitable deductions flow through to your personal 1040, so Colin\'s reference to pub 526 is the right place to look at (if it was a C-corp, it might be different). Advertisement costs is a necessary and ordinary expense for any business, but you need to look at the essence of the transaction. Did you expect the sponsorship to provide you any new clients? Did you anticipate additional exposure to the potential customers? Was the investment (80 hours of your work) similar to the costs of paid advertisement for the same audience? If so - it is probably a business expense. While you can\'t deduct the time on its own, you can deduct the salary you paid yourself for working on this, materials, attributed depreciation, etc. If you can\'t justify it as advertisement, then its a donation, and then you cannot deduct it (because you did receive something in return). It might not be allowed as a business expense, and you might be required to consider it as ""personal use"", i.e.: salary."', '"The relevant IRS publication is 526, Charitable Contributions. The section titled ""Contributions you cannot deduct"" begins on page 6; item 4 reads: ""The value of your time or services."" I read that to mean that, if the website you built were a product, you could deduct its value. I don\'t understand the legal distinction between goods and services I originally said that I believe that a website is considered a service. Whether a website is a service or a product appears to be much more controversial that I originally thought. I cannot find a clear answer. I\'m told that the IRS has a phone number you can call for rulings on this type of question. I\'ve never had to use it, so I don\'t know how helpful it is. The best I can come up with is the Instructions for Form 1120s, the table titled ""Principal Business Activity Codes,"" starting on page 39. That table suggests to me that the IRS defines things based on what type of business you are in. Everything I can find in that table that a website could plausibly fall under has the word ""service"" in its name. I don\'t really feel like that\'s a definitive answer, though. Almost as an afterthought, if you were able to deduct the value of the website, you would have to subtract off whatever the value of the advertisement is. You said that it\'s not much, but there\'s probably a simple way of estimating that."']

What does the settlement date of short interest mean?

['At the bottom of the page you linked to, NASDAQ provides a link to this page on nasdaqtrader.com, which states Each FINRA member firm is required to report its “total” short interest positions in all customer and proprietary accounts in NASDAQ-listed securities twice a month. These reports are used to calculate short interest in NASDAQ stocks. FINRA member firms are required to report their short positions as of settlement on (1) the 15th of each month, or the preceding business day if the 15th is not a business day, and (2) as of settlement on the last business day of the month.* The reports must be filed by the second business day after the reporting settlement date. FINRA compiles the short interest data and provides it for publication on the 8th business day after the reporting settlement date. The dates you are seeing are the dates the member firms settled their trades. In general (also from nasdaq.com), the settlement date is The date on which payment is made to settle a trade. For stocks traded on US exchanges, settlement is currently three business days after the trade.']

How to explain an income discrepancy to the IRS?

['"The IRS doesn\'t tax ""increased wealth"" They tax Revenue -- income. If this money or property came to you as a gift, you would owe no tax on it but the giver probably would owe gift tax. If it came to you as a loan, you would owe no tax on it but the lender would owe tax on any interest you pay (and must charge at least minimal interest, though they could give that to you as a gift and possibly not have it be taxable). But if came as payment for goods or services or investment or anything of that sort, and you aren\'t demonstrably tax-exempt, it is income and you are responsible for declaring it as such and paying tax on it."']

How do I look for private limited partnership investment opportunities? (Or should I?)

['"Investing in an existing company is almost like buying a house, or even becoming an ""Angel investor"" in a start-up. Before you start the process, decide how much you want to be involved in the day-to-day and which industries you would feel most comfortable in. The latter is an important consideration since you would have to know sufficient about the industry in order to evaluate the quality of your prospective investment. Searching for a suitable business is a time-consuming process: The guidance for evaluating any company has been answered in another question, so I\'ll simply link. Most business owners are looking to their businesses to provide them a pension, so they often look to sell around retirement age. Buying such a business is tricky - you may be assisting the next generation to finance the purchase which can have it\'s own struggles. Ideally you\'ll be looking for a young(ish) company with proven sales and which is looking to finance growth in an optimal way. Such a company may have many options for raising capital so you\'ll be competing to invest. As to whether or not it\'s a good idea... KFC only became a household name and global franchise after Pete Harman joined Harland Sanders as a partner. Richard and Maurice McDonald may have founded McDonald\'s but it was Ray Kroc who made it a success. New partners bring in new ideas and fresh energy which the original entrepreneurs may have lost during the difficulties of starting out. But that goes back to my first query; just how much do you want to get involved?"']

If earning as freelancer, is it better to be a Sole Trader or Limited Company?

["As I understand it (please correct me if i'm wrong, i've looked at this before and i've been a sole trader briefly but I've never formed a LTD company) there are pros and cons to forming a limited company. Pros Cons", 'Source Sole trader If you start working for yourself, you’re classed as a self-employed sole trader - even if you’ve not yet told HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). As a sole trader, you run your own business as an individual. You can keep all your business’s profits after you’ve paid tax on them. You can employ staff. ‘Sole trader’ means you’re responsible for the business, not that you have to work alone.You’re personally responsible for any losses your business makes. Tax responsibilities You must: You’re personally responsible for any losses your business makes. This is one condition which you would need to have a look. If you do some shoddy work and your client wants to recover the losses they can come after your personal money or property. LLPs have the same probelm too. And you pay NI and income tax on all of your profits. If you have a partner then both can take out the profits of a limited company, if both are directors. The tax hit will be less as compared to a single person.']

Can I register for VAT to claim back VAT without selling VAT applicable goods? (UK)

['"As far as I know any business can register for VAT regardless of the nature of the business. If all the goods you sell (or services you provide) are VAT-exempt or zero-rated then you will get refunds from HMRC on VAT your business pays. Any business whose non-VAT exempt turnover (which would include zero-rated goods and services provided) exceeds the registration threshold must register, again even if that means they are ""forced"" to claim refunds. So the only question would be whether your rather nebulous activities were enough to qualify you as a business or organisation to which the VAT regime applies at all. The one-liner answer to that is generally, if goods or services are provided in return for a charge, there’s a business activity for VAT purposes Inevitably there\'s a much bigger body of statute and case law and it won\'t always be obvious whether the one-liner answer applies or not to a particular activity so it may be necessary to seek specialist advice."', "IANAL, I have not been VAT registered myself but this is what I have picked up from various sources. You might want to confirm things with your solicitor or accountant. As I understand it there is a critical difference between supplying zero-rated goods/services and supplying exempt goods/services. If the goods/services are zero-rated then the normal VAT rules apply, you charge VAT on your outputs (at a rate of 0%) and can claim back VAT on your inputs (at whatever rate it was charged at, depending on the type of goods.. If the goods/services are exempt you don't charge and VAT on your outputs and can't claim back any VAT on your inputs. (Things get complicated if you have a mixture of exempt and non-exempt outputs) According to http://oko.uk/blog/adsense-vat-explained adsense income is a buisness to buisness transaction with a company in another EU country and so from a supplier point of view (you are the supplier, google is the customer) it counts as a zero-rated transaction.", '"You cannot ""claim back"" VAT. What happens is that if you sell goods with VAT and charge customers VAT, you would have to send that VAT straight to HMRC, but if your business itself paid VAT, then you already paid VAT, so you have to send less. As an example, if you send an invoice for £10,000 plus £2,000 VAT, and you paid yourself £500 VAT on business related expenses, then you need to send £2,000 - £500 = £1,500 to HMRC. But if you don\'t send invoices including VAT, then you owe HMRC £0. Any VAT you paid on business related expenses is lost; HMRC won\'t pay you money. BTW. Only VAT on business related expenses can be deducted. So if you want to be ""smart"", register for VAT and get the VAT on your weekly shopping bill refunded, forget it."']

Automatic transaction on credit card to stay active

["Put one of your monthly bills on it. (Utility bill, Netflix, monthly donation to charity, etc.) I have several automatic, recurring monthly charges on my credit card. If you don't have any current monthly bills that you want to switch, contact the Red Cross, or a charity of your choice. They would be very happy to charge your credit card once a month. Alternatively, it might be okay to let it close.", 'credit cards are almost never closed for inactivity. i have had dozens of cards innactive for years on end, and only one was ever closed on me for inactivity. i would bet a single 1$ transaction per calendar year would keep all your cards open. as such, you could forget automating the process and just spend 20 minutes a year making manual 1$ payments (e.g. to your isp, utility company, google play, etc.). alternatively, many charities will let you set up an automatic monthly donation for any amount (e.g. 1$ to wikipedia). or perhaps you could treat yourself to an mp3 once a month (arguably a charitable donation in the age of file sharing). side note: i use both of these strategies to get the 12 debit card transactions per month required by my kasasa checking account.', '"I agree with the rest of the answers -- you\'re probably better off just using it for some predictable flat-rate recurring monthly service like NetFlix, or making a charitable donation if you\'re into that sort of thing. But since that wasn\'t what you asked, I\'ll try to provide an answer: If you don\'t mind throwing away money, send money to yourself using PayPal. Here\'s how: Set up a PayPal Business Account, and use your personal PayPal account to send funds to it by setting up a PayPal subscription. PayPal says ""You can have one Consumer account and one Business account."" A PayPal Payments Standard business account has no monthly fee -- only transaction fees. According to PayPal, ""in order to set up a repeating payment, [you] would need to create a Subscription or Recurring Payments button from the Merchant Services tab"" (in the Business Account). You would then click the link/button to set up the subscription from your personal PayPal account, to make it send money to your Business account on an automatic schedule. You can then, at your own leisure, send the money back to your personal account without paying a second transaction fee, then finally send it back to your bank account. Or, if your bank account is not yet tied to your personal account, you can tie it to the business account instead, and deposit the funds into your bank account. Unfortunately, this step can\'t be automated. Again, to reiterate, you\'re much better off just using it for something recurring."', 'Putting money into your Amazon gift card balance is also a very convenient option, but I like these recurring Red Cross and Wikipedia ideas also.']

Are stores that offer military discounts compensated by the government?

["Company X located outside a military base offer discounts to military as a form of marketing. They want to encourage a group of potential customers to use their store/service. In some cases they are competing with subsidized store on the base. In other cases their only competition is other stores outside the base. The smart ones also understand the pay structure of military pay to make it easier for enlisted to stretch their money for the entire month. The government doesn't offer compensation to the business near bases. The businesses see their offer and discount as advertising expenses, and are figured into the prices they have to charge all customers. You will also see these types of discounts offered by some businesses in college towns. They are competing with the services on the campus and with other off-campus businesses. Some also allow the use of campus dollars to make it easier for the student to spend money.", "Nope, only base commissaries or BX/PX's are subsidized. The rest is just done for goodwill/marketing purposes.", 'This story is about military grocery stores - i.e.: grocery stores for military personnel on military bases. There are no discounts for military personnel in a regular grocery store. But they may have subsidised prices in grocery stores located inside a military installation, and these are those stores that the story is talking about.']

Can I claim a tax deduction for working from home as an employee? I work there 90% of the time

["The short answer is yes you probably can take the deduction for a home office because the space is used exclusively and you are working there for the convenience of your employer if you don't have a desk at your employers office. The long answer is that it may not be worth it to take the home office deduction as an employee. You're deduction is subject to a 2% AGI floor. You can only deduct a percentage of your rent or the depreciation on your home. A quick and dirty example if you make $75k/year, rent a 1200 sqft 2 bedroom apartment for $1000/month and use one bedroom (120 sqft) regularly and exclusively for your employer. You can deduct 10% (120sqft/1200sqft) of the $12000 ($1000*12 months (assumes your situation didn't change)) in rent or $1200. However because you are an employee you are subject to the 2% AGI floor so you can deduct $1200-$1500 (75000*.02 (salary * 2% floor)) = -300 so in order to deduct the first dollar you need an additional $300 worth of deductible expenses. Depending on your situation it may or may not be worth it to take the home office deduction even if you qualify for it.", "Talk to a tax professional. The IRS really doesn't like the deduction, and it's a concept (like independent contractors) that is often not done properly. You need to, at a minimum, have records, including timestamped photographs, proving that: Remember, documentation is key, and must be filed and accessible for a number of years. Poor record keeping will cost you dearly, and the cost of keeping those records is something that you need to weigh against the benefit.", "The general rule is: Generally, in order to claim a business deduction for your home, you must use part of your home exclusively and regularly: Exclusively seems to be the toughest standard and I do not know exactly how strict the IRS's interpretation is. Working in your living room where you regularly watch TV and have people over on the weekends would seem to fail that test. A separate room with your computer in it would pass it. If it was your only computer and you regularly played online games with it, that would seem to be a grey area. The IRA booklet covering this area is here http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p587.pdf I know people that have rented rooms in other places or made use of rental offices for this purpose.", '"90% sounds like ""principal place of business"" but check these IRS resources to make sure."']

Do I need to pay Income Tax if i am running a escrow service in India

['"This may be closed as not quite PF, but really ""startup"" as it\'s a business question. In general, you should talk to a professional if you have this type of question, specifics like this regarding your tax code. I would expect that as a business, you will use a proper paper trail to show that money, say 1000 units of currency, came in and 900 went out. This is a service, no goods involved. The transaction nets you 100, and you track all of this. In the end you have the gross profit, and then business expenses. The gross amount, 1000, should not be the amount taxed, only the final profit."', 'As JoeTaxpayer has mentioned, please consult a lawyer and CA. In general you would have to pay tax on the profit you make, in the example on this 10% you make less of any expenses to run the business. depending on how you are incorporating the business, there would be an element of service tax apart from corporate tax or income tax.', 'Income Tax would only be levied on the 10% commission that you earn and not on the total amount kept in the Escrow Account.']

Do I need to pay quarterly 1040 ES and 941 (payroll)?

["Don't overthink it. As an employee, whether of your own corporation or of someone else, you get a salary and there are deductions taken out. As the owner of a business you get (hopefully) business profits as well. And, in general, you often have other sources of income from investments, etc. Your estimated tax payments are based on the difference between what was withheld from your salary and what you will owe, based on salary, business income, and other sources. So, in essence, you just add up all the income you expect, estimate what the tax bill will be, and subtract what's been withheld. That's your estimated tax payment.", "I'm not sure why you're confusing the two unrelated things. 1040ES is your estimated tax payments. 941 is your corporation's payroll tax report. They have nothing to do with each other. You being the corporation's employee is accidental, and can only help you to avoid 1040ES and use the W2 withholding instead - like any other employee. From the IRS standpoint you're not running a LLC - you're running a corporation, and you're that corporation's employee. While technically you're self-employed, from tax perspective - you're not (to the extent of your corporate salary, at least).", "I think I may have figured this out but if someone could double check my reasoning I'd appreciate it. So if my company makes $75000 and I decide to pay myself a $30000 salary, then the quarterly payment break down would be like this: 1040ES: Would pay income tax on non salary dividend ($45000) 941: Would pay income tax, SS, medicare on salary ($30000) (I'm the only person on payroll) So I think this answers my question in that after switching from filing as LLC to S-corp, I won't have to pay as much on 1040ES because some of it will now be covered on payroll."]

Theoretically, if I bought more than 50% of a company's stocks, will I own the company?

["You'll own whatever fraction you bought. To own the company (as in, boolean - yes or no) you need to buy 100% of the outstanding stock. RE controlling the company, in general the answer is yes - although the mechanism for this might not be so straight forward (ie. you may have to appoint board members and may only be able to do so at pre-set intervals) and there may be conditions in the company charter designed to stop this happening. Depending on your jurisdiction certain ownership percentages can also trigger the need to do certain things so you may not be able to just buy 50% - in Australia when you reach 20% ownership you have to launch a formal takeover bid.", '"Owning more than 50% of a company\'s stock normally gives you the right to elect a majority, or even all of a company\'s (board of) directors. Once you have your directors in place, you can tell them who to hire and fire among managers. There are some things that may stand in the way of your doing this. First, there may be a company bylaw that says that the directors can be replaced only one ""class"" at a time, with three or four ""classes."" Then it could take you two or three years to get control of the company. Second, there may be different classes of shares with different voting rights, so if e.g. ""A"" shares controlled by the founding family gives them ten votes, and ""B"" shares owned by the other shareholders, you may have a majority of total shares and be outvoted by the ""A"" shares."', '"I believe Tom Au answered your key question. Let me just add in response to, ""What if someone was just simply rich to buy > 50%, but does not know how to handle the company?"" This happens all the time. Bob Senior is a brilliant business man, he starts a company, it is wildly successful, then he dies and Bob Junior inherits the company. (If it\'s a privately owned company he may inherit it directly; if it\'s a corporation he inherits a controlling interest in the stock.) Bob Junior knows nothing about how to run a business. And so he mismanages the company, runs it into the ground, and eventually it goes bankrupt. Stock holders lose their investment, employees lose their jobs, and in general everyone is very unhappy. I suppose it also happens that someone gets rich doing thing A and then decides that he\'s going to buy a business that does thing B. He has no idea how to run a business doing thing B and he destroys the company. I can\'t think of any specific examples of this off the top of my head, but I\'ve heard of it happening with people who make a ton of money as actors or professional athletes and then decide to start a business."', '"The usual pattern is that shareholders don\'t run companies in a practical sense, so ""if someone was just simply rich to buy > 50%, but does not know how to handle the company"" doesn\'t change anything. In large companies, the involvement of shareholders is limited to a few votes on key issues such as allocating profit (how much to keep in company vs pay in dividends) and choosing board members. And board members also don\'t run the company - they oversee how the company is being run, and choose executives who will actually run the company. If a rich person simply buys 50% and doesn\'t desire to get personally involved, then they just vote for whatever board members seem apropriate and forget about it."', "I almost agree. I am not completely sure about the ownership of stock, but to have the majority ownership of any company you must own more than 50% of a company's outstanding shares. Although a board in majority, could out vote a majority shareholder in most cases depending on the company policy regarding shareholders and the general law of the country, and to how the company is managed.", 'The person holding the majority of shares can influence the decisions of the company. Even though the shareholder holds majority of the shares,the Board of Directors appointed by the shareholders in the Annual General Meeting will run the company. As said in the characteristics of the company,the owners and the administrators of the company are different. The shareholder holding majority of the shares can influence the business decisions like appointing the auditor,director etc. and any other business decisions(not taken in the ordinary business) that are taken in the Annual General Meeting.', "It is also worth noting that one of the character defining features of a publicly traded company is that the management that is responsible for the day to day operations of the stands independent of those who have ownership. Shareholder of a public company typically don't have influence over the day to day running of the company.", 'You guys seem to have forgotten the most important part of this equation ... i work for a bank and I can tell u this as a painful fact ... every business is governed by its paperwork ... articles bylaws operating agreements amendments and minutes .. if a companys paperwork says that the 51% owner can fire everyone and move to Alaska and that paperwork is proper (signed and binding) it is with minimal excavation law... case in point every company is different .. and it is formed and governed by its paperwork.']

Using a self-directed IRA to buy vacation condo, rent it out to an LLC for $1

['"Self directed IRAs have rules to prevent self-dealing of this sort called ""prohibited transactions"". You can\'t buy or sell or lease assets or obtain services from anyone closely linked to you or any beneficiaries of the IRA. You can\'t loan yourself money from the IRA, and you can\'t deliberately take the proceeds that should be going to your self directed IRA and give them to another account that you own."', "I don't quite understand your thought process here. First, in a tax-advantaged retirement account you are NOT allowed to engage in a transaction with yourself. If you just want to run a business and be able to write off expenses, how is using the self-directed IRA relevant? You can either buy the condo using your tax-advantaged account and rent it out to regular tenants. Or you buy the condo yourself using your own money and then operate your business so you can deduct business expenses from doing so. 401k's allow you to take a loan out of it, so you can look into that as well."]

Will I have to pay taxes for Australia if I have an Australian bank account?

['Because you actually reside in New Zealand, your income taxes will be paid in New Zealand. However, as a non-resident of Australia you will have tax withholding on all of the interest you earn in an Australian bank account. Obviously, because that tax is paid to Australia, that will not be counted against your New Zealand income taxes due to the taxation agreement between those countries. You should still discuss this with an accountant in New Zealand and consider acting as a sole trader. Since you are doing freelance work, that seems like the most logical setup anyway.', '"After reviewing the tax treaty between New Zealand and Australia, I think the issue is whether or not you have an interest in a ""permanent establishment"" in Australia where you do business. The bank is not relevant as it is merely the vehicle by which you collect payment and would only come into the picture if you had an income bearing account (which you have indicated you do not). Even if you work out of the offices of the Australian company, you do not have a financial interest in their offices and as such, would pay taxes on the income in New Zealand (see documentation below). https://www.ato.gov.au/business/international-tax-for-business/foreign-residents-doing-business-in-australia/tax-on-income-and-capital-gains/#permanentestablishment"', '"If you are a resident of New Zealand for tax purposes, you will be taxed in New Zealand on all of your ""worldwide income"". This is income derived from New Zealand as well as income derived from all other countries Source: http://www.ird.govt.nz/international/nzwithos/income/overseas-income-index.html Another link that will be of use is this: https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/international-tax-for-individuals/work-out-your-tax-residency/ This is Australia\'s rules on if you qualify as a resident for tax purposes. I am not an accountant or a lawyer but my reading of this is you actually have to reside in Australia to be considered a resident - whether or not you have a bank account there doesn\'t appear to play into it. Additionally, Australia and NZ have a ""double taxation agreement"", explained here: http://www.ird.govt.nz/yoursituation-nonres/double-tax/ So this should prevent you from being taxed in both places."']

Are PINs always needed for paying with card?

["There generally isn't much in the way of real identity verification, at least in the US and online. The protection you get is that with most credit cards you can report your card stolen (within some amount of time) and the fraudulent charges dropped. The merchant is the one that usually ends up paying for it if it gets charged back so it's usually in the merchant's best interest to do verification. However the cost of doing so (inconvenience to the customer, or if it's an impulse buy, giving them more time to change their mind, etc) is often greater than the occasional fraudulent charge so they usually don't do too much about it unless they're in a business where it's a frequent problem.", "As far as I'm aware, PINs are only used for in-person transactions, not 'remote' (over the Internet or phone).", '"For the first part of your question; Refer to related question Why do some online stores not ask for the 3-digit code on the back of my credit card? The other case of Airport ticket machines, requires the physical presence of card. The assumption is that if you had the card before and after the transaction, it was you who used it for transaction. As the amounts are small its really easy by anyone [merchant, Banks] to write this off. The only way to misuse would be if you lost the card and someone used it. Also these ticket machines would have built in feature where by you cannot buy more than ""X"" tickets for the day. Ensuring max loss on a stolen card is limited to a small amount."', "Chip and Pin cards are popular in Europe, however in the US we don't have them. Visa/MC and Amex can issue chip and pin cards but no merchants or machines are set up here to take them. Only certain countries in Europe use them and since you could possibly have a US visitor or a non-chip and pin person using your machine or eating at your restaurant they usually allow you to sign or just omit the pin if the card doesn't have a chip. It is definitely less secure, but the entire credit card industry in the US is running right now without it, so I don't think the major credit card companies care too much (they just pass the fraud on to the merchants anyway).", "Security in the merchant services system is mainly handled in two ways: 1) Before transactions are done, the business itself must go through an application process similar (but not identical) to getting a loan. Some high risk businesses must pay higher fees due to the increased likelihood of customer complaints. 2) When a customer disputes a transaction, that's a mark against the business. Get too many of these disputes, and your priviledge of accepting credit cards will be revoked, meaning you won't be able to again. It's in the merchant's best interest to verify customer's identity, because disputes cost them money directly. It's in the servicer's best interest to verify the businesses integrity, because fraud drives up the cost for everyone else. As a whole, it's quite a reactionary system, yet in practice it works remarkably well.", "Like email and spam, fighting creditcard fraud is a cat and mouse game, with technology and processes constantly being developed to reduce fraud. The CVV on the back of the card is just one more layer of security. Requiring the CVV generally requires you to physically have access to the card. CVV should not be stored by any merchant. This frustrates card skimming fraud as the CVV is not present in the track data and fraud caused by database compromises. You should never use your PIN online. MC/VISA both have implementations of 3D-Secure (SecureCode for MC and Verified by VISA) which require a password / code to confirm card ownership. Depends on both Issuer and Merchant implementing the standard. Regarding not needing a PIN at the airport, some low value transactions no longer need PINs, depending on the Issuer and Scheme (VISA/MC). MasterCard PayPass or VISA PayWave enable low value contactless transactions without PIN. In Australia, the maximum value for a contactless transactions is $100 AUD. At some merchants (McDonalds for example) a PIN is not required for for meals purchased with VISA (at least, for the cheeseburger I bought there as a test). This makes sense - if you don't need a PIN for a contactless purchase, why do you need it for a chip based purchase? So - why allow PIN free transactions? On average customers report stolen credit cards / wallet very quickly and the losses are correspondingly small. As card issuers are always online, cards can be cancelled very quickly after being reported lost / stolen. Finally, by performing transactions for just a few cents or pennies, the merchant (Spotify) can likely validate you are the owner of the card as you'd need access to your online bank to confirm the transactions. PayPal do this with bank account to confirm ownership. (Unless I've misunderstood your statement)."]

Do I make money in the stock market from other people losing money?

['"Do I make money in the stock market from other people losing money? Not normally.* The stock market as a whole, on average, increases in value over time. So if we make the claim that the market is a zero-sum game, and you only make money if other people lose money, that idea is not sustainable. There aren\'t that many people that would keep investing in something only to continue to lose money to the ""winners."" The stock market, and the companies inside it, grow in value as the economy grows. And the economy grows as workers add value with their work. Here\'s an analogy: I can buy a tree seed for very little and plant it in the ground. If I do nothing more, it probably won\'t grow, and it will be worth nothing. However, by taking the time to water it, fertilize it, weed it, prune it, and harvest it, I can sell the produce for much more than I purchased that seed for. No one lost money when I sell it; I increased the value by adding my effort. If I sell that tree to a sawmill, they can cut the tree into usable lumber, and sell that lumber at a profit. They added their efforts and increased the value. A carpenter can increase the value even further by making something useful (a door, for example). A retail store can make that door more useful by transporting it to a location with a buyer, and a builder can make it even more useful by installing it on a house. No one lost any money in any of these transactions. They bought something valuable, and made it more valuable by adding their effort. Companies in the stock market grow in value the same way. A company will grow in value as its employees produce things. An investor provides capital that the company uses to be able to produce things**, and as the company grows, it increases in value. As the population increases and more workers and customers are born, and as more useful things are invented, the economy will continue to grow as a whole. * Certainly, it is possible, even common, to profit from someone else\'s loss. People lose money in the stock market all the time. But it doesn\'t have to be this way. The stock market goes up, on average, over the long term, and so long term investors can continue to make money in the market even without profiting from others\' failures. ** An investor that purchases a share from another investor does not directly provide capital to the company. However, this second investor is rewarding the first investor who did provide capital to the company. This is the reason that the first investor purchased in the first place; without the second investor, the first would have had no reason to invest and provide the capital. Relating it to our tree analogy: Did the builder who installed the door help out the tree farmer? After all, the tree farmer already sold the tree to the sawmill and doesn\'t care what happens to it after that. However, if the builder had not needed a door, the sawmill would have had no reason to buy the tree."', "There's really not a simple yes/no answer. It depends on whether you're doing short term trading or long term investing. In the short term, it's not much different from sports betting (and would be almost an exact match if the bettors also got a percentage of the team's ticket sales), In the long term, though, your profit mostly comes from the growth of the company. As a company - Apple, say, or Tesla - increases sales of iPhones or electric cars, it either pays out some of the income as dividends, or invests them in growing the company, so it becomes more valuable. If you bought shares cheaply way back when, you profit from this increase when you sell them. The person buying it doesn't lose, as s/he buys at today's market value in anticipation of continued growth. Of course there's a risk that the value will go down in the future instead of up. Of course, there are also psychological factors, say when people buy Apple or Tesla because they're popular, instead of at a rational valuation. Or when people start panic-selling, as in the '08 crash. So then their loss is your gain - assuming you didn't panic, of course :-)", '"Because I feel the answers given do not wholely represent the answer you are expecting, I\'d like to re-iterate but include more information. When you own stock in a company, you OWN some of that company. When that company makes profit, you usually receive a dividend of those profits. If you owned 1% of the company stock, you (should) recieve 1% of the profits. If your company is doing well, someone might ask to buy your stock. The price of that stock is (supposed) to be worth a value representative of the expected yield or how much of a dividend you\'d be getting. The ""worth"" of that, is what you\'re betting on when you buy the stock, if you buy $100 worth of coca cola stock and they paid $10 as dividend, you\'d be pretty happy with a 10% growth in your wealth. Especially if the banks are only playing 3%. So maybe some other guy sees your 10% increase and thinks, heck.. 10% is better than 3%, if I buy your stocks, even as much as 6% more than they are worth ($106) I\'m still going to be better off by that extra 1% than I would be if I left it in the bank.. so he offers you $106.. and you think.. awesome.. I can sell my $100 of cola shares now, make a $6 profit and buy $100 worth of some other share I think will pay a good dividend. Then cola publicises their profits, and they only made 2% profit, that guy that bought your shares for $106, only got a dividend of $2 (since their \'worth\' is still $100, and effectively he lost $4 as a result. He bet on a better than 10% profit, and lost out when it didn\'t hit that. Now, (IMHO) while the stock market was supposed to be about buying shares, and getting dividends, people (brokers) discovered that you could make far more money buying and selling shares for \'perceived value\' rather than waiting for dividends to show actual value, especially if you were not the one doing the buying and selling (and risk), but instead making a 0.4% cut off the difference between each purchase (broker fees). So, TL;DR, Many people have lost money in the market to those who made money from them. But only the traders and gamblers."', "The stock market is no different in this respect to anything that's bought or sold. The price of a stock like many other things reflects what the seller is prepared to sell it at and what the buyer is prepared to offer for it. If those things match then a transaction can take place. The seller loses money but gains stocks they feel represent equivalent value, the reverse happens for the buyer. Take buying a house for example, did the buyer lose money when they bought a house, sure they did but they gained a house. The seller gained money but lost a house. New money is created in the sense that companies can and do make profits, those profits, together with the expected profits from future years increase the value that is put on the company. If we take something simple like a mining company then its value represents a lot of things: and numerous other lesser things too. The value of shares in the mining company will reflect all of these things. It likely rises and falls in line with the price of the raw materials it mines and those change based on the overall supply and demand for those raw materials. Stocks do have an inherent value, they are ownership of a part of a company. You own part of the asset value, profits and losses made by that company. Betting on things is different in that you've no ownership of the thing you bet on, you're only dependent on the outcome of the bet.", "Just because your slice of pie gets bigger doesn't necessarily mean someone else's becomes smaller. In a lot of cases it's the entire pie that gets bigger. Why is the pie bigger? More investors (savers turn investors; foreign investments, etc.), more money printed (QE anyone?), Market sentiment changes (stock is priced by perceptions) And it can certainly get smaller.", '"The answer is partly and sometimes, but you cannot know when or how. Most clearly, you do not take somebody else\'s money if you buy shares in a start-up company. You are putting your money at risk in exchange for a share in the rewards. Later, if the company thrives, you can sell your shares for whatever somebody else will pay for your current share in the thriving company\'s earnings. Or, you lose your money, when the company fails. (Much of it has then ended up in the company\'s employees\' pockets, much of the rest with the government as taxes that the company paid). If the stockmarket did not exist, people would be far less willing to put their money into a new company, because selling shares would be far harder. This in turn would mean that fewer new things were tried out, and less progress would be made. Communists insist that central state planning would make better decisions than random people linked by a market. I suggest that the historical record proves otherwise. Historically, limited liability companies came first, then dividing them up into larger numbers of ""bearer"" shares, and finally creating markets where such shares were traded. On the other hand if you trade in the short or medium term, you are betting that your opinion that XYZ shares are undervalued against other investors who think otherwise. But there again, you may be buying from a person who has some other reason for selling. Maybe he just needs some cash for a new car or his child\'s marriage, and will buy back into XYZ once he has earned some more money. You can\'t tell who you are buying from, and the seller can only tell if his decision to sell was good with the benefit of a good few years of hindsight. I bought shares hand over fist immediately after the Brexit vote. I was putting my money where my vote went, and I\'ve now made a decent profit. I don\'t feel that I harmed the people who sold out in expectation of the UK economy cratering. They got the peace of mind of cash (which they might then reinvest in Euro stocks or gold or whatever). Time will tell whether my selling out of these purchases more recently was a good decision (short term, not my best, but a profit is a profit ...) I never trade using borrowed money and I\'m not sure whether city institutions should be allowed to do so (or more reasonably, to what extent this should be allowed). In a certain size and shortness of holding time, they cease to contribute to an orderly market and become a destabilizing force. This showed up in the financial crisis when certain banks were ""too big to fail"" and had to be bailed out at the taxpayer\'s expense. ""Heads we win, tails you lose"", rather than trading with us small guys as equals! Likewise it\'s hard to see any justification for high-frequency trading, where stocks are held for mere milliseconds, and the speed of light between the trader\'s and the market\'s computers is significant."', "Day traders see a dip, buy stocks, then sell them 4 mins later when the value climbed to a small peak. What value is created? Is the company better off from that trade? The stocks were already outside of company hands, so the trade doesn't affect them at all. You've just received money from others for no contribution to society. A common scenario is a younger business having a great idea but not enough capital funds to actually get the business going. So, investors buy shares which they can sell later on at a higher value. The investor gets value from the shares increasing over time, but the business also gets value of receiving money to build the business.", '"In gambling, the house also takes a cut, so the total money in the game is shrinking by 2-10 percent. So if you gain $100, it\'s because other people lost $105, and you do this for dozens of plays, so it stacks up. The market owns companies who are trying to create economic value - take nothing and make it something. They usually succeed, and this adds to the total pot and makes all players richer regardless of trades. Gambling is transactional, there\'s a ""pull"" or a ""roll"" or a ""hand"", and when it\'s over you must do new transactions to continue playing. Investing parks your money indefinitely, you can be 30 years in a stock and that\'s one transaction. And given the long time, virtually all your gains will be new economic value created, at no one else\'s expense, i.e. Nobody loses. Now it\'s possible to trade in and out of stocks very rapidly, causing them to be transactional like gambling: the extreme example is day-trading. When you\'re not in a stock long enough for the company to create any value (paid in dividends or the market appreciating the value), then yes, for someone to gain, someone else must lose. And the house takes a cut (e.g. Etrade\'s $10 trading fee in and out). In that case both players are trying to win, and one just had better info on average. Another case is when the market drops. For instance right after Brexit I dumped half my domestic stocks and bought Euro index funds. I gambled Euro stocks would rebound better than US stocks would continue to perform. Obviously, others were counterbetting that American stocks will still grow more than Euro will rebound. Who won that gamble? Certainly we will all do better long-term, but some of us will do better-er. And that\'s what it\'s all about."', '"There is one other factor that I haven\'t seen mentioned here. It\'s easy to assume that if you buy a stock, then someone else (another stock owner) must have sold it to you. This is not true however, because there are people called ""market makers"" whose basic job is to always be available to buy shares from those who wish to sell, and sell shares to those who wish to buy. They could be selling you shares they just bought from someone else, but they also could simply be issuing shares from the company itself, that have never been bought before. This is a super oversimplified explanation, but hopefully it illustrates my point."', 'Do I make money in the stock market from other people losing money? Sometimes. If the market goes down, and someone sells -- on a panic, perhaps, or nervousness -- at a loss, if you have extra cash then you can buy that stock on the hope/expectation that its value will rise.']

Joining a company being acquired

['"Is there anything I need to ask or consider during my negotiation process based on the fact that they probably will soon be own by another company? Very tricky situation. You are being hired by one company, and one hiring manager. But you already know that there are big changes ahead. What you don\'t know is how all those changes will actually play out. You will at least end up working for a different company. I\'ve worked for several companies in the past that were acquired, and some that acquired other companies. After each acquisition, the nature of the company changed significantly. Some teams were let go completely (often ""overhead"" departments like accounting, marketing, etc, that were handled at the corporate level), some teams were moved to a different location, others stayed the same. Sometimes management changed. In one case I was working for a new boss who worked out of the home office in another state. The time frame for these changes ranged from immediately, to several years after the acquisition. For me at least, some of the things that made the job appealing earlier typically were gone. Try as best you can to ask questions about the acquisition, and about the nature of the acquiring company. If they are allowed to tell you the name of the company that is acquiring them, do some searching. See if you can find out how the company typically deals with acquisitions - do they immediately let almost everyone go (keeping only the ""essential"" few), or do they run new acquisitions as separate divisions and leave them alone for at least a while? Try to find out from your hiring manager what their expectations are for your specific team post-acquisition. Try to find out if anything within your offer is subject to change, post-acquisition. Are you being hired under the old, pre-acquisition rules? Or under the new, post-acquisition rules? The fact that you even know the company is being acquired is good. Often, companies cannot even divulge that fact until very near the end. On the other hand your use of the phrase ""probably will soon"", makes me wonder how much is definite here. Here\'s something you might wish to read: https://workplace.stackexchange.com/questions/20357/a-coworker-beat-me-to-resignation-how-can-i-resign-in-a-professional-manner"', "The best answer I can give is - be prepared for change. There's no perfect question you can ask or assurance you can get prior to accepting the offer that will give you any particularly perfect security or sense of stability here. The company itself is going through a change of identity that can change how it will do business and even what the business is and how revenue is acquired. In the time of the acquisition your role within the company could change radically for better or worse, it could even be eliminated entirely. If that type of uncertainty doesn't appeal to you - don't take the position. If you are absolutely psyched about this job, the best thing you can do is to learn more about the business itself and see if you can make any educated bets about how your role will play into the changes in business strategy that will come with the acquisition."]

How should I record invoices in foreign currency in GNUCash?

['"The solution I\'ve come up with is to keep income in CAD, and Accounts Receivable in USD. Every time I post an invoice it prompts for the exchange rate. I don\'t know if this is ""correct"" but it seems to be preserving all of the information about the transactions and it makes sense to me. I\'m a programmer, not an accountant though so I\'d still appreciate an answer from someone more familiar with this topic."', "It depends upon in how many currencies your business is denominated. If your business is solely dependent upon this one payer, it's best to start up a new set of books in USD. All accounts should be translated from CAD from a date preceding the USD activity. The CAD books should be closed, and all should be done with the new USD books. If your business will continue to use both USD & CAD, it's best to have two sets of books, one for USD and one for CAD. Multi-currency books are a nightmare and should be avoided at all costs. Also, with the way you describe your situation, it appears as if you're also blending your household and business books. This should also be avoided for best practices."]

Any tax advantage for registering a residential house as a business? (I want to apply legal pressure to my landlord)

['"To the best of my knowledge, in California there\'s no such thing as registering a place as a business. There\'s zoning (residential/commercial/mixed/etc), and there\'s ""a business registered at a place"". But there\'s no ""place registered as a business"". So you better clarify what it is that you think your landlord did. It may be that the place is used for short term rentals, in which case the landlord may have to have registered a business of short term rentals there, depending on the local municipal or county rules. Specifically regarding the deposit, however, there\'s a very clear treatment in the California law. The landlord must provide itemized receipt for the amounts out of the deposit that were used, and the prices should be reasonable and based on the actual charges by the actual vendors. If you didn\'t get such a receipt, or the amounts are bogus and unsubstantiated - you have protection under the CA law."']

Difference between a mortgage and buy-to-let in UK

['"Residential mortgages normally explicitly state that the property cannot be let without explicit permission, whereas BTL mortgages typically require that the property be let. There are other differences. Residential mortgages are regulated, which means that consumers have a degree of protection from mis-selling; most BTLs are not, as landlords are expected to know what they\'re doing. Affordability of residential mortgages are based on your income, since that is how you are going to pay for them. BTLs are (mostly) assessed based on the property\'s rental income, since it\'s that that will fund the mortgage. Finally, residential mortgages are typically done on a repayment basis, so that at the end of the term, you\'ve paid off the entire loan, whereas BTLs are typically interest-only, on the assumption that you\'ll either sell the property, or remortgage, at the end of the term. (I\'ve used words like ""typically"" a lot to give an overall picture of the differences. Obviously it\'s a bit more complicated than that, and there are exceptions to a lot of the above descriptions.)"', 'In my experience buy-to-let mortgages charge a higher rate of interest than an personal residential mortgage. They are regarded as a business enterprise and presumably the banks calculate that they carry a higher risk. A bank would probably take action if the property on an ordinary mortgage was rented out, as you would be breaking their terms. Policies could be rendered void. The terms on an ordinary mortgage disallow renting out the property.', "Another factor that makes Buy to let more expensive is the risk involved. With a buy to let you are dependent on finding a tenant that will keep regular payments. if the property is left empty you need to finance the mortgage yourself putting you under financial strain and raising risk. Also as Chis mentioned they are regarded as a business enterprise, If the mortgage was to be taken by a business that would be very high risk for a bank as the business could dissolve leaving the bank out of pocket. Because of this it can be very difficult to get a buy to let through a business unless you are moving from a personal portfolio. For a regular mortgage these risks don't exist so this is reflected in lower interest repayments. It's because of these differences in risk that banks created buy to let so they can better manage those risks."]

Could someone place an independent film on the stock market?

['"When we say ""stock market,"" we are usually thinking of the publicly traded stocks, such as the New York Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ. Shares of individual products do not go on these exchanges, only large corporations. You won\'t see a stock ticker symbol for The Force Awakens or for the iPhone 6s Plus. The reason for this is that when investors buy a stock, they are looking for something that will grow in value theoretically forever. Individual products usually have a limited lifespan. Your movie will (hopefully) generate revenue when it comes out, but after a while sales will slow down after people have seen it. If someone bought a share of stock in a movie on the stock market, they have to realize that eventually the movie will stop making money, and their share of stock won\'t be worth anything anymore. Instead, people invest in companies that have the potential to make new products, such as Disney or Apple. So if you were envisioning seeing the ticker symbol of your movie going across the screen on CNBC, sorry, that\'s not going to happen. However, you could theoretically sell shares to individual investors for a percentage of the profit. You figure out how much money you need to create the movie, and estimate how much profit you think the movie will earn. Then you find an investor (or group of investors) that is willing to give you the money you need in exchange for a percentage of the profit. Unlike a stock market investor, these investors won\'t be looking for the long-term growth potential of the resale value of the stock, but simply a share of the profit."', "Stock is a part ownership of a business. First there has to be a business that people want to own part of because they expect to make a profit from that ownership. Nobody is going to be interested if the business isn't worth anything. In other words: sure, you could try to start a movie production house to make this film and others... But unless you are already a major player AND already have a lot of money invested in the studio, forget it. This isn't GoFundMe or Kickstarter. Nobody is going to buy stock because they want a copy of the DVD that you promise will be available in two years' time."]

Company requires me to use my personal cell phone to work. Writeoff?

["Not authoritative, but according to TurboTax: If your new cell phone acts as both your business and personal phone, you are only allowed to deduct the portion used for business from your taxable income. It’s important for you to hang on to your itemized phone bill and receipts to ensure that you’re deducting the right amounts and to keep records of your deduction. Since the usage you're describing sounds like a very small amount of the overall usage, it will probably be difficult to justify a business expense deduction."]

Is an analyst's “price target” assumed to be for 12 months out?

["I wouldn't put too much stock in the guidance generically... it's more a measure of confidence in the company. When you listen to the earnings calls and start following a particular analyst, you'll understand where they come from when they kick out a number.", '"If the time horizon is not indicated, this is just a ""fair price"". The price of the stock, which corresponds with the fair value of the whole company. The value, which the whole business is worth, taking into consideration its net income, current bonds yield, level of risk of the business, perspective of the business etc.. The analyst thinks the price will sooner or later hit the target level (if the price is high, investors will exit stocks, if the price is cheap, investors will jump in), but no one knows, how much time will it take."', "The time horizon applicable to the price target is always specified by the broker or bank which published the research report. You will find this information in the disclaimer, which is present on every research report. Usually it is 12 months, but some firms give 6 months price targets. However, you should never rely on the price target alone and always combine it with the following details (to name a few): Are the analyst's estimate above or below consensus estimates (or company guidance), did the analyst rise or lower its estimates. What is the rating on the stock (Buy, Sell, Hold...), when did he change his rating or price target. Does the firm do business with the company? (which may influence a bullish tone and optimistic price target).", "I don't think you can always assume a 12-month time horizon. Sometimes, the analyst's comments might provide some color on what kind of a time horizon they're thinking of, but it might be quite vague.", "Most commonly, unless you read 'fair value target price,' an analyst's target price is a 12-month target price. Typically, there is a firm wide policy determining which time horizon to use. No analyst would provide an open ended target price, it doesn't make any sense (you discount cash flows to a certain period, adjust for inflation, etc). So there is always a time horizon.", 'Analysts normally (oxymoron here) gauge their targets on where the stock is currently and more importantly where it has been. Except for in the case of say a Dryships where it was a hundred dollar stock and is now in the single digits, it is safe to assume that Apple for instance was well over $ 700 and is now at $500, and that a price guidance of $ 580 is not that remarkable and a not so difficult level to strike. Kind of like a meteorologist; fifty percent chance of rain. Analysts and weathermen.Hard to lose your job when your never really wrong. Mr Zip, Over and outta here']

A merchant requests that checks be made out to “Cash”. Should I be suspicious?

["There are legitimate reasons: I wouldn't jump the gun and assume that this person is avoiding taxes, etc. Barbers are usually licensed professions. Since it's generally a cash business, they tend to get audited more often by the tax authorities. That said, I wouldn't pay her with a check -- you have no idea who is actually cashing the check, and you could run into issues with unknown third parties misusing your account information.", '"There are benefits associated with a cash only business (the link states a few). However checks made out to ""cash"" don\'t reap those benefits listed. For anyone on SE to say your barber hides revenue from the IRS would just be speculation. With that said there are a great number of disadvantages for a cash only business. And from my experience, a business that goes out of their way to take cash only can be a little suspicious. Luckily you are not committing any crimes or fraud by paying her cash."', '"To put a positive spin on the whole thing, maybe it\'s a small family shop, and having the check made out to ""cash"" means that your barber can hand it to someone else without the need to countersign. Or maybe his last name is ""Cash"" - there was a pretty famous singer who fit that description. Either way, it\'s not your place to nanny his finances."', '"They\'re hiding income. The IRS is a likely candidate for who they are hiding it from but not the only option. Another possibility that comes to mind is someone who had a judgment against them--a check made out to ""cash"" could be handled by someone else and thus not ever appear in their bank accounts."', "If the business owner doesn't want you to pay him directly, the only reason I can think of is breaking a law. It can be because the business doesn't legally exists, or because the barber wants to evade taxes, or because he doesn't pay his child support or doesn't want his income to be apparent to his debtors in a bankruptcy proceedings. Either way, stinks."]

What threshold to move from SEP to Solo401k?

["I think this article explains it pretty well: Contributions to a SEP are limited to 20% of your business income (which is business income minus half of your self-employment tax), up to a maximum of $45,000. With a solo 401(k), on the other hand, you can contribute up to $15,500 plus 20% of your business income (defined the same way as above), with a maximum contribution of $45,000 in 2007. You can make an extra $5,000 catch-up contribution if you're 50 or older"]

Can a shareholder be liable in case of bankruptcy of one of the companies he invested in?

['"No. One of the key ideas behind a corporation is that an investor\'s liability is limited to the amount he invests, i.e. the amount of stock he buys. This is the primary reason why small businesses become corporations, even though one person owns 100% of the stock. Then if the business goes broke, he won\'t lose his house, retiretment fund, etc. He\'ll lose everything he had in the business, but at least there\'s a limit to it. (In some countries there are other ways to achieve the same results, like creating a ""limited liabililty company"", but that\'s another story.)"', '"No, assuming by ""public company"" you mean a corporation. The shareholder\'s individual liability is limited to their investment. Your shares can go to zero value, but that\'s the limit. EDIT In regard to the follow-up question in the comments: ""Are all companies in the stock market corporations?"" the answer is definitely ""no."" I cannot say much about other countries, but the US markets have some entities which are known as ""master limited partnerships."" These trade shares on the market by the usual rules, but if you buy you become a partner in the company rather than a shareholder. You still have limited liability in this case, but there will be differences, for example, in how you\'re are taxed."', "The answer depends on whether the company involved has 'limited liability'. Most, but not all public and listed companies and corporations have this, but not all so it is worth checking and understanding what you are getting involved with. The expression 'limited liability' means that the owners (shareholders) of a company have a liability up to the amount of the face value of the shares they hold which they have not yet paid for. The difference is usually minor but basically it means that if you buy $10 of shares you have no liability, but if the company gives you $10 of shares, and you pay them (in cash or kind) $5, then you still have a liability of $5. If the company fails, the debtors can come after you for that liability. An 'unlimited liability' company is a different animal altogether. Lloyds insurance is probably the most famous example. Lloyds worked by putting together consortiums to underwrite risk. If the risk doesn't happen, the consortium keeps the premiums, if it does, they cover the loss. Most of the time they are very profitable but not always. For example, the consortiums which covered asbestos caused the bankruptcies of a great many very wealthy people.", '"Not normally, for a limited liability company anyway. In extreme circumstances a court may ""lift the veil"" of incorporation and treat shareholders as if they were partners. If you are an office bearer or a director that is found to have breached duties/responsibiities then that is another matter. Dim views can be taken of shonky arrangents for companies formed for activites not of a bona fide business nature too."', '"I am a tax lawyer and ALL the RESPONSES ABOVE are 1/2 Correct but also 1/2 Wrong and in tax law this means 100% WRONG (BECAUSE ANY PART INCORRECT UNDER TAX LAW will get YOU A HUGE PENALY and/or PRISON TIME by way of the IRS! So in ESSENCE ALL the above answers are WRONG! Let me enlighten you to the correct answer in 5 parts, as people that do not practice tax law may understand (but you still probably will not understand, if you are NOT a Lawyer). 1) All public companies are corporations (shown by Ltd.), 2) only Shareholders of Public companies (ie, traded on the NYSE stock market) are never liable for debts of a bankrupt company, due to the concept of limited liability. 2) now Banks may ask a sole proprietorship (who wants to incorp. for example) to give collateral, such as owners stocks/bonds or his/her house, but then of course the loanee can tell the Bank No Thanks and find a lender that may charge higher interest rates but lend money to his company with little to NO collateral. 3) Of course not all companies are publicly traded and these are called private companies. 4)""limited liability"" has nothing to do directly with subsequent shareholders (the above answer is inaccurate!), it RELATES rather to INITIAL OWNERS INVESTMENT in their company, limiting the amount of owner loss if the company goes bankrupt. 5) Share Face-value is usually never related to this as shares are sold at market value in real life instances (above or below face-value), or the most money Investments Banks or owners can fetch for the shares they sell (not what the stock\'s face-value is set at upon issuance). Never forget, stocks are sold in our Capitalistic System to whomever pays the most, as it is that Buyer who gets to purchase the stock!"', "In an open corporation scenario a stock holder may well be found liable. It's a very narrow and uncommon bunch of scenarios but it's well worth sharing. See the paragraph on open corporations in the following document: http://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents/courseware_asp_files/businessLaw/RightsOfShareholders/LiabilityOfShareholders.asp"]