query: what is the best way to do a freelancing job over the summer for a student

positive: If this will be your sole income for the year, going self-employed is the best way to do this: So, here's how to go at it: Total cash in: £2000 Total Tax paid: £0 Admin overhead: approx 3 hours. Legit: 100%   :) Edit:  Can you tell me that in my case what are the required fields on the invoice? If you're non-VAT registered, there are no legal requirements as to what information you need to put on the invoice -it literally can be a couple of numbers on a napkin, and still be legit.  With that said, to make a professional appearance, my invoices are usually structured as follows: Left side: ( Sidenote: why client-specific incremental numbering? Why, so they can't make educated guesses to the number of clients I have at any given time :)  ) Right side: Center table: And so far, none of my clients missed any fields, so this should have everything they need to :) Hope this helps, but keep in mind, all of the above is synthetic sugar on the top -ultimately,  the relationship you share with your Clients is the thing you will (or will not) get paid for! Edit#2: The voices in my head just pointed out, that I've totally omitted National Insurance contributions in the above. However, and I quote HMRC: If your profits are expected to be less than £5,315 you may not have to pay Class 2 National Insurance contributions. Hence, this won't change the numbers above, either -just make sure to point this out during your registration in the office.

negative: Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) and the University of Pittsburgh (Pitt) have different end of term dates but by less than a month.  Both have summer sessions, but most students do not stay over the summer.  You can rent over the summer, but prices fall by a lot.  Thirty to forty thousand students leave over the summer between the two.  Only ten to twenty thousand remain throughout the year and not all of those are in Oakland (the neighborhood in Pittsburgh where the universities are located).  So many of the landlords in Oakland have the same problem.  Your competitors will cut their rates to try to get some rent for the summer months.   This also means that you have to handle eight, nine, and three month leases rather than year long and certainly not multiyear leases.  You're right that you don't have to buy the latest appliances or the best finishes, but you still have to replace broken windows and doors.  Also, the appliances and plumbing need to mostly work.  The furnace needs to produce heat and distribute it.  If there is mold or mildew, you will have to take care of it.  You can't rely on the students doing so.  So you have to thoroughly clean the premises between tenants.   Students may leave over winter break.  If there are problems, the pipes may freeze and burst, etc.  Since they're not there, they won't let you know when things break.   Students drop out during the term and move out.  You probably won't be able to replace them when that happens.  If you have three people in two bedrooms, two of them may be in a romantic relationship.  Romantic relationships among twenty-year olds end frequently.  Your three people drops back to two.  Your recourse in that case is to evict the remaining tenants and sue for breach of contract.  But if you do that, you may not replace the tenants until a new term starts.  Better might be to sue the one who left and accept the lower rent from the other two.  But you likely won't get the entire rent amount for the remainder of the lease.  Suing an impoverished student is not the road to riches.   Pittsburgh is expected to have a 6.1% increase in house prices which almost all of it is going to be pure profit. I don't know specifically about Pittsburgh, but in the national market, housing prices are about where they were in 2004.  Prices were flat to increasing from 2004 to 2007 and then fell sharply from 2007 to 2009, were flat to decreasing from 2009 to 2012, and have increased the last few years.  Price to rent ratios are as high now as in 2003 and higher than they were the twenty years before that.  Maybe prices do increase.  Or maybe we hit a new 20% decrease.  I would not rely on this for profit.  It's great if you get it, but unreliable.   I wouldn't rely on estimates for middle class homes to apply to what are essentially slum apartments.  A 6% average may be a 15% increase in one place and a 3% decrease in another.  The nice homes with the new appliances and the fancy finishes may get the 15% increase.  The rundown houses in a block where students party past 2 AM may get no increase.   Both the city of Pittsburgh and the county of Allegheny charge property taxes.  Schools and libraries charge separate taxes.  The city provides a worksheet that estimates $2860 in taxes on a $125,000 property.  It doesn't sound like you would be eligible for homestead or senior tax relief.  Realtors should be able to tell you the current assessment and taxes on the properties that they are selling you.   You should be able to call a local insurance agent to find out what kinds of insurance are available to landlords.  There is also renter's insurance which is paid by the tenant.  Some landlords require that tenants show proof of insurance before renting.  Not sure how common that is in student housing.

negative: "Thanks for the great response.  The example with calculus is perfect! Group A is some students who will never ever get it, no matter how much you teach and train them.  As you know, group B is some students who excel in calculus just by reading the book with no need for a professor to explain or teach them. They probably exceed in understanding beyond the course objectives.  Group C, most, will be in the middle: struggle and with efforts of the professor (if the class is not more than 10-15 students) and their own efforts, they will eventually understand... some will get C, some will get B and few will get A.  Which group will succeed with their career if it requires calculus?  > The messed up part is that professors are never formally taught to teach.   True. I was an adjunct professor while studying for my master's. In the end of the semester, students had to evaluate their professors. I got the 2nd best results, after another part-time adjunct professor, and way above all tenured professors. Are you surprised? By the way, I was teaching introductory classes and I was working for the department I was teaching for as a research intern.  As for professors who don't know how to teach, this was not an issue in the past and was not needed in the past (i.e. it's because of past traditions).   In the past, the role of the professor was not so much to teach, in the sense and the way teachers teach today in elementary school: attend and dance around every student's special needs and go in a slow pace to accommodate make sure nobody is left behind.  The role of the professor in the past, being a real expert and full of knowledge far and beyond what is required, was to plan and sequence what has to be taught, in a pace that will meet the full agenda of the class. No concern is given for students who can't keep the pace. Also, the role was to challenge the students, test then and answer any question they may have. This includes debates over any topic related to the class material.  > I think the vast majority of work related skills that people develop are learned on the job  Absolutely true!!!! Or let's put it this way: **the best school was, is and will be ""a Master and an Apprentice"".** Which is somewhat still done in Germany, and is the only way Medical Students learn... because, no choice: the life of others is in their hands.   By the way, **Masters have zero patience** for apprentices who don't show a promise. Masters also have little talent in teaching but **Masters have long term 1000% patience** to show, again and again, correct again and again, demand, explain and challenge their apprentices.  ... to the point the Masters actually don't do much work, and, instead, just teach, in their own special way."

negative: I switched from engineering into finance, into an entry level position as an analyst on the investment side. I can tell you about my experience and how I did it.  Yes, it is incredibly hard to get a position on the buyside. Investment management doesn't scale well with numbers, adding more analysts typically doesn't improve results (i.e. Buffett and Munger made all the investment decisions at Berkshire Hathaway, the most successful investment team is a two man team running more than a hundred billion dollars of assets). So teams are very small. A large amount of money goes through the hands of very few people, so naturally the pay is very big. The recruiters are not lying when they say there are hundreds of applicants chasing each one of those jobs.  I tried asking my friends and family, but being a first generation American, most of the people I know are blue-collar types that work with their hands. I had some success tapping into the alumni network, I got many responses with advice but no interviews. It doesn't help that the finance world is currently shrinking and there are talented people losing their jobs. I had the most success attending my schools career fair. If you graduated from one of the top schools, the firms that are recruiting will still show up. Also, check your schools career office. All the top schools I know of have on-campus interviews. They are generally open to alumni. It is summer right now, but on-campus recruiting season will start in the fall. You should be able to get some interviews through your school.  Now the most important thing you need to do is to differentiate yourself. What are you doing right now? Are you working in some other area of finance or a different field altogether? I think the best way to do it (and it is how I did it) is to invest your own money. If you are in an interview and you say you invest your own money, you are pretty much guaranteed that you will be explaining one of your investment theses for the next half hour. This is effectively what you will be doing in the real job if you get it. Firms want to hire someone who can start working, they don't want to pay you that big money only to find that you can't do anything for the next year or two before they cut you. So you have to prove that you can do the job. Interns do it by working for cheap for a summer or two. Someone who graduated already can do it by claiming that they do it on the side, and then backing that up by being able to explaining positions intelligently (you will NOT get the job if it looks anything like /r/investing). There is also something hypocritical if you say that you should be paid boatloads of money because you are capable of managing money well (that is what you are claiming by applying to an investment job) and you don't manage your own money and you haven't formulated any investment theses. Students typically won't be able to do this because they don't have any money to invest, so they get their jobs through the internship route.

negative: The short answer is that you can use student loans for living expenses.  Joe provides a nice taxonomy of loans.  I would just add that some loans are not only guaranteed, but also subsidized.  Essentially the Government buys down the rate of the loan. The mechanics are that a financial aid package might consist of grants, work study (job), subsidized, and guaranteed loans.  One can turn down one or more of the elements of the package.  All will be limited in some form. The work study will have a maximum number of hours and generally has low pay.  Many find better deals working in the businesses surrounding the college or starting their own services type business.  The grants rarely cover the full cost of tuition and books.  The loans will both be limited in amount.  It mainly depends on what you qualify for, and generally speaking the lower the income the more aid one qualifies for. Now some students use all their grant, all their loan money and buy things that are not necessary.  For example are you going to live in the $450/month dorm, or the new fancy apartments that are running $800/month?  Are you going to use the student loan money to buy a car?  Will it be a new BMW or a 8 year old Camary? I see this first hand as I live near a large university.  The pubs are filled with college students, not working, but drinking and eating every night.  Many of them drive very fancy cars. The most onerous example of this is students at the military academies.  Attendees have their books and tuition completely paid for.  They also receive a stipend, and more money can be earned over the summer.  They also all qualify for a 35K student loan in their junior year.  Just about every kid, takes this loan.  Most of those use the money to buy a car.  I know a young lady who did exactly that, and so did many of her friends. So kids with a starting pay of 45K also start life with a 35K.  Buying a nice car in the military is especially silly as they cannot drive it while deployed and they are very likely to be deployed.  At least, however, they are guaranteed a starting job with a nice starting pay, and upward potential. College kids who behave similarly might not have it as good.  Will they even find work?  Will the job have the ability to move up?  How much security is in the job?  One might say that this does not apply to engineers and such, but I am working with a fellow with a computer science degree who cannot find a job and has not worked in the past 6 months.  This even though the market is super hot right now for computer engineers. So, in a word, be very careful what you borrow.

negative: > They can move over to getting ketchup packets and bringing out orders. Also helping people with the kiosks.  If they can even hire them to do that. I work in ag and there are so many restrictions these days, we don't hire anyone under 18 to do anything for any reason. Even chop weeds. Which used to be summer jobs for a lot of the high school kids around here. Now they basically have nothing to do.

negative: College professor here. I often think about the fact that all the information I teach is available online. Students are paying a premium for my course- what of value do I bring?  **Filter** There is a lot of good information online, but there is also a lot of inaccurate information. I filter out inaccurate information.   **Structure** I organize material in a way that makes it easier to digest  **Elaboration** I provide context and examples. I'm able to explain complex topics in several different ways in case students don't get it the first time.   **Motivation** I explain *why* students need to learn something; I hold them accountable for deadlines.   **Social interaction** I get students to talk with one another and see material from multiple view points.   **Feedback** This is, in my opinion, the most valuable thing I provide to students, and I invest *a lot* of time in it. What are students doing well? What are they not doing well? How can they improve?  This doesn't mean intelligent, motivated individuals can't learn from online materials as well as in a classroom- I believe they can. But the classroom environment does provide some advantages over teaching yourself material online.

negative: I've seen this in my town. I don't know if they are charging for Teslas specifically, or things like the Volt (I don't own an electric car so haven't looked into it too much), but there are over a dozen places in my city that have parking spots equipped with charging stations. They are outside various retail locations/malls as well as parking garages at the local university.   Keep in mind, this is not a major city. The total population is about 150,000 and that includes about 50,000 transient students who aren't here during the summer.

negative: A system comparing students to themselves a year ago is what I think would work best. Therefore you are graded based off the students you have, not the grade you are in.  This would mean if I was in 2nd grade and read at a 1st grade level then went to 3rd grade and read at a 4th grade level, then the teacher would receive higher marks. This would of course be averaged out throughout the class with outliers left off (because some students always get A's, and some... not so much).   Its not a perfect system, but its better than saying that the only performance indicators are not touching children and keeping your job long enough to get tenure

negative: They're trying to, but ratepayers and state governments are fighting back, especially in progressive states.   The big issue is the degree to which you can bank your summer power surplus to offset your winter deficit. You'd think that since you're generating power for the grid in summer you'd get equal credit for that to use in winter when the sun shines less, but power companies do their best to prevent this, so state governments have to mandate it.

negative: First the obvious: Business school rankings are flawed.   I have no doubt that Asian business schools are improving rapidly, and many are already on par with Western universities. Many of the best teachers at US/European schools are also teaching in Asia (I have never had an Asian teacher but I expect that they are as great as their Western counterparts). Also, academic journals accept more and more Asian submissions.   But we also have to put the numbers in perspective. An American student who did an MBA in China will have a hard time getting a job in the US. Even those who go to European universities are met by recruiters with puzzlement. So these the high ranking of Asian schools is really only relevant for Asian students.   In short, what the ranking says is: If you're Chinese, you don't *need* to go to the US or Europe for your business degree. Personally I suggest you still do if you can afford it, because the experience abroad, and the exposure to students with a different attitude, will be an enrichment.

negative: That contradicts both what I have written, and my personal experience. I am saying that we currently do educate people, and we don't mold them for jobs, even though that is what students are sold when they apply to college, and it's certainly what they pay up to six figures for.

negative: Look I agree with you in theory.   In practice, it is quite different.   The fact that there is way more educated people than is even remotely necessary. The extreme vast majority of jobs out there DO NOT even require actual ability to get a diploma, let alone a degree.   Think about your daily life: with whom do you actually deal with that requires much of an education? Few people are going to pay more to their barista, retail sales or car detailer because they have an advanced degree.    Everybody having a college degree drives the value down for everybody...which is exactly what is happening.    Things need to be turned on their head. I propose that Colleges need to receive their income as a percentage of the first 10-15 years of income from their students.  It will cut down on bogus baloney degrees, concentrate on valuable students (even those with questionable academics like Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison) and concentrate on degrees with high future value.   However, when you get 2500 applications for a lower-end job, I would immediately take it down to those with a degree because it's easy and nobody will second guess you.

negative: "First, it's clear from your story that you very likely should be able to receive some financial aid.  That may be in the form of loans or, better, grants in which you just get free money to attend college.  For example, a Pell grant.  You won't get all you'd need for a free ride this way, but you can really make a dent in what you'd pay.  The college may likely also provide financial aid to you.  In order to get any of this, though, you have to fill out a FAFSA.  There are deadlines for this for each state and each college (there you would ask individually).  I'd get looking into that as soon as you can. Do student loans have to be paid monthly?  Any loan is a specific agreement between a lender and a borrower, so any payment terms could apply, such as bimonthly or quarterly.  But monthly seems like the most reasonable assumption.  Generally, you should assume the least favorable (reasonably likely) terms for you, so that you are prepared for a worst-case scenario.  Let's say monthly. Can I just, as I had hoped, borrow large sums of money and only start   paying them after college? Yes.  That is a fair summary of all a student loan is.  Importantly, though, some loans are federal government subsidized loans for which the interest on the loan is paid for you as long as you stay in college + 6 months (although do check that is the current situation).  Unsubsidized loans may accrue interest from the start of the loan period.  If you have the option, obviously try hard to get the subsidized loans as the interest can be significant.  I made a point to only take subsidized loans.   WARNING: Student loans currently enjoy a (nearly?) unique status in America as being one of the only loan types that are not forgivable in bankruptcy.  This means that if you leave college with $100,000 in debt that begins accruing interest, there is no way for you to get out of it short of fleeing the country or existence.  And at that point the creditors may come after your mother for the balance.  These loans can balloon into outrageous amounts due to compounding interest.  Please have a healthy fear of student loans.  For more on this, listen to this hour long radio program about this. Would a minimum wage job help,  Of course it will ""help"" but will it ""help enough""?  That depends on how much you work.  If you make $7.50/hr and work 20 hrs/week for all but 3 weeks of the year, after taxes you will be adding about $6,000 to offset your costs.  In 3 years of college (*see below), that's $18,000, which, depending on where you go, is not bad at helping defray costs.  If you are at full-time (40 hrs), then it is $12k/yr or $36k toward defraying costs.  These numbers are nothing to sniff at. Do you have any computer/web/graphics skills?  It's possible you could find ways to make more than minimum wage if you learn some niche IT industry skill.  (If I could go back and re-do those years I wouldn't have wasted much time delivering pizzas and would have learned HTML in the 90s and would have potentially made some significant money.) would college and full-time job be manageable together?  That's highly specific to each situation (which job?  how far a commute to it?  which major? how efficient are you?  how easily do you learn?) but I would say that, for the most part, it's not a good idea, not only for the academic-achievement side of it, but the personal-enrichment aspect of college.  Clubs, sports, relationships, activities, dorm bull sessions, all that good stuff, they deserve their space and time and it'd be a shame to miss out on that because you're on the 2nd shift at Wal-Mart 40hrs/week. How do I find out what scholarships, grants, and financial aid I can apply for?  Are you in a high school with a career or guidance counselor?  If so, go to that person about this as a start.  If not, there are tons of resources out there.  Public libraries should have huge directories of scholarships.  The Federal Student Loan program has a website.  There are also a lot of resources online found by just searching Google for scholarships--though do be careful about any online sources (including this advice!). Sermon: Lastly, please carefully consider the overall cost vs. benefit to you.  College in 2012 is anything but cheap.  A typical price for a textbook is $150 or more.  Tuition and board can range over $40k at private colleges.  There is a recent growing call for Americans to re-think the automatic nature of going to college considering the enormous financial burden it puts many families under.  Charles Murray, for one, has put out a book suggesting that far too many students go to college now, to society's and many individuals' detriment (he's a controversial thinker, but I think some of his points are valid and actually urgent).  With all that said, consider ways to go to college but keep costs down.  Public colleges in your state will almost always be significantly cheaper than private or out-of-state.  Once there, aim for As and Bs--don't cheat yourself out of what you pay for.  And lastly, consider a plan in which you complete college in three years, by attending summer courses.  This website has a number of other options for helping to reduce the cost of college."

negative: "They understand inflation perfectly.  Their owners/member banks own the mortgages, auto loans, business loans, student loans, etc, and, of course all the collateral on unpaid debts.   Inflation is I their best interests.  They aren't in the money game, they are in the capitol game. The fed it's self is in the business of creating inflation and debt.  While the fed, it's self won't capitolise on bad loans, they are happy to do whatever quantitative easing they can to bail out their member banks (who never needed bailing out, as it was their customers, not them, who lost out)...     One of the men behind the founding of/ the principal of the federal reserve/privatized Nation banking, Mayer Amschel Rothschild said ""give me control of a country's money source, and  I care not who makes it's rules"".  The federal Reserve is doing a shitty job by way of we the people, because it was set up specifically to help a small number roof people to plunder our economy.   They built it to create an entire nation of debt slaves... What it needs is to be burned to the ground, and the authority to issue currency be places back into the hands of the legislators- as the Constitution specifies exactly to prevent private interests from doing what they're doing/have done...   The Constitution also doesn't allow for a federal income tax, which was levied the same year that the fed. Was instituted- 1913."

negative: That's a great answer. Now here's how it really works.  You forgive student debts, the lenders take major losses. This creates a major credit crisis and the financial institutions need to be bailed out all over again. This means using taxpayer dollars and printing massive amounts of money. The value of student debt is over $1 trillion. That is about a third what the government pays in a typical year, so just imaging how that would effect the deficit when they have to foot the bill because there is no way in the hell the banks are paying it.

negative: >Education is totally depending on the skills and mindset of the student. Many many students can be self taught and/or are motivated to learn. They don't need teachers.  This is a good niche for automation. IMHO the best model would be to allow students to access resources in isolation then arrange a catch-up class with a facilitator to encourage discussion. That way the benefits of automation and human interaction are realized.

negative: "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://qz.com/851066/almost-all-the-10-million-jobs-created-since-2005-are-temporary/) reduced by 61%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Survey research conducted by economists Lawrence Katz of Harvard University and Alan Krueger at Princeton University shows that from 2005 to 2015, the proportion of Americans workers engaged in what they refer to as &quot;Alternative work&quot; jumped from 10.7% to 15.8%. Alternative work is characterized by being temporary or unsteady-such as work as an independent contractor or through a temporary help agency.  > &quot;And over 60% was due to the [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.&quot; In other words, nearly all of the 10 million jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were not traditional nine-to-five employment.  > Katz and Krueger found that each of the common types of alternative work increased from 2005 to 2015-with the largest changes in the number of independent contractors and workers provided by contract firms, such as janitors that work full-time at a particular office, but are paid by a janitorial services firm.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/79k7gc/almost_all_the_10_million_jobs_created_since_2005/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~237356 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **work**^#1 **Alternative**^#2 **job**^#3 **Krueger**^#4 **full-time**^#5"

negative: Several things to consider: I don't see why your friend should pay any tax. It's not his income at all. And I am not sure where your income should be taxed in this scenario. Is he declaring it as his income somehow? The bank won't do it for him, the transfer as such should be transparent. On the other hand, money transiting on his account could in principle look suspicious, although €300 is unlikely to raise alarm. What I do know is that if you do pay taxes, 20% is not particularly high as such. There are four brackets of income tax (and tax-like contributions to the pension system) in the Netherlands, between 36.55% and 52%. Rates for personal taxes in the Netherlands are simply way higher than what you might be used to in Eastern Europe or what has been mentioned in comments.  In fact, if anything, 20% seems too low. I am at a loss guessing what it could correspond to, you could ask your friend how he came to that number. There various tax discounts (kortingen) and deductions (aftreken) that apply to freelance work (and some that apply to all incomes). €3000 yearly is quite low and would probably not be taxed at all if you were recently registered as freelance (zzp'er) in the Netherlands and had no other sources of income. But on the other hand, if your money is treated as being part of your friend's income, these wouldn't apply, as he is probably already benefiting from them. There are special rules for copyright fees. Not sure this is necessarily 100% kosher but I have met people who got paid that way for articles they wrote in trade publications.

negative: As an actuary (health, not pensions), this is what we do.  We spend years(5+) taking exams and learning about the best and proper ways to predict liabilities, probabilities, and other statistics that we use to forecast cost and return in the future.  I am in health, not pensions, but I would check out [Actuarial Outpost](http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_discussion_forum/forumdisplay.php?f=15) and /r/actuary. The subreddit tends to be a younger (see student) crowd but there may be someone who can better answer your question.

negative: "Do mutual funds edit/censor underperforming investments to make their   returns look better, and if so, is there any way one can figure out if   they are doing it? No, that's not what the quote says. What the quote says is that the funds routinely drop investments that do not bring the expected return, which is true. That's their job, that is what is called ""active management"". Obviously, if you're measuring the fund by their success/failure to beat the market, to beat the market the funds must consistently select over-performers. No-one claims that they only select over-performers, but they select enough of them (or not...) for the average returns to be appealing (or not...) for the investors."

negative: I think it has more to do with a sizable amount of students have no interest in learning. The best most funded system in the world would fail if the students resist being taught and sabotage those that do want to learn

negative: "The entire idea of accountability in America has been in serious decline over the years.  Not to get on my high horse and preach, but this issue begins early on with child care and has branched it's way into our economics as well.  Kids get 9th place ribbons for races with 9 racers. Young post-college adults are struggling to survive on their own in the real world. CEO's are told to retire early as opposed to stepping down.  At the end of the day, everyone wants to credit themselves with a job well done and shift blame to others or outside forces.   However, this doesn't mean that there's no position left in the US with 'accountability.' For instance, the Fed Chairman has to be correct on their position or the entire economy can be destroyed in the process.   So what do we do instead? Those positions are the ones we blame for what's happening around us. So naturally, their response is to leave as delicately and unnoticed as possible.  If you ask me, those people at Equifax should be in jail. Not because of the hack, but because they waited so long to let everyone know. Stepping down and retiring shouldn't  mean they get away from it, the same way declaring bankruptcy doesn't mean I get away from my student loans.  If people started taking accountability for their own actions, America would be much more healthy in my opinion.  But then again, at the end of the day it is just my opinion, so you're free to believe whatever else you like. Cause you know what they say, 'opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one."""

negative: "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-consumers-loans/u-s-cracks-down-on-debt-collection-of-private-student-loans-idUSKCN1BT26G) reduced by 73%. (I'm a bot) ***** > WASHINGTON - The U.S. consumer financial watchdog on Monday ordered National College Student Loan Trusts and its debt collector, Transworld Systems Inc, to pay at least $26.1 million for attempting to collect on possibly non-existent or out-of-date loans.  > According to the CFPB, the collection of 15 trusts purchased and securitized more than 800,000 private student loans, and then sold notes to investors.  > Last summer the CFPB, charged with guarding individuals against predatory lending, proposed toughening regulation of debt collection industry after fielding thousands of complaints from people contacted about debts they did not owe or illegally harassed by collection agencies.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/70z1th/us_cracks_down_on_debt_collection_of_private/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~212498 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **debt**^#1 **Loan**^#2 **CFPB**^#3 **Trusts**^#4 **collection**^#5"

negative: "Great response, thanks! I'll do my best to answer your questions.  1. I'm a genuine believer that everything, from calculus to charisma, can be taught to *most* people. Some people don't have the intelligence to ever learn calculus, for example, and some people will only ever be average at it. But most people can at least improve in most areas through education.   The messed up part is that professors are never formally taught to teach. Some of the things I listed I implicitly learned in grad school (e.g., when doing research, I learned how to filter out inaccurate information; when writing research papers, I learned how to organize information). I learned theories of motivation because I was in an org psych program, but I never learned how to apply them, especially in a classroom setting. I had to figure that out myself. But, yes, I do believe it's something that can be learned.   2. I think the vast majority of work related skills that people develop are learned on the job, as you mentioned. There are some generic skills students learn in college that can be applied to their work, however. I'm thinking of communication and social skills (although I'm probably biased, since those are the two topics I teach). College, it seems to me, is more about learning how to follow directions, figure things out for yourself, and work effectively in groups than any particular subject matter. And I think those skills do transfer well to the workplace.   3. I 100% agree with this. We're pressured to pass students and inflate grades. Character issues, including being disorganized, being dishonest, or just being rude, are diagnosed as psychological disorders and we have to ""accommodate"" students with these ""disabilities"" (to be clear, I 100% believe in psychological disorders, and I 100% support accommodating students with these disorders- I just think they are over-/ misdiagnosed these days).    Totally agree with your last paragraph."

negative: >i dont see what's the big deal, all the banks got bailed out. Govt printed over 7 trillion bucks, not much inflation. govt has to help private sector. gave plenty of freebies to the rich mother fukers in the banking sector.  Yes that was bullshit, I agree. The difference is that most of the money that went to the banks is held with the banks. It didn't cause inflation because it isn't circulating in the economy. The government also had to do something with the banks because it would have triggered a major depression if they didn't. I don't think they handled it the best way at all. They should have nationalized the banks after the bailouts rather than let them keep thriving. However, students don't **need** that extra debt. That would be $1 trillion extra that actually is circulating in the economy, which would cause serious inflation. That would mean [doubling](http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12773.htm) the amount of money in circulation. That is a lot different than the trillions the government printed, mostly just to set monetary policy.

negative: "Let me run some simplistic numbers, ignoring inflation. You have the opportunity to borrow up to 51K. What matters (and varies) is your postgraduation salary. Case 1 - you make 22K after graduation. You pay back 90 a year for 30 years, paying off at most 2700 of the loan. In this case, whether you borrow 2,800 or 28,000 makes no difference to the paying-off. You would do best to borrow as much as you possibly can, treating it as a grant. Case 2 - you make 100K after graduation. You pay back over 7K a year. If you borrowed the full 51, after 7 or 8 years it would be paid off (yeah, yeah, inflation, interest, but maybe that might make it 9 years.) In this case, the more you borrow the more you have to pay back, but you can easily pay it back, so you don't care. Invest your sponsorships and savings into something long term since you know you won't be needing to draw on them. Case 3 - you make 30K after graduation. Here, the payments you have to make actually impact how much disposable income you have. You pay back 810 a year, and over 30 years that's about 25K of principal. It will be less if you account for some (even most) of the payment going to interest, not principal. Anything you borrow above 25K (or the lower, more accurate amount) is ""free"". If you borrow substantially less than that (by using your sponsorship, savings, and summer job) you may be able to stop paying sooner than 30 years. But even if you borrow only 12K (or half the more accurate number), it will still be 15 years of payments. Running slightly more realistic versions of these calculations where your salary goes up, and you take interest into account, I think you will discover, for each possible salary path, a number that represents how much of your loan is really loan: everything above that is actually a grant you do not pay back. The less you are likely to make, the more of it is really grant. On top of that, it seems to me that no matter the loan/grant ratio,  ""borrow as much as you can from this rather bizarre source"" appears to be the correct answer. In the cases where it's all loan, you have a lot of income and don't care much about this loan payment. Borrowing the whole 51K lets you invest all the money you get while you're a student, and you can use the returns on those investments to make the loan payments."

negative: We also have for-profit, career-oriented schools which take advantage of students and get them to pay for training that used to be done on the job. The training is often sub par and the only students who do well are those who would have been able to teach themselves the skills at a fraction of the cost. The influx of minimally qualified applicants then drives down wages in that field while removing the possibility for promotion for anyone who wanted to train on the job.

negative: "Disclaimer: I work in trading as an analyst for a hedge fund, not ibanking. Take everything with a grain of salt.   >Pretty much, I'm a student at UCSB who has recently become interested in pursuing I-Banking.  Why?   >As it looks, I currently don't have an internship lined up for this summer  Get something. Or do something interesting like surf the barrier reef for the summer. I was working with the principals recently on hiring (i.e. had to screen resumes / do the first round interviews) for an entry-level position and recent grads without any experience were an automatic no. People with interesting experience (or cool thesis) sometimes got an interview if only because it's interesting and novel. Other places may disagree or have different philosophies but I can't imagine this is totally dissimilar.  >If I can't find an analyst position in the next few weeks, I plan on working my ass off over summer reading and researching what it means to be an I-Banker.   Idk, there's really not that much to it. ""Can you use Excel extremely well""; ""do you function well with little sleep""; ""do you understand basic financial modeling"". An ibanking analyst at a money center bank isn't doing hugely sophisticated things.   >I'm aware that none of these schools are target schools, but I have heard good things about west coast banking at USC and east coast/south for vandy.  Reasonable. Either one will would probably allow you to get your foot in the door.   >I love UCSB, I love the people, the atmosphere, my fraternity, and the weather.  Why leave? I don't see the upside to doing so.   >However, I'm getting to a point in my life where the decisions I make are becoming much more important, and I am willing to sacrifice what I have developed at UCSB for more opportunities to break into Ibanking/PE/hedge funds   Why? What's the reason? Money? There's nothing wrong with wanting money, however please understand your motivation for wanting to go into ibanking and make sure it'll make you happy.   I work in the hedge fund world (analyst). It's interesting and I personally enjoy it a great deal. That said the majority of the traders I know are constantly talking about quitting and doing something meaningful with life.  Do what you *enjoy* and if that happens to be finance, go for it. Your biggest challenge in ibanking is getting in the room. I think networking helps for that, I imagine the internet is full of resources on that. And then surviving once you do - that part always seems the hardest. There's a lot of ex-ibankers out there.   My girlfriend was an investment banker for a spell. I asked her and she said ""do interesting things, get good grades, work hard, and learn Excel"". She said that for one of her interviews they pretty much talked about food the whole time and partying in France. So go figure."

negative: > I'm not so sure that performance measurement of students is all that difficult  You assume that student performance is a good proxy for teacher performance. One of the bigger influences on student performance is parent engagement (particularly the parent engagement that happens prior to school age, but also the engagement once they're in school). Often these differences run along socioeconomic lines, and schools are generally divided on neighborhood lines with students attending the school closest to their home.  If you judge based on student performance, you'll likely assume that the teachers in the richer neighborhoods are better (students perform better on standardized tests, students are more likely to graduate high school and even go on to college, etc). The fact is, there's a lot of good teachers who take the hard jobs because even a little improvement can go a long way. Put those same teachers in the richer neighborhoods and you might judge things differently.

negative: > Only one path exists by which the citizens of the low-wage country can enter the affluent one, and that path is fraught with obstacles.  Not totally true. You can get into the technology field without an education. You still need to be something of a genius, but you don't necessarily need to go to college. There is plenty of freelance programming and web development work available for anyone capable of doing the work. And when you are dealing with clients over the Internet, there is virtually no requirement other than getting the job done.   > The effects of technological change and globalization could be altered by political actions  I doubt it. Artificial intelligence is coming whether you like it or not. Also, smartphones have altered people's behavior and nothing can be done about it. The cops don't like to be filmed but they are powerless to stop it when everyone carries a smartphone with a built-in camera. The social rewards for filming anything that is going down ensures that all incidents will be recorded.

negative: It looks like your visa being refused is entirely irrelevant. What happens in bankruptcy is that all the assets of the bankrupt entity are taken over, liquidated, and the proceeds are distributed to the creditors. You're one of the creditors, and as you've been told - the proceeds are not enough to pay all the creditors in full. This is quite common in bankruptcies. What you can do is sue in court and demand priority over other creditors, but... a. You're exactly the same as many other creditors (rest of the students), so why would you get a priority? b. Suing costs money and even if you get more, you'll pay way more for legal fees and expenses. What else can you do? If you paid with a credit card - your credit card company may be able to reverse charges. Sometimes that works, depending on how fast you move. If you paid with a check - your bank may similarly be able to stop payment on the check. This provided it hasn't been settled yet.

negative: "I'm going to subtly and cheekily change the obvious advice. There are three ways to deal with negative cashflow, not two: You're currently studying for a degree. You don't say what country you're in or how your studies are funded, but most people in the US, UK, and a fair number of other countries, run up debts while studying for a degree. They do this because a degree is valuable to them. They can't avoid it because the tuition alone costs more than most students can generate in income, never mind their living expenses. So by all means look for savings, (1). Clearly strangers on the internet can't just think up ways for you to spend less money without knowing anything about what you do spend money on. But you can at least list your expenditures for yourself, and see what's necessary. Consider also how much fun you want your studies to be: 4 years in a cold house to avoid paying for heating, and never going out with friends to avoid spending on unnecessary stuff is all very well. But with hindsight you'll regret torturing yourself if you're ever well-off enough to pay back whatever you would have borrowed to use for heating and fun. Only do (2) if it doesn't affect your studies or if the money you're paid justifies delaying the valuable asset you seek to acquire (a degree, leading perhaps to a better job but at least to the capacity to do a full-time job rather than fitting work around your studies). There are some jobs that are really good fits for students (reasonably low hours that don't clash with classes) and some jobs that are terrible. If these fail, resort to (3). I don't mean dishonest book-keeping, I mean accept that you are going to borrow money in order to pay for something of value that you can account as an asset. Work out now what you'll need to borrow and how you think you can pay it back, make sure the sum is worth it, budget for that, stick to your budget. You'll still have negative cashflow, nothing changes there, but your capital account looks fine. Personally I wouldn't actually put a monetary value on the degree, I'm not that bothered about the accounts and it's really difficult to be accurate about it. You can just consider it, ""more than I expect to borrow"" and be done with it. Studying costs money. Once you've graduated, you probably aren't going to be back here saying, ""I want to buy a house but I have no capital and I don't want to go into debt"". Are you? ;-) Although if you are, the answer happens to be ""Islamic mortgage""! I don't know whether Islamic banks have an equivalent answer for student debt, since they can't own a share of your degree like they can a share of your home. Unless you're a Muslim, presumably the ways that Islamic finance avoids interest payments would not in any case satisfy your desire to be ""not in debt""."


query: Funds in closed bank account have gone to the government

positive: "Legally speaking, if you do close a limited company, the funds belong to the government (""bona vacantia""). There's some guidance on this at Companies House and there is indeed a substantial amount of administration work to get it undone. Notable excerpts: You should deal with any loose ends, such as closing the company’s   bank account, the transfer of any domain names - before you apply. [...] From the date of dissolution, any assets of a dissolved company will   belong to the Crown. The company’s bank account will be frozen and any   credit balance in the account will pass to the Crown. [...] 4. What happens to the assets of a dissolved company? From the date of dissolution, any assets of a dissolved company will   be 'bona vacantia'. Bona vacantia literally means “vacant goods” and   is the technical name for property that passes to the Crown because it   does not have a legal owner. The company’s bank account will be frozen   and any credit balance in the account will be passed to the Crown. [...] Chapter 3 - Restoration by Court Order The registrar can only restore a company if he receives a court order,   unless a company is administratively restored to the register (see   chapter 4).  Anyone who intends to make an application to the court to   restore a company is advised to obtain independent legal advice. [...] Chapter 4 - Administrative Restoration 1. What is Administrative Restoration? Under certain conditions, where a company was dissolved because it   appeared to be no longer carrying on business or in operation, a   former director or member may apply to the registrar to have the   company restored. [...]"

negative: "If it is planned, then one can get a Bankers Check payable overseas; if destination is known. 1.) What will happen to the money? It will eventually go to Government as escheating. Unlcaimed.org can help you trace the funds and recover it. 2.) Will the banks close the accounts?   3.) After how much time will the banks close the accounts? Eventually Yes. If there is no activity [Note the definition of activity is different, A credit interest is not considered as activity, a authentic phone call / correspondence to change the address or any servicing request is considered activity] for a period of One year, the account is classified as ""Dormant"". Depending on state, after a period of 3-5 years, it would be inactive and the funds escheated. i.e. handed over to Government. 4.) Is there anything else to do? Any ideas? Before leaving? Try keeping it active by using internet banking or credit / debit cards linked to the account. These will be valid activities.  5.) Is there any way to send a relative to the US with any kind of paper of power, to unfreeze the accounts? 6.) The banks say they would need a power of attorney, but does that person actually need to be an attorney in the US, or can it simply be   a relative WITH a paper (a paper that says power of attorney) or what   is a power of attorney exactly, is it an actual attorney person, or   just a paper? 7.) Is there any other way to unfreeze the accounts? Although I can confirm first hand; I think there would be an exception process if a person cannot travel to the Bank. It could even be that a person is in some remote state, not well etc and can't travel in person. I think if you are out of country, you could walk-in to an US embassy and provide / sign relevant documents there and get it attested. Although for different purpose, I know a Power of Attorney being created in other country and stamped / verified by US embassy and sent it over to US. This was almost a decade back. Not sure about it currently."

negative: Savings accounts have limitations in case a bank goes belly up and you have a higher amount in the account (more than the insured amount). Mostly big corporations or pension funds cannot rely on a bank to secure their cash but a government bond is secured (with some fine print) and hence they are willing to take negative interest rates.

negative: Banks work pretty hard to make themselves a big part of your life with bill pay, auto-deposit, loans and other services.  You need to carefully unwind each one and be on the lookout for fees.  If you close a savings account, will your checking account suddenly have fees?  If you stop auto deposit, will there suddenly be a fee? Do you have a business that deposits money?  A Google Ad sense account?  PayPal or the equivalent?  These all might be tied to your bank accounts. Wait a couple of months, leaving enough cash in the old back to prevent fees if possible.  If two months go by and there isn't any activity on the account, you can probably close it. After you are sure all the written checks have cleared, go to the back and get a counter check for the balance of the account.   You could alternately just write yourself one more check for the remaining balance and call the bank to close the account.  You could electronically transfer the funds if you wanted too.  HOWEVER, it is important to be careful of the timing, the last thing you want to do is write a check or transfer the money after the account is closed. (per Dilip Sarwate) If you do the check and phone call thing, make sure you do it in a short enough period of time that you don't incur a fee. Having and closing regular bank accounts won't have any tax implications in the US.

negative: 31 USC § 714 - AUDIT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL, FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD, FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, AND OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY ... snip   **Audits of the Board and Federal reserve banks may not include**  (1) transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization;  (2) deliberations, decisions, or actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations;  (3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee; or   (4) a part of a discussion or communication among or between members of the Board and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System related to clauses (1)–(3) of this subsection.   (c) (1) Except as provided in this subsection, an officer or employee of the Government Accountability Office may not disclose information identifying an open bank, an open bank holding company, or a customer of an open or closed bank or bank holding company. The Comptroller General may disclose information related to the affairs of a closed bank or closed bank holding company identifying a customer of the closed bank or closed bank holding company only if the Comptroller General believes the customer had a controlling influence in the management of the closed bank or closed bank holding company or was related to or affiliated with a person or group having a controlling influence.   (2) An officer or employee of the Office may discuss a customer, bank, or bank holding company with an official of an agency and may report an apparent criminal violation to an appropriate law enforcement authority of the United States Government or a State.   (3) Except as provided under paragraph (4), an officer or employee of the Government Accountability Office may not disclose to any person outside the Government Accountability Office information obtained in audits or examinations conducted under subsection (e) and maintained as confidential by the Board or the Federal reserve banks.   (4) This subsection shall not— (A) authorize an officer or employee of an agency to withhold information from any committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction of Congress, or any member of such committee or subcommittee; or (B) limit any disclosure by the Government Accountability Office to any committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction of Congress, or any member of such committee or subcommittee. ... http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/714   The people here who are under an illusion the federal reserve has any sort of beneficial attributes are deluded, where in reality it is banking on your countries increasing debt and impoverishing you and the nation your fathers conquered with a veil of legitimacy and a tattoo of tyranny since it's inception.

negative: The guarantor is the Government of Latvia, the fund is the means of executing that guarantee. Unless the government defaults, the guarantee is valid. See here: In accordance with amendments to the Deposit Guarantee Law adopted by   the Parliament of the Republic of Latvia (Saeima) as from December 16,   2010 compensation of EUR 100 000 (approx. LVL 70 000) is guaranteed to   the clients of the Latvian banks (both natural and legal persons) per   depositor per each bank (all accounts added together, if several   accounts at one bank in one name). The government guaranteed   compensation covers deposits, current account balance, salary   accounts, savings accounts etc. further down: In accordance with the Deposit Guarantee Law, in the occurrence of a   case of unavailability of deposits in the Fund for paying out the   guaranteed compensations, such payments shall be made from the   Government budget via FCMC.

negative: First, you need to understand the difference in discussing types of investments and types of accounts. Certificate of Deposits (CDs), money market accounts, mutual funds, and stocks are all examples of types of investments. 401(k), IRA, Roth IRA, and taxable accounts are all examples of types of accounts. In general, those are separate decisions to make.  You can invest in any type of investment inside any type of account.  So your question really has two different parts:   Tax-advantaged retirement accounts vs. Standard taxable accounts FDIC-insured CDs vs. at-risk investments (such as stock mutual funds) Retirement accounts are special accounts allowed by the federal government that allow you to delay (or, in some cases, completely avoid) paying taxes on your investment.  The trade-off for these accounts is that, in general, you cannot access any of the money that you put into these accounts until you get to retirement age without paying a steep penalty.  These accounts exist to encourage citizens to save for their own retirement.  Examples of retirement accounts include 401(k) and IRAs. Standard taxable accounts have no tax advantages, but no restrictions, either.  You can put money in and take money out whenever you like.  However, anything that your investment earns is taxable each year. Inside any of these accounts, you can invest in FDIC-insured bank accounts, such as savings accounts or CDs, or you can invest in any number of non-insured investments, including money market accounts, bonds, mutual funds, stocks, precious metals, etc. Something you need to understand about investing in general is that your potential returns are directly related to the amount of risk that you take on.  Investing in an insured investment, which is guaranteed by the government to never lose its value, will result in the lowest potential investment returns that you can get. Interest-bearing savings accounts are currently paying less than 1% interest.  A CD will get you a slightly higher interest rate in exchange for you agreeing not to withdraw your money for a period of time. However, it takes a long time for your investments to grow with these investments.  If you are earning 1%, it takes 72 years for your investment to double. If you are willing to take some risk, you can earn much more with your investments.  Bonds are often considered quite safe; with a bond, you loan money to a government or corporation, and they pay you back with interest.  The risk comes from the possibility that the government or corporation won't pay you back, so it is important to choose a bond from an entity that you trust. Stocks are shares in for-profit companies.  Your potential investment gain is unlimited, but it is risky, as stocks can go down in value, and companies can close.  However, it is important to note that if you take the largest 500 stocks together (S&P 500), the average value has consistently gone up over the long term.  In the last 35 years, this average value has gone up about 11%.  At this rate, your investment would double in less than 7 years. To avoid the risk of picking a losing stock, you can invest in a mutual fund, which is a collection of stocks, bonds, or other investments.  The idea is that you can, with one investment, invest in many stocks, essentially earning the average performance of all the stocks.  There is still risk, as the market can be down as a whole, but you are insulated from any one stock being bad because you are diversified. If you are investing for something in the long-term future, such as retirement, stock mutual funds provide a good rate of return at an acceptably-low level of risk, in my opinion.

negative: God, if the last **[partial audit that revealed trillions in secret loans](http://www.goldstockbull.com/articles/federal-reserve-secret-bank-bailouts-topped-16-trillion/)** wasn't enough- I can't see why we wouldn't give them a full audit.   31 USC § 714 - AUDIT OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL, FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD, FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, AND OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY   (a) In this section, “agency” means the Financial Institutions Examination Council, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (in this section referred to as the “Board”), Federal reserve banks, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. (b) Under regulations of the Comptroller General, the Comptroller General shall audit an agency, but may carry out an onsite examination of an open insured bank or bank holding company only if the appropriate agency has consented in writing. **Audits of the Board and Federal reserve banks may not include—** (1) transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization; (2) deliberations, decisions, or actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations; (3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee; or (4) a part of a discussion or communication among or between members of the Board and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System related to clauses (1)–(3) of this subsection. (c) (1) Except as provided in this subsection, an officer or employee of the Government Accountability Office may not disclose information identifying an open bank, an open bank holding company, or a customer of an open or closed bank or bank holding company. The Comptroller General may disclose information related to the affairs of a closed bank or closed bank holding company identifying a customer of the closed bank or closed bank holding company only if the Comptroller General believes the customer had a controlling influence in the management of the closed bank or closed bank holding company or was related to or affiliated with a person or group having a controlling influence. (2) An officer or employee of the Office may discuss a customer, bank, or bank holding company with an official of an agency and may report an apparent criminal violation to an appropriate law enforcement authority of the United States Government or a State. (3) Except as provided under paragraph (4), an officer or employee of the Government Accountability Office may not disclose to any person outside the Government Accountability Office information obtained in audits or examinations conducted under subsection (e) and maintained as confidential by the Board or the Federal reserve banks. (4) This subsection shall not— (A) authorize an officer or employee of an agency to withhold information from any committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction of Congress, or any member of such committee or subcommittee; or (B) limit any disclosure by the Government Accountability Office to any committee or subcommittee of jurisdiction of Congress, or any member of such committee or subcommittee.  ...  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/31/714     The people here who are under an illusion the federal reserve has any sort of meaningful audit, and that it is coincidental that the last audit outside of this limited scope resulted in the information related to trillions of secret loans is very deluded or brainwashed.  Open your fucking eyes, world! The federal reserve bank exists to rob you of the country your fathers conquered!

negative: This just happened to me with a Wells Fargo Bill Pay check.  WF put a stop payment on the check. The money was taken out of my account immediately yet it is going to take 3-5 days to reappear in the account.  I question these banking practices.  Georgia Bank and Trust Company of GA does not do this.  The Bill Pay check is processed just like a hand written check; when the check clears the bank your account is debited. If it is an Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) then the money does come out of your account immediately, of course. These are acceptable banking practices to me.  I will be closing the Wells Fargo account.

negative: In the United States there are some specific savings accounts, some of which have rules from the federal government (education) and some that are setup by the bank/credit Union. Some institutions have a Christmas club, where money is set aside each week or each month and then you are given access at the end of the time period. Some institutions have accounts that pay CD rates but allow you to add funds during the period. They will have some flexibility in setting the time period. I have seen accounts that are designed to save up for a big purchase, or for a specific time period (summer vacation) Ask your bank. Or better yet look at a variety of banks websites for their rate sheet. That will explain all the different account types, rates, and rules. My credit Union allows a large number of sub accounts so that you don't have to commingle the funds.

negative: This is an 'Ordinary' bank account and not a NRO or NRI account, as I have a PAN card, Aadhar card etc and use an Indian address As you are NRI, you cannot hold an Ordinary Savings account in India. Please have this converted to NRO ASAP. It should be a simple paperwork. Will it be better and easier for my sister to transfer this inheritance money from my 'ordinary' bank account into her bank account and then have my sister 'Gift' me the money under LRS OR is it advisable to go through the lengthy procedure of opening NRO account, then filling in 15CB, 15CA, getting RBI permission and using form A2 to transfer the funds. If my sister transfers the money into her bank account, will this be considered as income for her and will she need to pay taxes on it (even though the money in my account is from inheritance). The right process would be to have your account converted to NRO, and complete the formality of 15CB, 15CA. There is no taxes if you transfer the funds to your sister and she transfers the funds back to you. From Indian Taxes point of view, this is gift between close relatives and there is no taxation.

negative: They might not have to open accounts at 12 bank because the coverage does allow multiple accounts at one institution if the accounts are joint accounts. It also treats retirement accounts a separate account. The bigger issue is that most millionaires don't have all their money siting in the bank. They invest in stocks, bonds, government bonds, international funds, and their own companies. Most of these carry risk, but they are diversified. They also can afford advisers to help them manage and protect their assets.

negative: "Welcome to the 21st century, the New Order. Forget all that legal mumbo jumbo you may have read back in law school in the 1960s about commercial code. Its all gone now. Now we have Check 21 and the Patriot Act !!! Basically what this means is that because some Arab fanatics burned down the World Trade Center, the US government and its allied civilian banking company henchmen now have total control and dictatorship over ""your"" money, which is no longer really money, but more like a ""credit"" to your account with THEM which they can do with what they want. Here are some of the many consequences of the two aforementioned acts: (1) You can no longer sue a bank for mishandling your money (2) All your banking transaction information is the joint property of the bank, its ""affiliates"" and the US Treasury (3) You can no longer conduct private monetary transactions with other people using a bank as your agent; you can only request that a bank execute an unsecured transaction on your behalf and the bank has total control over that transaction and the terms on which occurs; you have no say over these terms and you cannot sue a bank over any financial tort on you for any reason. (4) All banks are required to spy on you, report any ""suspicious"" actions on your part, develop and run special software to detect these ""suspicious actions"", and send their employees to government-run educational courses where they are taught to spy on customers, how to report suspicious customers and how to seize money and safe deposit boxes from customers when the government orders them to do so. (5) All banks are required to positively identify everyone who has a bank account or safe deposit box and report all their accounts to the government. (6) No transactions can be done anonymously. All parties to every banking transaction must be identified and recorded. So, from the above it should be clear to (if you are a lawyer) why no endorsement is present. That is because your check is not a negotiable instrument anymore, it is merely a request to the bank to transfer funds to the Treasury. The Treasury does not need to ""endorse"" anything. In fact, legally speaking, the Treasury could simply order your bank to empty your account into theirs, and they actually do this all the time to people they are ""investigating"" for supposed crimes. You don't need to endorse checks you receive either because, as I said above, the check is no longer a negotiable instrument. Banks still have people do it, but it is just a pro forma habit from the old days. Since you can't sue the bank, the endorsement is pretty meaningless because it cannot be challenged in court anyway. You could probably just write ""X"" there and they would deposit it."

negative: "The number one difference is that bank savings accounts, or money market accounts (MMAs allow limited checking--six non-ATM withdrawals per month, max, else possible fees) have FDIC insurance up to $250,000.  However don't put that much in--allow some room for interest, so you never go over the $250,000.  Money Market Mutual Funds do not enjoy FDIC insurance.  There may be some SPIC insurance--generally against brokerage failure though, but its coverage is questionable--search out those details, and if they apply to anything besides actual cash held at the brokerage.  If the money market mutual fund is strictly invested in US Treasury securities (like T-Bills, or other short-term US Treasury instruments), it enjoys the full faith and credit of the US government, FWIW--but many MMMFs invest in corporate instruments.  If the fund has any pricing issues, there might be a delay in getting paid off.  (Extremely unlikely.)      Number two, and more importantly, bank savings accounts (or MMAs) pay way more!  You can get a bit over 1% APY now--many paying 0.90% APY, or higher.  No money market mutual funds are close to that, generally yielding a small fraction of that, almost zero for US Treasury MMM funds.  Sure 1.05% ain't too exciting, but you may as well get the most you can if holding ""cash,"" and fully insured to boot."

negative: A bank check is drawn on the bank itself. You gave the bank the funds backing that check at the time you purchased it. You can not get that money back except by returning the check to them. So, yes, effectively that check behaves like cash; the money us already gone from your account, and once you hand it over you can't claim it was forged or otherwise try to cancel the payment.

negative: In the United States most residential real estate transactions employ a title company to process all the paperwork and transfer all the funds. Some paperwork has to be filed with the local government, but they also have to deal with the banks/mortgage companies on the two ends of the transaction. At closing both parties will sign a ton of paperwork all of which was coordinated by the title company. As for the funds: The buyer will write a check; the lender will send over the loan commitment papers for the rest of the money.  How much money: that depends on the purchase price, the deposit, the down payment, the taxes and fees, an other closing costs they are responsible for (initial escrow, inspection, title insurance...).  The seller hopefully doesn't have to write a check, but if they underwater they will have to bring funds to closing. From the incoming funds the title company will send money to the old lender, the real estate agents, the local government to record the deed.  The sellers escrow money with the old lender may end up being sent back to the seller or some of the funds could be transferred to the buyer to help cover the portion of the real estate taxes. From the perspective of the buyer they will only write two checks (one at the start of the process for the deposit, and one on closing day for their portion of the transaction. The seller will hopefully walk away with a check. Of course determining if they will owe taxes for the transaction depends on a lot more information.

negative: He has my bank account info, and I just want to know where I stand legally. Legally you can't keep the money. It would either go back to the originator or to Government unclaimed department. I got a bunch of missed calls from an unknown number and a really unprofessional email from a guy who supposedly worked for UNICEF saying I had 4 hours until I am suppose to be visited by police and that there was nowhere I could run to. These are common tactics employed to ensure you take some action and transfer the real money somewhere. Do not succumb to such tactics.  The money is still in my account I have not touched it. Advise your Bank immediately that there is this deposit into your account that is not your's. Let the bank take appropriate action. Do not authorize Bank to debit your account. The max you can do is authorize the bank to reverse this transaction. The best is stick to statement that said transaction is not yours and Bank is free to do what is right.  There is a small difference and very important. If you authorize bank to debit, you have initiated a payment. So if the original payment were revered by originator bank, you are left short of money. However if your instructions are very clear, that this specific transaction can be reversed, you cannot be additionally debited if this transaction is reversed.  He has my bank account info, Depending on how easy / difficult, my suggestion would be monitor this account closely, best is if you can close it out and open a new one.

negative: "But it's also true that the FDIC (or equivalent) insurance account doesn't have enough to cover all deposits.  The FDIC may come in handy if your local FDIC member bank goes belly up and a few hundred depositors need to be made whole.  However, in a national crisis, where the government is ""legally"" stealing funds, that FDIC insurance is a joke.  I do agree though, if you have more than the insured amount in a single account, split it up."

negative: Some people cannot get bank accounts because they have been seized by a creditor or they're illegal.   Some companies don't (or can't) deal with paper checks.  Giving them a prepaid debit card and auto depositing it to the card is sometimes simpler or cheaper.   Hell, when I was on unemployment the government tried to make me receive the funds on a debit card.  It was a major pain just to get the money sent to my bank account.

negative: Despite QE, monetary expansion in the US has gone down for the last 10 years. I am not quite sure what you are asking. Yes banks have trillions at the Fed because of the central bank “money printing,” but none of that is leaking into the economy. Are you referring to central banks around the world purchasing US treasuries? Are you asking what assets are closely connected to treasuries that you can avoid?

negative: I have a PayPal account that I have linked to my bank account.  My PayPal balance is always $0.  When I make a purchase with PayPal, PayPal will automatically withdraw the funds from my bank account to make the purchase.   PayPal does not ask my permission for each purchase.  I probably gave them permission to do this when I linked my bank account.  Or perhaps the PayPal purchase process includes this permission.  I don't read the text closely.  Or I should add, that I probably read it at one point, but since I do it on a regular basis, I don't read it now, and I don't recall what is on the checkout page.

negative: "There is no Federal law that mandates that they must re-open a closed account. They can either refuse the transfer / return the money, or they can optionally re-open your account so they get money (makes more sense for them). It is, however, in one of your agreements that they reserve the right to re-open a closed account in order to receive the deposit. At which point, your account will become active, and the balance may be below the required minimum balance threshold, so you may have maintenance or low-balance fees charged against the account (Credit Unions are less likely to have these fees). If you want to call them out on their BS, you can ask them to cite the law which mandates the re-opening of closed accounts. They will likely fall back on your Member agreement. There may be some state laws that discuss this, but I haven't found anything. This has become such a problem for some bank customers (where they are charged fees on the money they weren't aware they had) that a law was proposed in Sept. 2013, called the Freedom and Mobility in Consumer Banking Act, which would essentially only allow the named account holder(s) to re-open a closed account. I went ahead and looked up the NACHA guidelines for ACH transfers (I got the 2013 version)  2013 Corporate Rules and Guidelines. These lines reference ""Article 4A"", which is Uniform Commercial Code Section 4A - Funds Transfer. This means that if your account is actually closed, they have an exception to the standard timeframe for issuing a Return Entry. This means that if you notify them (in writing) that you refuse any future credit Entries to the account, they MUST return them. I then went looking for the return reason codes RDFI = Receiving Depository Financial Institution From what I gather, based on these NACHA guidelines, your CU didn't actually close your account. They put it on ""hold"" or some similar state. If they actually close your account, they are required to issue a Return Entry with Code R02.  In your case, your CU doesn't charge you any maintenance fees, but for those working with banks, the best bet is to notify them in writing that you refuse any future credits to the account, or go into a branch and insist on fully closing out the account."

negative: I don't see how Paypal can stop you from transferring USD funds from your paypal account to a USD account held with a bank. Just tell them to do the transfer to your account. The issue could be around USD onshore / offshore regulation. Is the US government preventing EU citizens from taking USD income offshore? If that's the case then you need a correspondent bank. So in other words, like using your friend. But what you can do is ask your bank who is their correspondent bank in the US, and whether they have the license required to transfer USD funds offshore. So you shift the regulation issues to your bank, and then you have to accept your bank's exchange rate - which is going to be better than paypal, who charges too much for FX transactions.

negative: In my experience earning interest is not enough to keep the account in a non-dormant state. If payment of interest was the trigger to reset the clock then no savings account would ever be considered dormant. In general as the account got close to the deadline we were notified that a single transaction moving money into or out of the account would reset the clock. I have had this happen in recent years with a bank account and a credit union account.  In researching for the exact definition of a dormant account I found this regarding interest on the FDIC website: That means that the state law may set the definition, it also means that you should look at the information regarding the bank policy. I did try and see if the rules for a credit union are the same. The added twist with a credit union is that if the account is closed, they are no longer a share holder and that brings into the discussion voting rights. So the policy/guidelines is even more complex. If the account does go inactive state law will define what happens to the account, and how you can get the funds back.

negative: First, gather the information you have on her banking history.  She may have accounted for that money and moved it to a new account or otherwise spent it.  I don't expect you'll have much banking documentation from the 1950s, but if you do, then start there and trace the money. To the extent you can, you may try to contact the banks in question or their successors.  It may be difficult to trace them through mergers or closings.  Again, it's very possible that she spent or transferred those funds and there is nothing to find anyway. There is also a risk that if the money went unclaimed for too long, then the bank was obligated to escheat any remaining balance to the state of Ohio.  You can try contacting Ohio Department of Commerce about unclaimed funds and attempt to locate anything that may have rightly belonged to her.  You will need to gather documentation to do so.  You may be able to receive the funds from the state, if it has received them.

negative: I had opened a PPF account with State Bank of India. If you had opened the account before you became NRI its fine. NRI cannot Open a new PPF Account. can I continue depositing money every year to PPF account? If you already have an PPF account, you can deposit funds into this. Best via transfers from NRE/NRO account. living in US for 2 years  Incase you have not deposited into PPF for a given year, you need to pay a penalty of Rs 50 every year and a Minimum of Rs 500 every year. So for 2 years your would need to pay Rs 1100/- to regularize the account. Normal contributions can begin after you regularize. continue staying here for few more years The PPF account cannot be closed, you can make deposits as above. On Maturity [15 years] you are expected to close the account and can transfer funds outside of India via the NRO account.

negative: “Chase’s tellers do not have the authority to close an account…” That’s a “truthy” bit of bullshit. Yes, a teller themselves do not have the authority to close an account. But if you are the owner of the account and you state to the teller that you would like to withdraw all of your money into a cashier’s check so as to close the account they cannot refuse you. Since they fed you this nonsense, they might play some delaying tactics like calling a manager and having them talk to you tough the window and such. But just stand your ground and state you would like to close the account and withdraw all funds. Now if they were extra slimy and if you were to withdraw all funds but they let the zero balance float for a bit so they could claim a fee on you, bullshit once again. You should take any notice of fees coupled with a dated receipt showing the date you withdrew funds, go to the branch and complain to the manager right away. State clearly you will not pay any fees and you would like written verification that your account is closed. Also—and this goes without saying and is implied above—but be sure to keep copies of all if your receipts and transactions. If they state they want to hold onto something, demand they make a copy. And for your own safety/sanity keep your own backup copies somewhere safe at home. All of that said, I have seen modern consumer bankers really act like a bunch of slimeballs in the past decade or so, but generally this has still been an exception to the rule. The reality is if you do not want to have your money in their bank it’s in their best interest to let go of you as soon as possible; especially if you have a small amount of money such as $1,500 at stake. Remember your rights as a consumer, remember it’s your money and remember—and remind them—that you can report them if they deny you reasonable access to your funds.

negative: "The point here is actually about banks, or is in reference to banks. They expect you know how a savings account at a bank works, but not mutual funds, and so are trying to dispel an erroneous notion that you might have -- that the CBIC will insure your investment in the fund.  Banks work by taking in deposits and lending that money out via mortgages. The mortgages can last up to 30 years, but the deposits are ""on demand"". Which means you can pull your money out at any time.  See the problem? They're maintaining a fiction that that money is there, safe and sound in the bank vault, ready to be returned whenever you want it, when in fact it's been loaned out. And can't be called back quickly, either. They know only a little bit of that money will be ""demanded"" by depositors at any given time, so they keep a percentage called a ""reserve"" to satisfy that, er, demand.  The rest, again, is loaned out. Gone.  And usually that works out just fine. Except sometimes it doesn't, when people get scared they might not get their money back, and they all go to the bank at the same time to demand their on-demand deposits back. This is called a ""run on the bank"", and when that happens, the bank ""fails"". 'Cause it ain't got the money.  What's failing, in fact, is the fiction that your money is there whenever you want it. And that's really bad, because when that happens to you at your bank, your friends the customers of other banks start worrying about their money, and run on their banks, which fail, which cause more people to worry and try to get their cash out, lather, rinse repeat, until the whole economy crashes. See -- The Great Depression.  So, various governments introduced ""Deposit Insurance"", where the government will step in with the cash, so when you panic and pull all your money out of the bank, you can go home happy, cash in hand, and don't freak all your friends out. Therefore, the fear that your money might not really be there is assuaged, and it doesn't spread like a mental contagion. Everyone can comfortably go back to believing the fiction, and the economy goes back to merrily chugging along.  Meanwhile, with mutual funds & ETFs, everyone understands the money you put in them is invested and not sitting in a gigantic vault, and so there's no need for government insurance to maintain the fiction.  And that's the point they're trying to make.  Poorly, I might add, where their wording is concerned."

negative: "At least in the US, a Cashier's Check is just like a regular personal check - only it's guaranteed by the bank itself, so the person accepting it can be pretty certain the check won't be returned for insufficient funds...if the check is genuine! Most banks therefore have a policy for cashier's checks that is very similar to their policies on regular checks and money orders: if you are a member with an account in good standing, they'll make all or part of the money available to you according to their fund availability policy, which is usually anywhere from ""immediately"" to 7-10 days. With amounts over $5,000, banks will tend to put a hold on the funds to ensure it clears and they get their money. If you are not a member then many banks will refuse to cash the check at all, unless the cashier's check is drawn on on that brand of bank. So if the cashier's check is issued by, say, Chase Bank, Chase banks will usually be willing to cash out the entire check to you immediately (with properly provided ID). Because the bank is guaranteed by them they are able to check their system and ensure the check is real and can clear the check instantly. This policy isn't just up to individual banks entirely, as it is defined by United States federal banking policies and federal regulations on availability of funds. If you really must cash the check without a holding period and won't/can't have a bank account of your own to perform this, then you will generally need to go into a branch of the bank that is guaranteeing the check to be able to cash it out fully right away. Note that since the check might be issued by a bank with no branch near you, you should have a back-up plan. Generally banks will allow you to setup a special/limited savings-only account to deposit your check, even if you don't have a checking account, so if no other option works you might try that as well. The funds availability policies are the same, but at least you'll be able to cash it generally in 10 days time (and then close the account and withdraw your money)."

negative: "Thanks for the reply man. Yeah it literally says ""closed"" next to the accou t name. But we finally got ahold of someone, I guess they close your account whenever you have $0 in it and the account should open again 1-2 business days after the direct deposit tries to go into her account. At least that's what the lady said.   She hates this bank but we live in a small town and there's just not many options in terms of banking here.  Thanks for the help though man I appreciate it!"

negative: I would also like to have this discussed, alongside the issue that the US has gone into some type of [recession](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c0/US_Treasuries_to_Federal_Funds_Rate.png) roughly every ten year. So with the prospect of a possible recession with a close to 0% cash rate looming, what tools will the FED employ to keep Banks borrowing while maintaining inflation rates?

negative: The default of the country will affect the country obligations and what's tied to it. If you have treasury bonds, for example - they'll get hit. If you have cash currency - it will get hit. If you're invested in the stock market, however, it may plunge, but will recover, and in the long run you won't get hit. If you're invested in foreign countries (through foreign currency or foreign stocks that you hold), then the default of your local government may have less affect there, if at all. What you should not, in my humble opinion, be doing is digging holes in the ground or probably not exchange all your cash for gold (although it is considered  a safe anchor in case of monetary crisis, so may be worth considering some diversifying your portfolio with some gold). Splitting between banks might not make any difference at all because the value won't change, unless you think that one of the banks will fail (then just close the account there). The bottom line is that the key is diversifying, and you don't have to be a seasoned investor for that. I'm sure there are mutual funds in Greece, just pick several different funds (from several different companies) that provide diversified investment, and put your money there.

negative: First, make sure you are contacting the bank directly - use an old invoice you have on hand with a phone number direct to the bank and call them.  Do not use the provided number, or you may wind up being pulled into a scam (It is entirely possible that the bank is also confused at this point - so you should not rely on the number provided at all). Second, once you can confirm that your account is being closed, find out when it is being closed so you know when you need to act on it - it's possible you still have access to your account, and do not need to launch into a panic just yet.   Third, get the bank to explain exactly why they are closing your account - make it clear that if they cannot explain, you will be forced to transfer to a new account and close business with them permanently - this is not a threat, this is a matter of fact because... Finally, if you cannot keep your account open, find a different bank and open up a new account.  Frankly, if your current bank is closing your account and only managed to get a letter out to you a month late, you should probably find a new bank.  If instead they simply cannot figure out if your bank account is closed or not, this is also a bad sign and you may want a new bank account anyway.   But please, go through these steps in order, because you need to verify with your bank what is going on.   Keep @Brick 's answer in mind as well, in case you need to get your money out of your account quickly.