query: Converting annual interbank rates into monthly rates

positive: The formula you're looking for is  Thus, from 3% p.a. you get ca. 0.247% per month. However, as you see 0.25% is a good approximation (generally, small rates give good approximation).

negative: There are a few ways to look at this question. Assumptions. Per the original post's assumptions, this answer: In other words, if the owner paid the mortgage on its original schedule, the deal could boil down to a $ 40,000 up-front payment, in exchange for $ 200,000 of equity after 30 years.  Or the deal could boil down to a $ 40,000 up-front payment, in exchange for a $ 810.70 monthly payment starting in 30 years. While the owner is paying down the mortgage, the return on equity is the principal payment divided by the equity.  The principal payment is the net rent minus non-financing costs and interest, so it is actually a profit. The initial return on equity is 6.321 % APR, or 6.507 % APY.  This is calculated by dividing the $ 210.70 monthly principal payment by the initial $ 40,000 equity, and converting from monthly return to annual return. After 30 years, the return on equity is 4.864 % APR, or 4.974 % APY.  This is calculated by dividing the $ 810.70 monthly cash flow (which is no longer reduced by mortgage payments) by the $ 200,000 equity after 30 years, and converting from monthly return to annual return. The cap rate is the same as the return on equity in the absence of debt.  In this example, 4.864 % APR, or 4.974 % APY. The return on equity declines from 6.507 % APY initially to 4.974 % APY after 30 years. This is because the cap rate exceeds the note rate (4.974 % APY vs. 4.594 % APY), and the leverage decreases from 5x to 1x. The weighted average compound annual growth rate of the equity during the 30 years is 5.511 % APY.  Per the original poster's answer, this is computed by taking the 30th root of the 5-fold increase in equity.  Because the owner made no extra principal payments (besides those already discussed), the relevant amounts are the initial $ 40,000 owner payment and the final $ 200,000 owner equity.  5.511 % APY corresponds to a 5.377 % APR. The internal rate of return if the owner never sells can be computed by treating the deal as a $ 40,000 up-front payment, in exchange for an $ 810.70 monthly payment starting in 30 years.  The internal rate of return (IRR) is not a very useful number, because it assumes that you can somehow reinvest the eventual dividends at the same rate.  In this example, the IRR is 5.172 % APR, or 5.296  % APY.  In this example, the IRR is calculated by (iteratively) finding an interest rate for which (initial investment) * (1 + IRR) ^ (number periods before dividends start) = (periodic dividend) / (IRR - growth rate of dividend).  For example: $ 40,000 * (1.004309687)^360 = $ 810.70 / (0.004309687 - 0) = $ 188,111 I then converted the 0.431 % monthly IRR to an annual IRR. The deal can be thought of as a return on equity, plus a return on paying down the mortgage. When computing the return from paying down the mortgage, the initial equity is irrelevant.  It does not matter whether you start with a $ 160,000 mortgage on a $ 160,000 property, a $ 160,000 mortgage on a $ 200,000 property, or a $ 160,000 mortgage on a $ 1,000,000 property.  All that matters is the note rate on the mortgage, which is the applicable compound interest rate. The return on paying down the mortgage equals the note rate of the mortgage.  For a 4.5% note rate, this works out to a 4.594% annual percentage yield (APY). You can confirm this by looking at your amortization schedule.  Suppose you have a $ 160,000 mortgage with a fixed 4.5% APR note rate for 360 months.  Your monthly payment is $ 810.70.  In the first month, $ 600 goes toward interest, and $ 210.70 reduces the principal.  In other words, the $ 210.70 principal payment eliminated the need for a $ 810.70 payment 30 years later.  Notice that: . $ 210.70 * (1 + 0.045 / 12)^360 = $ 210.70 * (1.00375)^360 = $ 210.70 * 3.8477 = $ 810.71 which is within rounding error of $ 810.70. The interest rate is 3/8 % per month, which is an APR of 4.5%, and an APY of 4.594 %.

negative: "I cannot speak for Paypal specifically and I doubt anyone who doesn't actually work on their internal automated payment systems could. However, I can speak from experiencing in working on automated forex transaction systems and tell you what many institutions do and it is often NOT based on live rates. There is no law stating an institution must honor a specific market exchange rate. Institutions can determine their own rates how and when they want to. However, there is some useful information on their website: https://www.paypal.com/an/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=p/sell/mc/mc_convert-outside ""The most readily available information on currency exchange rates is based on interbank exchange rates. Interbank exchange rates are established in the course of currency trading among a global network of over 1,000 banks, and are not available through consumer or retail channels."" This leads me to believe they pull exchange rates from either Oanda or XE periodically and then use these rates throughout the day to conduct business. Paypal does not disclose who they use to determine rates. And it's highly doubtful they do this for every transaction (using live rates). Even if they did, there would be no way for you to check and be certain of a particular exchange rate as paypal states: "" Consumers may use these rates as a reference, but should not expect to use interbank rates in transactions that involve currency conversion. To obtain actual retail rates, contact your local financial institution or currency exchange, or check the rate displayed in your PayPal transaction."" This is partly because rates can change by the second just like stock prices or anything else which is susceptible to the open market's variables of supply, demand news events etc. So, even if you check the rates on Oanda (which you can do here: http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/) you are not going to get a 100% accurate representation of what you would get by doing an exchange immediately afterwards from Paypal or any other financial institution. However, if you want to estimate, using Oanda's currency converter will likely get you close in most scenarios. That is assuming Paypal doesn't charge a premium for the exchange, which they may. That is also assuming they use live rates, it's also possible they only update their rates based on market rates periodically and not for every transaction. You may want to test this by checking the exchange rate on your transaction and comparing that to the Oanda rates at the same time."

negative: First you should maintain a monthly expense and find out the burn rate. There would be certain expenses that are annual but mandatory [School fees, Insurance Premium, Property Taxes, etc]. So the ideal emergency fund depending on your industry should be 3 month to 6 months plus your mandatory yearly payments, more so if they come together. For example Most of my annual payments come out in May and I bank on the Bonus payout in April to cater to this spike in expense. So if I were to lose a job in March, my emergency funds would be sufficient for routine expenses, if i don't provision for additional funds Second you need to also figure out the reduced rate of monthly burn and ideally the emergency funds should be for 3 months of normal burn and 6 months of reduced burn.

negative: If they short the contract, that means, in 5 months, they will owe if the price goes up (receive if the price goes down) the difference between the price they sold the future at, and the 3-month Eurodollar interbank rate, times the value of the contract, times 5. If they're long, they receive if the price goes up (owe if the price goes down), but otherwise unchanged. Cash settlement means they don't actually need to make/receive a three month loan to settle the future, if they held it to expiration - they just pay or receive the difference.  This way, there's no credit risk beyond the clearinghouse. The final settlement price of an expiring three-month Eurodollar futures (GE) contract is equal to 100 minus the three-month Eurodollar interbank time deposit rate.

negative: Some brokerages will let you withdraw/deposit in multiple jurisdictions. e.g. I used to use Interactive Brokers. I could deposit/withdraw to US and UK bank accounts, in the appropriate currencies. It helps to have a brokerage that provides good rates on forex exchange also, and they were very good on the bid/ask spread. It was possible to get interbank rates plus a very low commission.

negative: In order to arrive at a decision you need the numbers: I suggest a spreadsheet.  List the monthly and annual costs (see other responses).  Then determine what the market rate for rental.  Once you have the numbers it will be clear from a numbers standpoint.  One has consider the hassle of owning property from a distance, which is not factored into the spreadsheet

negative: Summarized article: The London-based investment bank Barclays Bank has agreed to pay penalties of $450 million to settle charges it attempted to manipulate key benchmark interest rates.   The settlement is with the US Department of Justice, the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission and the British Financial Services Authority (FSA).   Investigators found that Barclays manipulated the London Interbank Offered Rate (Libor) and the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (Euribor) which measures how much banks will charge each other for loans, and in turn, affects the cost of loans and mortgages to consumers.   Between 2005 and 2009, Barclays staff would base its estimates for the Libor on the requests of its derivatives traders, who wanted to manipulate the rate to benefit their trading positions. The traders would ask their Barclays colleagues to adjust their rate estimates up or down to post a profit for the bank.  The FSA said that Barclays appeared to have a wide acceptance of its derivatives traders lobbying its colleagues and found evidence through a trail of emails and instant messages.   Barclays has admitted its actions fell short of industry standards but it is unclear if there was any impact to consumers.   The FSA is investigating several major banks for similar violations.  * For more summarized news, subscribe to the [/r/SkimThat](http://www.reddit.com/r/SkimThat) subreddit

negative: "It is possible and it depends on your strategy. As short selling interest rates are annual and levied monthly at a prorated rate. Interest rates are also low in general, with the exception of hard to borrow stocks. Therefore you can maintain a short position for weeks on end and notice nothing. Months even, if the position itself has already gained in your favor. There is no additional fee for opening the short position. Although some brokers have a ""locate"" fee, if it is hard to borrow the stock and they need to go find some shares to short. So you can do it as much as you like."

negative: "You can use the 6900 to make an investment.  Or to buy something.  That's why people keep reminding you that you could make interest.  Because most people think of either 7200 now or paying the same 7200 over time.  So you could just be storing the 7200 under the mattress until you pay it out.  Obviously in that case, inflation doesn't matter (""is not applicable"").  You've given up the use of the 7200 from the beginning.   Think of it instead as 7200 now and twenty-three payments of 300 each.  So 14,100 total.  Then you can spend 6900 on something else at the beginning or spend 300 a month on other things.  The difference between spending 6900 now and 300 in each of twenty-three months would be measured in inflation.  Of course, this requires you to have both 7200 now and an income stream producing at least 300 a month.   Another way of doing things is to take 6900 and invest it.  Each month you remove 300 and use it to make a payment.  We're now back to just one 7200, plus the interest over time.  I would argue that this is still an inflation advantage.  It's just that instead of spending the money, you invested it.  And that of course is your prerogative.   The point being that you would not have that opportunity if you paid up front.   Now to calculate the difference in monthly payments of 300 euro using the above webpage what should I do?   As already said, you would have to calculate twenty-three values and then sum them with the 300 you pay up front in the monthly.   There are other ways to calculate it, if you are not using that particular tool.  For example, there are formulas to calculate the net present value of an annuity.  E.g. see Investopedia.   Where: P = the present value of an annuity stream PMT = the dollar amount of each annuity payment r = the inflation rate n = the number of periods in which payments will be made Investopedia talks about interest rates, but you can put inflation there for this purpose.  In that case, r might better be called the ""discount rate"".   PMT is 300. r is whatever estimate you are using for inflation.  E.g. .003 per period. n is 23.   Note that the monthly inflation rate is smaller than the annual rate.  So .003 is about 3.66% annually.  3.04% annually is more like .0025 a month.   I found calculators for this with search terms ""present value of annuity calculator"".  Some of the calculators will take the annual rate (3.66%) and number of periods per year as input.  Or the calculator may take a monthly rate as a percentage (.3%) rather than as a decimal (.003).  So be careful of the inputs.   This gives me a net present value (NPV) of 6,657.69 for the 23 payments of 300, assuming .3%.  Or 6957.69 is the NPV of the monthly payments and 7200 is the NPV of the 7200 up front.   Obviously if you can pay less than 6957.69 up front rather than 7200, then it makes more sense to pay up front.   Even without a discount though, it still may make more sense to pay up front.   How much those intangibles are worth is up to you."

negative: "Just to confirm, you don't pay interest when holding a bond, the issuer of the bond pays you interest. The idea of calculating ""present value"" is as you suggest. You discount future payments using an appropriate rate. These future payments include both the coupon payments you receive through the life of the bond and the principal repayment at the maturity of the bond - each should be discounted from the due date of the payment to today's date. A typical rate to use would be the interest you yourself could earn by investing elsewhere (this gives you some idea of how much it would cost to get those payments another way), or perhaps some standard rate, for example the interbank rates such as LIBOR or FEDFUNDS."

negative: The general concept is that your money will grow at an accelerating rate because you start getting interest paid on your returns in addition to the original investment.  As a simple example, assume you invest $100 and get 10% interest per year paid annually.   -At the end of the first year you have your $100 + $10 interest for a total of $110. -So you start the second year with $110 and so 10% would be $11 for a total of $121. -The third year you start with $121 so 10% would be $12.10 for a total of $133.10 See how the amount it goes up each year increases? If we were talking a higher initial amount or a larger number of years that can really add up. That is essence is compound interest. Most of the complicated looking formulas you see out there for compound interest are just shortcuts so you don't have to iteratively go through the above exercise a bunch of times to find out how much you would have after some number of years. This formula tells you how much you would have(A) after a certain number of years(t)  at a given interest rate(r) assuming they pay interest n times per year, for example you would use 12 for n if it paid interest monthly instead of yearly. P represents the  amount you started out with.   If you keep investing monthly (as shown in your example) instead of just depositing it and letting it sit, you have to use a more complicated formula. Finance people refer to this as calculating the future value of an annuity.  That formula looks like this: A = PMT [((1 + r)N - 1) / r] x (1+r)  A : Is the amount you would have at the end of the time period.   N : The number of compounding periods (months if you get interest calculated monthly)   PMT : The total amount you are putting in each period (N)    r: Just like before, the interest rate you are getting paid. Be sure to adjust this to a monthly number if N represents months (divide APR by 12)* *Most interest rates are quoted as APR, which is the annualized interest rate not counting compounding. Don't confuse this with APY, which has compounding built into it and is not appropriate for use in this formula. Inserting your example: r (monthly interest rate) = 15% APR / 12 = .0125 n = 30 years * 12 months/year = 360 months   A = $150 x [((1 + .0125)360 - 1) / .0125] x (1+.0125) A = $1,051,473.09 (rounded)

negative: I'll offer another answer, using different figures. Let's assume 6% is the rate of return you can expect.  You are age 25, and plan to retire at age 65.  If you have $0 and want $1M at retirement, you will need to put away $524.20/month, or $6,290.40/year, which is 15% of $41,936.  So $41,936 is what you'd need to make per year in order to get to your target. You can calculate your own figures with a financial calculator:  480 months as your term (or, adjust this to your time horizon in months), .486755% as your interest (or, take your assumed interest rate + 1 to the 1/12th power and subtract 1 to convert to a monthly interest rate), 0 as your PV, and $1M as your FV; then solve for PMT.

negative: Paying $12,000 in lump sumps annually will mean a difference of about $250 in interest vs. paying $1,000 monthly. If front-load the big payment, that saves ~$250 over paying monthly over the year. If you planned to save that money each month and pay it at the end, then it would cost you ~$250 more in mortgage interest. So that's how much money you would have to make with that saved money to offset the cost. Over the life of the loan the choice between the two equates to less than $5,000. If you pay monthly it's easy to calculate that an extra $1,000/month would reduce the loan to 17 years, 3 months. That would give you a savings of ~$400,000 at the cost of paying $207,000 extra during those 17 years. Many people would suggest that you invest the money instead because the annual growth rates of the stock market are well in excess of your 4.375% mortgage. What you decide is up to you and how conservative your investing strategy is.

negative: When you do finance problems the first thing you need to think about is how the interest is accrued. Is it monthly semi annually or yearly? Once you understand the period of time on the interest and payments it’ll help you understand these problems more. Also a good thing to memorize is converting from EAR to APR. and APR to EAR. You’ll use that a lot. Good luck!

negative: Is this transaction legal Yes it is. Are there any tax implications in US?  The interest is taxable in US. From what I understand, there are no tax implications in India. Yes this is right. The question you haven't asked is does this makes sense? So you are paying 3% upfront. Getting 8% at end of one year. You can making monthly repayments through the year. You have not factored in the Fx Rate and their fluctuations. For Example you would convert USD to INR and back to USD. Even if you do this the same day, you loose around 2% that is referred to as Fx Spread. Plus the rates for USD and INR get adjusted for inflation. This means that INR will loose value in a year. In long term it would be balance out [i.e. the gain in interest rate is offset by loss in Fx rate]. At times its ahead or behind due to local conditions.

negative: Just to add: the 20% APR is the annualized interest rate, but applied monthly. So you'd be charged $0.50 of interest on your $30 balance, which gets capitalized on the next month. So if you were to miss the next payment for some reason, your new interest charge would be on $30.50 instead of $30 (actually, it'd be much more since there would be a fee for the late payment, but discounting that to illustrate the point).

negative: If you mean the internal rate of return, then the quarterly rate of return which would make the net present value of these cash flows to be zero is 8.0535% (found by goal seek in Excel), or an equivalent compound annual rate of 36.3186% p.a. The net present value of the cash flows is: 10,000 + 4,000/(1+r) - 2,000/(1+r)^2 - 15,125/(1+r)^3, where r is the quarterly rate. If instead you mean Modified Dietz return, then the net gain over the period is: End value - start value - net flow = 15,125 - 10,000 - (4,000 - 2,000) = 3,125 The weighted average capital invested over the period is: 1 x 10,000 + 2/3 x 4,000 - 1/3 x 2,000 = 12,000 so the Modified Dietz return is 3,125 / 12,000 = 26.0417%, or 1.260417^(1/3)-1 = 8.0201% per quarter, or an equivalent compound annual rate of 1.260417^(4/3)-1 = 36.1504%. You are using an inappropriate formula, because we know for a fact that the flows take place at the beginning/end of the period. Instead, you should be combining the returns for the quarters (which have in fact been provided in the question). To calculate this, first calculate the growth factor over each quarter, then  link them geometrically to get the overall growth factor. Subtracting 1 gives you the overall return for the 3-quarter period. Then convert the result to a quarterly rate of return. Growth factor in 2012 Q4 is 11,000/10,000 = 1.1 Growth factor in 2013 Q1 is 15,750/15,000 = 1.05 Growth factor in 2013 Q2 is 15,125/13,750 = 1.1 Overall growth factor is 1.1 x 1.05 x 1.1 = 1.2705 Return for the whole period is 27.05% Quarterly rate of return is 1.2705^(1/3)-1 = 8.3074% Equivalent annual rate of return is 1.2705^(4/3)-1 = 37.6046% ========= I'd recommend you to refer to Wikipedia.

negative: To figure this out, you need to know the price per share then vs the price per share now.  Google Finance will show you historical prices.  For GOOG, the closing price on January 5, 2015 was $513.87.  The price on December 31, 2015 was $758.88.  Return on Investment (ROI) is calculated with this formula: ROI = (Proceeds from Investment - Cost of Investment) / Cost of Investment Using this formula, your return on investment would be 47.7%.  Since the time period was one year, this number is already an annualized return.  If the time period was different than one year, you would normally convert it to an annualized rate of return in order to compare it to other investments.

negative: The interest in your account is usually calculated based on the average monthly balance. What the bank will do is try to figure out how much money did you have on average over the month and give you interest on that amount. For example, if you had 10k on deposit and took it out half way through the month, you will still receive interest on about 5k, based on a monthly rate. What I would do is read in detail your agreement with the bank to figure out if your interest is based on an average annual balance and is paid at the end of the year or if it is based on a different measurement. Also, I would be very careful if this is a CD account, since they will have early withdrawal fees. Hope this helps.

negative: "You could convert your Australia cash to US dollars in cash now through a Foreign Currency provider like Travelex or UAE Exchange. To convert to USD cash right now, here's the rate you're looking at with both providers: The downside with either converting to cash now, or getting a ""cash passport"" like my other answer is you're not earning any interest on your cash. Alternate Option Anther idea is to just leave your cash in an Australian bank earning interest, and get credit card that has no Annual Fee and Free Foreign Currency Conversions. That way, use that credit card to make purchases while in the USA, and the currency conversion will happen at the time of the transaction using the credit card issuer's Bid/Offer spread. This is what I do. The credit card I use in the Bank West Platinum Zero Mastercard. Just make sure you pay the full amount off the card when the bill comes (not the minimum) to avoid paying any interest on the card's balance. The current conversion they give for a USD transaction is:"

negative: "Here's a number-crunching example of how the ""Zero interest rate"" offer is misleading. Suppose the offer is that a car ""costs $24,000.00 with zero percent financing over 24 months""  or as an alternative, ""$3,000.00 off for cash"". Ignore the hype:  the quoted prices and the quoted interest rates.  Look at what really happens to two people who take advantage of the two offers, One person hands over $21,000.00 cash, and leaves with the new car. The second promises to make 24 payments of $1000.00, one a month, starting in one month's time, and also leaves with the same make and model new car. The two people have received exactly the same benefit, so the two payment schemes must have the same value. A mortgage program will tell you that paying off a $21,000.00 loan by making 24 monthly payments of $1000.00 requires an interest rate of 1.10% a month, or an effective annual rate of 14.03%."

negative: India is better as the exchange rate conversion will be better. In the US, banks or exchange rate converters do not hold much INR and likely to quote a much worse rate. Best way is to open HSBC premier accounts in both US and India and use their global transfers as in premier accounts the conversion rates are usually decent. HSBC Premier also has good tools to link two accounts, so the process would be transparent. Best conversion rates are given by Middle East banks or FX converters due to the large number of Indians working there, but I suspect opening a bank account in Dubai might not be feasible.

negative: If the cash flow information is complete, the valuation can be determined with relative accuracy and precision. Assuming the monthly rent is correct, the annual revenue is $1,600 per year, $250/mo * 12 months - $1,400/year in taxes. Real estate is best valued as a perpetuity where P is the price, i is the income, and r is the rate of interest.  Theoreticians would suggest that the best available rate of interest would be the risk free rate, a 30 year Treasury rate ~3.5%, but the competition can't get these rates, so it is probably unrealistic. Anways, aassuming no expenses, the value of the property is $1,600 / 0.035 at most, $45,714.29. This is the general formula, and it should definitely be adjusted for expenses and a more realistic interest rate. Now, with a better understanding of interest rates and expenses, this will predict the most likely market value; however, it should be known that whatever interest rate is applied to the formula will be the most likely rate of return received from the investment. A Graham-Buffett value investor would suggest using a valuation no less than 15% since to a value investor, there's no point in bidding unless if the profits can be above average, ~7.5%.  With a 15% interest rate and no expenses, $1,600 / .15, is $10,666.67.  On average, it is unlikely that a bid this low will be successful; nevertheless, if multiple bids are placed using this similar methodology, by the law of small numbers, it is likely to hit the lottery on at most one bid.

negative: "The house that sells for $200,000 might rent for a range of monthly numbers. 3% would be $6000/yr or $500/mo. This is absurdly low, and favors renting, not buying. 9% is $1500/mo in which case buying the house to live in or rent out (as a landlord) is the better choice. At this level ""paying rent"" should be avoided.  I'm simply explaining the author's view, not advocating it.  A quote from the article -  annual rent / purchase price = 3% means do not buy, prices are too   high annual rent / purchase price = 6% means borderline annual rent / purchase price = 9% means ok to buy, prices are   reasonable Edit to respond to Chuck's comment - Mortgage rates for qualified applicants are pretty tight from low to high, the 30 year is about 4.4% and the 15, 3.45%. Of course, a number of factors might mean paying more, but this is the average rate. And it changes over time. But the rent and purchase price in a given area will be different. Very different based on location. See what you'd pay for 2000 sq feet in Manhattan vs a nice town in the Mid-West. One can imagine a 'heat' map, when an area might show an $800 rent on a house selling for $40,000 as a ""4.16"" (The home price divided by annual rent) and another area as a ""20"", where the $200K house might rent for $1667/mo. It's not homogeneous through the US. As I said, I'm not taking a position, just discussing how the author formulated his approach. The author makes some assertions that can be debatable, e.g. that low rates are a bad time to buy because they already pushed the price too high. In my opinion, the US has had the crash, but the rates are still low. Buying is a personal decision, and the own/rent ratios are only one tool to be added to a list of factors in making the decision.  Of course the article, as written, does the math based on the rates at time of publication (4%/30years). And the ratio of income to mortgage one can afford is tied to the current rate. The $60K couple, at 4%, can afford just over a $260K mortgage, but at 6%, $208K, and 8%, $170K. The struggle isn't with the payment, but the downpayment.   The analysis isn't too different for a purchase to invest. If the rent exceeds 1% of the home price, an investor should be able to turn a profit after expenses."

negative: Governments only have a few ways to get income: tax income, tax consumption, tax property (cars & boats), tax real estate, or tax services (hotel & meals). The National, state, county, city, and town taxing authorities determine what is taxed and what the rate will be to get enough money to run their share of the government. In general the taxing of real estate is done by the local government, but the ability to tax real estate is granted to them by the state. In the United States the local government decides, generally through a public hearing, what the rate will be. You can usually determine the current rate and tax value of the home prior to purchase. Though some jurisdictions limit the annual growth of value of the property, and then catch it up when the property is sold. That information is also in  public records.   All taxes are used to build roads, pay for public safety, schools, libraries, parks.. the list is very long. Failure to pay the tax will result in a lien on the property, which can result in your losing the property in a tax sale.  Most of the time the bank or mortgage company insists that your monthly payment to them includes the monthly portion of the estimated property tax, and the fire insurance on the property. This is called escrow. This makes sure the money is available when the tax is due. In some places is is paid yearly, on other places every six months. With an escrow account the bank will send the money to the government or insurance company. Here is the big secret: you have been indirectly paying property tax. The owner of the apartment , townhouse, or home you have been renting has been paying the tax from your monthly payment to them.

negative: Yes, you still need to pay income tax on your capital gain regardless of whether you converted your USD proceeds back into CAD. When you calculate your gains for tax purposes, you'll need to convert all of your gains to Canadian dollars. Generally speaking, CRA will expect you to use a historical USD to CAD exchange rate published by the Bank of Canada. At that page, notice the remark at right: Are the Exchange Rates Shown Here Accepted by Canada Revenue Agency? Yes. The Agency accepts Bank of Canada exchange rates as the basis for   calculations involving income and expenses that are denominated in   foreign currencies.

negative: First let's define some terms. Your accrued benefit is a monthly benefit payable at your normal retirement age (usually 65). It is usually a life-only benefit but may have a number of years guaranteed or may have a survivor piece. It is defined by a plan formula (ie, it is a defined benefit). A lump sum is how much that accrued benefit is worth right now. Lump sums are based on applicable interest rates and mortality tables specified by the IRS (interest rates are released monthly, mortality annually). Your plan can either use the same interest rates for a whole year, or they can use new ones each month. Affecting your lump sum is whether your accrued benefit is payable now (immediately, you are age 65), or later (deferred, you are now age 30). For example, instead of being paid an annuity assume you are paid just one payment of $1,000 on your 65th birthday. The lump sum of that for a 65 year old would be $1,000 since there would be no interest discount, and no chance of dying before payment. For a 30 year old, at 4% interest the lump sum would be about $237 (including mortality discount). At age 36 the lump sum is $246. So the lump sum will get bigger just because you get older. Very important is the interest discount. At age 30 in the example, 2% interest would produce a $467 lump sum. And at 6% $122. The bigger the rate, the smaller the lump sum because interest helps an amount now grow bigger in the future. To complicate things, since 2008 the IRS bases lump sums on 3 different interest rates. The monthy annuity payments made within 5 years of the lump sum date use the 1st rate, past 5 and within 20 years use the 2nd rate, and past that use the 3rd rate. Since you are age 30, all of your monthly annuity payments would be made after 20 years, so that makes it simple since we'll only have to look at the 3rd rate. When you reach age 45 the 2nd rate will kick in. Here is the table of interest rates published by the IRS: http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Minimum-Present-Value-Segment-Rates You'll find your rates above on the 2013 line for Aug-12. That means your lump sum is being made in 2013 and it is being based on the month August 2012. Most likely your plan will use the same rates for its entire plan year. But what is your plan year? If it is the calendar year, then you would have a 5 month lookback for the rates. But if is a September to August plan year with a 1 month lookback, the rates would have changed between August and September. Your August lump sum would be based on 4.52%, your September on would be based on 5.58% (see the All line for Aug-13). For comparison, a 30 year old with a $100 annuity payable at age 65 would have a lump sum value of $3,011 at 4.52%, but a lump sum value of $1,931 at 5.58%. The change in your accrued benefit by month will obviously have some impact on the lump sum value, but not as much as the change in interest rates if there is one. The amount they actually contribute to the plan has nothing to do with the value of the lump sum though.

negative: Wire transfers are the best method.  Costs can vary from $10 to $100 or more, depending on the banks and countries involved.  There's rarely any saving using the same bank, although HSBC may have reduced charges if you have Premier accounts in both countries (for a one-off transaction, it may not be worth the effort to open an account). However, that cost is insignificant compared to your possible losses on the currency exchange.  Assuming your money is currently in Hong Kong Dollars (HKD), it will need to be converted to US Dollars (USD). One place where it could be converted is at your Hong Kong bank.  You'll get their retail rate. Make sure you are aware of the rate they will use, and any fees, in advance.  Expect to pay around 2-3% from the mid-market rate (the rate you see quoted online, which doesn't fluctuate much for HKD-USD as the currencies are linked). Another place where the currency could be converted is at your US bank.  You really don't get any control over that if it arrives as HKD and is then automatically converted into your USD.  The rate and fees could be quite poor, especially if it is a minor US bank that has to deal with anther bank for foreign currency. For amounts of this size, it's worthwhile using a specialist currency conversion company instead.  Currency Fair in Ireland is one.  It's a peer-to-peer exchange that is generally the best deal (at least for the currency pairs I use).  You wire the money to them, do the exchange on their site at a rate that is much closer to 0.5% from the midrate, then the money is transferred out by wire for a few dollars.  Adds a few days to the process, but will possibly save you close to US$1000.  Another established option is Currency Online in New Zealand. There are probably also specialist currency exchange companies in Hong Kong. The basic rule is, don't let the banks exchange currencies at rates that suit them, use a third party that offers a better rate and lower fees.

negative: "You can shop for a mortgage rate without actually submitting a mortgage application.  Unfortunately, the U.S. Government has made it illegal for the banks to give you a ""good faith estimate"" of the mortgage cost and terms without submitting a mortgage application.  On the other hand, government regulations make the ""good faith estimates"" somewhat misleading.  (For one thing, they rarely are good for estimating how much money you will need to ""bring to the closing table"".) My understanding is that in the United States, multiple credit checks within a two-week period while shopping for a mortgage are combined to ding your credit rating only once. You need the following information to shop for a mortgage: A realistic ""appraisal value"".  Unless your market is going up quickly, a fair purchase price is usually close enough. Your expected loan amount (which you or a banker can estimate based on your down payment and likely closing costs). Your middle credit score, for purposes of mortgage applications.  (If you have a co-borrower, such as a spouse, many banks use the lower of the two persons' middle credit score). The annual property tax cost for the property, taking into account the new purchase price. The annual cost of homeowners' insurance. The annual cost of homeowners' association dues. Your minimum monthly payments on all debt.  Banks tend to round up the minimum payments.  Also, banks care whether any of that debt is secured by real estate. Your monthly income.  Banks usually include just the amount for which you can show that you are currently in the job, with regular paychecks and tax withholding, and that you have been in similar jobs (or training for such jobs) for the last two full years.  Banks usually subtract out any business losses that show up on tax returns.  There are special rules for alimony and child support payments. The loan terms you want, such as a 15-year fixed rate or 30-year fixed rate. The amount of points you are willing to pay.  Many banks are willing to lower your ""note rate"" by 0.125% if you pay 0.5% up-front.  The pros and cons of paying points is a good topic for another question. Whether you want a so-called ""no-fee"" or ""no-closing cost"" loan.  These loans cost less up-front, but have a higher ""note rate"". Unless you ask for a ""no-fee"" or ""no-closing cost"" loan, most banks have similar charges for things like: So the big differences are usually in: As discussed above, you can come up with a simple number for (roughly) comparing fixed-rate mortgage loan offers.  Take the loan origination (and similar) fees, and divide them by the loan amount.  Divide that percentage by 4.  Add that percentage to the ""note rate"" for a loan with ""no points"".  Use that last adjusted note rate to compare offers.  (This method works because you have the choice of using up-front savings to pay ""points"" to lower the ""note rate"".) Notice that once you have your middle credit score, you can ask other lenders to estimate the information above without actually submitting another loan application.  Because the mortgage market fluctuates, you should compare rates on the same morning of the same day.  You might want to check with three lenders, to see if your real estate agent's friend is competitive:"

negative: Any time you are optimizing a portfolio, the right horizon to use for computing the statistics you will use for optimization (expected return, covariance, etc.) will be the same as your rebalance/trading frequency.  If you expect your trading strategy to trade once a day, you should use daily data for optimization.  Ditto for monthly or quarterly.  If at all possible you should use statistics across the board that are computed at the same frequency as your trading. Regarding currency pricing, I see no reason you can't take the reported prices and convert them to whatever currency you want using that day's foriegn exchange rate.  Foreign exchange rates are available for free at the Fed and elsewhere.  Converting prices from one currency to another is not rocket science. Since you are contemplating putting actual money behind this, note that using data to compute statistics is less reliable for lower statistical moments.  The mean (expected return) is the first moment, so using historical returns is extremely unreliable at predicting future returns.  The variances and covariances are second moments, they are better.  Skewness and kurtosis, yet better.  The fact that the expected return can't reliably be estimated from past returns is the major downfall of the Markowitz method (resulting portfolios are often very crazy and will depend critically on the data period you use to set them up).   There are approaches to fixing this, such as Black-Litterman's (1992) method, but they get complicated fast.

negative: "APR stands for ""annual percentage rate."" This means when you see a loan with a 6% rate, it is 6% per year.  On a $100,000 mortgage, where you aren't paying much of the principal down at first, a 6% rate would have you paying nearly $6,000 in interest in the first year alone."

negative: The most common usage of interest rate swaps is by corporates who issue bonds.  Most US investors (e.g. insurance companies & pensions) want fixed-rate bonds, so that they know what their interest income will be for the life of the investment.  Many financial issuers prefer to have their liabilities be floating rate, so that they will benefit if the Fed keep interest rates at zero for a long time.  So the financial issuer issues the fixed rate bond, the insurance company buys it, and the issuer converts the obligation to floating with an interest rate swap.


query: Is there a standard or best practice way to handle money from an expiring UTMA account?

positive: "I'd first put it in CDs or other short term account. Get through school first, then see where you land.  If you have income that allows you to start a Roth IRA, I'd go for that, but keep it safe in case you actually need it back soon. After school, if you don't land a decent job fast, this money might be needed to live on. How long will it last if you take a few months to find work?  If you do find a good job, moving, and setting up an apartment has a cost. Once you're there, I'd refer you to the many ""getting started"" Q&As on this site."

negative: I've addressed some of the problems with the new fiduciary rule in other threads, but basically no one is arguing that advisors shouldn't be fiduciaries. Of course they should, and the vast majority do. What this rule effectively does is simply alter the way that advisors are compensated on retirement assets such as 401(k)'s, by forcing them to hold these assets in RIA accounts. This is not necessarily in the best interest of the client. (Yes I am aware of the Best Interest Contract Exemption, or BICE.) Perhaps more importantly, these types of regulations should be handled by one of the already existing regulator bodies, the SEC or FINRA. To bring in the DOL as a third regulatory body is a bit redundant to say the least.  I think a far easier solution (in concept, at least) is that any FINRA registered advisor (which is basically all advisors aside from pure insurance agents) should be held to the Fiduciary standard and not simply the Suitability standard

negative: "Assuming that the will that bequeathed the money to your son did not stipulate any restrictions or set up a trust to hold the money until your son turns 25, or something like that, I don't think you have much choice except to put the money in a UTMA account (which of course can be invested in whatever  the trustee (which could be you, or you and your wife jointly) decides.  Note: not a UGMA account since the money is not a gift. You also don't have any option except to turn the account over to your son when he turns eighteen. The point is, the investment can be in anything as long as the account is registered as a UTMA account.  But do remember also that your son is entitled to sue you for breach of fiduciary duty if you don't take good care of the money, so that blowing it all in risky investments is also not a good idea. If you are worried about taxes and your son's income being taxed at your rate, one way of deferring the issue is to buy US Savings Bonds. The interest can be deferred from taxation until the bonds are redeemed. Edit added in response to JoeTaxpayer's comments: But a better strategy is to declare the accrued interest each year as unearned income of the child on the kiddie tax form that is part of your tax return, and pay the tax, if any, that results To ease your mind or conscience, think of the tax that you pay on your child's behalf as a gift to your child! In any case, there will likely not be much tax due since the first $950 of unearned  income of a child is tax-free and the next $950 taxed at 10%. Then, when the bonds are cashed in, the interest that accrued (and was ""taxed"") in earlier years can be deducted  from the interest (cash in price minus purchase price) that you (or your son) will be told is the interest that the bonds earned. Of course, if kiddie tax is not a concern (and it shouldn't be, given the amount available for investment), an even better strategy is to set up the UTMA account(s) in long-term investments in low-cost index funds or ETFs (as JoeTaxpayer suggests) and pay the tax, if any, as it comes due."

negative: I would like to bring up some slightly different points than the ones raised in the excellent answers from JoeTaxpayer and littleadv.  The estate can be the beneficiary of an IRA -- indeed, as has been pointed out, this is the default beneficiary if the owner does not specify a beneficiary -- but a testamentary trust cannot be the designated  beneficiary of an IRA. A testamentary trust that meets the requirements laid out on page 36 of Publication 590 is essentially a pass-through  entity that takes distributions from the IRA and passes them on to the beneficiaries.   For the case being considered here of minor beneficiaries, the distributions from the  IRA that pass through  the trust must be sent to the legal guardians (or other custodians) of the minors' UTMA accounts, and said guardians must invest these sums for the benefit of the minors and hand the monies over when the minors reach adulthood. Minors are not responsible for their support, and so these monies cannot be used by the legal guardian for oaying the minors' living expenses except as provided for in the UTMA regulations. When the minors become adults, they get all the accumulated value on their UTMA accounts, and can start taking  the RMDs personally after that, and blowing them on motorcycles if they wish.  Thus, the advantage of the testamentary trust is essentially that it lets the trustee of the trust to decide how much money (over and above the RMD) gets distributed each year.  The minors and soon-to-be young adults cannot take the entire IRA in a lump sum etc but must abide by the testamentary trustee's ideas of whether extra money (over and above the RMD) should be taken out  in any given year. How much discretion is allowed to the trustee is also something to be thought through carefully. But at least the RMD must be taken from the IRA and distributed to the minors' UTMA accounts (or to the persons as they reach adulthood) each year.  Regardless of whether the Traditional IRA goes to beneficiaries  directly or through a testamentary trust, its value (as of the date of death) is still included in the estate, and estate tax  might be due. However, beneficiaries can deduct the portion of estate tax paid by the estate from the income tax that they have to pay on the IRA withdrawals. Estate planning is very tricky business, and even lawyers very competent in estate and trust issues fall far short in their understanding of tax law, especially income tax law.

negative: To get the probability of hitting a target price you need a little more math and an assumption about the expected return of your stock.  First let's examine the parts of this expression. IV is the implied volatility of the option.  That means it's the volatility of the underlying that is associated with the observed option price.  As a practical matter, volatility is the standard deviation of returns, expressed in annualized terms.  So if the monthly standard deviation is Y, then Y*SQRT(12) is the volatility. From the above you can see that IV*SQRT(DaysToExpire/356) de-annualizes the volatility to get back to a standard deviation.  So you get an estimate of the expected standard deviation of the return between now and expiration. If you multiply this by the stock price, then you get what you have called X, which is the standard deviation of the dollars gained or lost between now and expiration.  Denote the price change by A (so that the standard deviation of A is X). Note that we seek the expression for the probability of hitting a target level, Q, so mathematically we want 1 - Pr( A < Q - StockPrice)  We do 1 minus the probability of being below this threshold because cumulative distribution functions always find the probability of being BELOW a threshold, not above. If you are using excel and assuming a mean of zero for returns, the probability of hitting or exceeding Q at expiration, then, is That's your answer for the probability of exceeding Q. Accuracy is in the eye of the beholder.  You'd have to specify a criterion by which to judge it to know the answer.  I'm sure more sophisticated methods exist that are more unbiased and have less error, but I think it's a fine first approximation.

negative: Security in the merchant services system is mainly handled in two ways: 1) Before transactions are done, the business itself must go through an application process similar (but not identical) to getting a loan.  Some high risk businesses must pay higher fees due to the increased likelihood of customer complaints. 2) When a customer disputes a transaction, that's a mark against the business.  Get too many of these disputes, and your priviledge of accepting credit cards will be revoked, meaning you won't be able to again. It's in the merchant's best interest to verify customer's identity, because disputes cost them money directly.  It's in the servicer's best interest to verify the businesses integrity, because fraud drives up the cost for everyone else. As a whole, it's quite a reactionary system, yet in practice it works remarkably well.

negative: "The appropriate structure for an organization depends largely on the size of the firm. Smaller firms can employ some non-traditional hierarchies more easily (i.e., flat design), whereas the same structures are more difficult to use in mid-size and large companies. The most important pieces of any corporate structure are (1) clarity of roles, (2) accountability, and (3) ease of communication.  Firstly, everyone in the organization must have clarity of their own role and how it fits into the bigger picture. That means a structure that is easy to understand, and a comprehension of how all the roles tie in to each other.   Secondly, a good structure will enable and empower leadership to hold the team accountable, and be held accountable in turn. What is often misunderstood about accountability is that people often assume that it simply means punishing poor behavior when something breaks down. In reality, that's holding people responsible, not accountable. Accountability is something that is self-driven and is a product of sound relationships and transparency. As an example, one of the most common breakdowns in accountability is found in passive non-responsiveness. This is when you may reach out to a business partner for help or an update, but they simply do not reply (as in email, text, or voicemail).   Thirdly, the structure should be such that it is easy for individuals to communicate across and up/down the chain. This doesn't mean that if you send an email, communication is easy. Rather, who do I reach out to for this problem? What are the best practices or agreed-upon methodologies for a certain practice, and how does the team know this? Some of this should be codified in the form of standard operating procedures (SOPs) which can be referenced at any time. Many companies use a ""playbook"" which is a high-level reference guide on how to operate the business (an example is found here: https://www.atlassian.com/team-playbook). A playbook can be anything from a PDF to an interactive website like the aforementioned link. It should always have the most up-to-date information.  Most companies will change their structure over time as their environment (both internal and external) change and they need to adapt. For example, a small firm may not need an HR department, but as it employs more and more people, a need to have someone (or an entire team) focused on human capital management rises quickly -- an owner-operator can handle only so much before it is time to scale up.  The most important thing to consider is who you hire. People are the largest expense to an organization, and having the right people in the right roles is the best way to avoid unnecessary incremental costs resulting from inefficiency, fraud, or risky behavior. Always look for the personality traits that make a good employee relative to the role (i.e., customer service: friendliness; finance: integrity; operations: teamwork).  One of the most obvious parts of a business as it scales up is specialization. You want to find a balance, though. For example, HR handles all human relations issues, while Legal handles all internal claims, suits, and patents. There is an overlap that occurs here, as internal claims often start as human relations issues, which means you must have healthy communication and clear accountability for an appropriate hand-off so Legal takes a claim at the right point in time. While this example may be a little obvious, many times the edges are blurred, and clarity of role can be difficult.  I hope that helps! Reach out with any follow-up questions."

negative: Good question!  In part, it's just a way of indicating how much we appreciate your time.  Typically institutional review boards want to see some kind of of incentive to participants to approve a study.  In a best case scenario (max accuracy) it works out to about $40/hr - not bad!  And, generally, it's standard practice with these kind of accuracy based studies to have some payoff that increases with accuracy.

negative: "As a former professor, I have few questions:  1. When it comes to the things you listed, how to **filter** things, how to **build a structure and methodology** to handle tasks, how to **research and elaborate** on the knowledge needed, **motivation**, **social and personal traits**, and seeking **feedback** (including self-critic), what percentage of this is taught or can be taught in school, and what percentage of this is part of the personality you already have and cannot be taught? Can ""motivation"", for example, be taught in school?  2. When it comes to practical and current knowledge needed in the workplace, is it coming more from what was taught in college, or is it more from self study and experience gained in the first few weeks at a real work environment?   3. Do colleges and universities fail students when needed? When I was teaching, and from professors I currently know, the guidelines are very strict as for the possibility of failing a student. Few of my students should never ever be accepted to college, definitely should have failed my classes as clearly they do not have the capability to handle the real requirements, bad and immature personalities, zero chance to improve, etc. I was prevented from failing few of them.  Lastly, I do think kids should go to college, but traditionally, colleges and universities were mostly(!) to demand high standards, tough acceptance, and fail those who can't handle the requirements. Thus, those fewer who got degrees deserved those degrees and almost always benefited from those degrees as for getting work, good compensation for their work and succeeding in their work."

negative: The United States is no longer on a gold standard, and the value of its currency is solely founded on the productivity of its economy. So I don't think there's any practical reason for the United States government to explicitly sell off a lot of gold to force the price to crash. In fact I would expect that the price of gold has very little interest for the Fed, or anyone else in a position of economic power in the government. I believe that we still have large reserves of it, but I have no idea what they are intended for, aside from being a relic of the gold standard. Best guess is that they'll be held on to just in case of an international trend back towards the gold standard, although that is unlikely on any time frame we would care about.

negative: "Coming from someone who has worked a in the account servicing department of an actual bank in the US, other answers are right, this is probably a scam, the phone number on the letter is probably ringing to a fraudulent call center (these are very well managed and sound professional), and you must independently locate and dial the true contact number to US Bank. NOW. Tell them what happened. Reporting is critical. Securing your money is critical. Every piece of information you provided ""the bank"" when you called needs to be changed or worked around. Account numbers, passwords, usernames, card numbers get changed. Tax ID numbers get de-prioritized as an authentication mechanism even if the government won't change them. The true bank probably won't transfer you to the branch. If the front-line call center says they will, ask the person on the phone what the branch can do that they cannot. Information is your friend. They will probably transfer you to a special department that handles these reports. Apparently Union Bank's call center transfers you to the branch then has the branch make this transfer. Maybe their front-line call center team is empowered to handle it like I was. Either way, plug your phone in; if the call takes less than 5 minutes they didn't actually do everything. 5 to 8 minutes per department is more likely, plus hold time. There's a lot of forms they're filling out. What if that office is closed because of time differences? Go online and ask for an ATM limit increase. Start doing cash advances at local banks if your card allows it. Just get that money out of that account before it's in a fraudsters account. Keep receipts, even if the machine declines the transaction. Either way, get cash on hand while you wait for a new debit card and checks for the new account you're going to open. What if this was fraud, you draw your US Bank account down to zero $800 at a time, and you don't close it or change passwords? Is it over? No. Then your account WILL get closed, and you will owe EVERYTHING that the fraudsters rack up (these charges can put your account terrifyingly far in the negative) from this point forward. This is called ""participation in a scam"" in your depository agreement, because you fell victim to it, didn't report, and the info used was voluntarily given. You will also lose any of your money that they spend. What if US Bank really is closing your account? Then they owe you every penny you had in it. (Minus any fees allowed in the depository agreement). This closure can happen several days after the date on the warning, so being able to withdraw doesn't mean you're safe. Banks usually ship an official check shipped to the last known address they had for you. Why would a bank within the United States close my account when it's not below the minimum balance? Probably because your non-resident alien registration from when you were in school has expired and federal law prohibits them from doing business with you now. These need renewed at least every three years. Renewing federally is not enough; the bank must be aware of the updated expiration date. How do I find out why my account is being closed? You ask the real US Bank. They might find that it's not being closed. Good news! Follow the scam reporting procedure, open a new account (with US Bank if you want, or elsewhere) and close the old one. If it IS being closed by the bank, they'll tell you why, and they'll tell you what your next options are. Ask what can be done. Other commenters are right that bitcoin activity may have flagged it. That activity might actually be against your depository agreement. Or it set off a detection system. Or many other reasons. The bank who services your account is the only place that knows for sure. If I offer them $500 per year will they likely keep the account opened? Otherwise I got to go to singapore open another account Legitimate financial institutions in the United States don't work this way. If there is a legal problem with your tax status in the US, money to the bank won't solve it. Let's call the folks you've talked to ""FraudBank"" and the real USBank ""RealBank,"" because until RealBank confirms, we have no reason to believe that the letter is real.  FraudBank will ask for money. Don't give it. Don't give them any further information. Gather up as much information from them as possible instead. Where to send it, for example. Then report that to RealBank. RealBank won't have a way to charge $500/year to you only. If they offer a type of account to everyone that costs $500, ask for the ""Truth in Savings Act disclosures."" Banks are legally required to provide these upon request. Then read them. Don't put or keep your money anywhere you don't understand."

negative: Dude!  I specifically said big businesses got paid.  But you IMPLIED big Business was more altruistic, was the great giver of our infrastructure.   Now you’re telling me the financial sector pays for everything, and should be loved for it, as if they aren’t making money off the loans either.  Back to the beginning:  Big money is not to be thanked for our infrastructure.  The government is.  Big money is the parasite using that infrastructure to leech money from the government as many ways as they can.  Every item you have pointed out is another place where big money has gained off the government.  We need to relearn thatbpeopke are more important than money, and it starts with big money being held responsible for its practices and how those practices affect We the People.  Well, maybe we should make the Media accountable first.

negative: Think of it this way:  1) You buy 1k in call options that will let you buy 100k of stock when they expire in the money in a year.   2) You take the 99k you would have spent on the stock and invest it in a risk free savings account.  3) Assume the person who sold you the call, immediately hedges the position by buying 100k of stock to deliver when the options expire.  The amount of money you could make on risk free interest needs to be comparable to the premium you paid the option writer for tying up their capital, or they wouldn't have made the trade. So higher risk free rates would mean a higher call price.   NOTE: The numbers are not equal because of the risk in writing the option, but they will move the same direction.

negative: "I think the ""right"" way to approach this is for your personal books and your business's books to be completely separate. You would need to really think of them as separate things, such that rather than being disappointed that there's no ""cross transactions"" between files, you think of it as ""In my personal account I invested in a new business like any other investment"" with a transfer from your personal account to a Stock or other investment account in your company, and ""This business received some additional capital"" which one handles with a transfer (probably from Equity) to its checking account or the like. Yes, you don't get the built-in checks that you entered the same dollar amount in each, but (1) you need to reconcile your books against reality anyway occasionally, so errors should get caught, and (2) the transactions really are separate things from each entity's perspective. The main way to ""hack it"" would be to have separate top-level placeholder accounts for the business's Equity, Income, Expenses, and Assets/Liabilities. That is, your top-level accounts would be ""Personal Equity"", ""Business Equity"", ""Personal Income"", ""Business Income"", and so on. You can combine Assets and Liabilities within a single top-level account if you want, which may help you with that ""outlook of my business value"" you're looking for. (In fact, in my personal books, I have in the ""Current Assets"" account both normal things like my Checking account, but also my credit cards, because once I spend the money on my credit card I want to think of the money as being gone, since it is. Obviously this isn't ""standard accounting"" in any way, but it works well for what I use it for.) You could also just have within each ""normal"" top-level placeholder account, a placeholder account for both ""Personal"" and ""My Business"", to at least have a consistent structure. Depending on how your business is getting taxed in your jurisdiction, this may even be closer to how your taxing authorities treat things (if, for instance, the business income all goes on your personal tax return, but on a separate form). Regardless of how you set up the accounts, you can then create reports and filter them to include just that set of business accounts. I can see how just looking at the account list and transaction registers can be useful for many things, but the reporting does let you look at everything you need and handles much better when you want to look through a filter to just part of your financial picture. Once you set up the reporting (and you can report on lists of account balances, as well as transaction lists, and lots of other things), you can save them as Custom Reports, and then open them up whenever you want. You can even just leave a report tab (or several) open, and switch to it (refreshing it if needed) just like you might switch to the main Account List tab. I suspect once you got it set up and tried it for a while you'd find it quite satisfactory."

negative: The standard customer is actually pretty satisified with BofA because he gets access to the large number of branches for free. But that money has to come from somewhere, that service isn't free. BofA gets it from those who are less responsible with their money. Alternatively, BofA can just charge everybody evenly across the board. Due to low interest rates, deposits are not very profitable, they cannot lower the interest on your savings account any more. Banks are actually losing money on most of their depositors because the stuff involved with maintaining an account costs money. That's why some banks are actively doing things to push some depositors away (some banks even charge you money to store money in the bank).  Logically, it makes sense for me to bank at a place where the profits are not squeezed from me. So as someone who doesn't get hit with fees, I'm happy with BofA. That might sound weird, but logic dictates that I go to where I get the best value.

negative: I think that journalism is going to have to shift to a more scientific based reporting standard to regain credibility. Data driven reporting, with explained methodology for collection and vetting the data; adversarial review of methods and conclusions; greater emphasis on accuracy rather than speed of delivery. I would happily pay for that service. I think the days of good faith trust in journalism as an institution and best practices are gone.

negative: Just wanted to chime in and reinforce everything that's already been said.   Practice exams are the best way to prepare, I did Kaplan myself. They are harder than the test itself, passed with a 92 when I never broke 80 on a practice exam. Good luck!

negative: "Let's divide all bank accounts into savings and checking. The main difference is that checking is easy to get money from; savings is hard to get money from. Because of this, the federal Reserve requires that banks keep more money on hand to cover transactions in checking accounts. Here is a related question from a banking customer regarding a recent notice on their bank statement: Deposit Reclassification. It seems that the bank was moving the customer's money between hidden sub accounts to make it look like the checking account was really a savings account and thus ""reduce the amount of funds we are required to keep on deposit at the Federal Reserve Bank."" If they didn't have to transfer the money many times the bank could keep less cash on hand. But once they did 5 hidden transactions the rest of the money in the hidden savings account would be moved by the bank. The 6 transaction limit is done to not allow you to treat savings like checking. Here is a relevant quote from the Federal Reserve Savings Deposits  Savings deposits generally have no specified maturity   period. They may be interest-bearing, with interest computed or paid   daily, weekly, quarterly, or on any other basis. The two most   significant features of savings deposits are the ‘‘reservation of   right’’ requirement and the restrictions on the number of   ‘‘convenient’’ transfers or withdrawals that may be made per month (or   per statement cycle of at least four weeks) from the account. In order   to classify an account as a ‘‘savings deposit,’’ the institution must   in its account agreement with the customer reserve the right at any   time to require seven days’ advance written notice of an intended   withdrawal. In practice, this right is never exercised, but the   institution must nevertheless reserve that right in the account   agreement. In addition, for an account to be classified as a ‘‘savings   deposit,’’ the depositor may make no more than six ‘‘convenient’’   transfers or withdrawals per month from the account. ‘‘Convenient’’   transfers and withdrawals, for purposes of this limit, include   preauthorized, automatic transfers (including but not limited to   transfers from the savings deposit for overdraft protection or for   direct bill payments) and transfers and withdrawals initiated by   telephone, facsimile, or computer, and transfers made by check, debit    card, or other similar order made by the depositor and payable to   third parties. Other, less-convenient types of transfers, such as   withdrawals or transfers made in person at the bank, by mail, or by   using an ATM, do not count toward the six-per-month limit and do not   affect the account’s status as a savings account. Also, a withdrawal   request initiated by telephone does not count toward the transfer   limit when the withdrawal is disbursed via check mailed to the   depositor.  Examiners should be particularly wary of a bank’s practices   for handling telephone transfers. As noted, an unlimited number of   telephone-initiated withdrawals are allowed so long as a check for   the withdrawn funds is mailed to the depositor. Otherwise, the limit   is six telephone transfers per month. The limit applies to telephonic   transfers to move savings deposit funds to another type of deposit   account and to make payments to third parties."

negative: The technical skills (excel, matlab, econometrics) others posted are absolutely essential, but I have seen a ton of world class number crunchers who could not put anything in context.  My advice:  - Read any annual report for any company you find somewhat interesting, aim for reading 2 or 3 a week.  This is the best way to learn real world macro economics and get a very strong grasp on financial accounting  - Practice writing about what you learn.

negative: "Buy term and invest the difference is certainly the standard recommendation, and for good reason. When you start looking at some sample numbers the ""buy term and invest the difference"" strategy starts to look very good. Here are the rates I found (27 yr old in Texas with good health, non-smoker, etc): $200k term life: $21/month $200k whole life: $177/month If you were to invest the difference in a retirement account for 40 years, assuming a 7% rate of return (many retirement planning estimates use 10%) you would have $411,859 at the end of that period. (If you use 10% that figure jumps to over $994k.) Needless to say, $400k in a retirement account is better than a $200k death benefit. Especially since you can't get the death benefit AND the cash value. Certainly one big difficulty is making sure you invest that difference. The best way to handle that is to set up a direct deposit that goes straight from your paycheck to the retirement account before it even touches your bank account. The next best thing would be an automatic transfer from your bank account. You may wonder 'What if I can no longer afford to invest that money?' First off, take a second and third look at your finances before you start eating into that. But if financial crisis comes and you truly can't afford to fund your own life insurance / retirement account then perhaps it will be a good thing you're not locked into a life insurance policy that forces you to pay those premiums. That extra freedom is another benefit of the ""buy term and invest the difference"" strategy. It is great that you are asking this question now while you are young. Because it is much easier to put this strategy into play now while you are young.  As far as using a cash value policy to help diversify your portfolio: I am no expert in how to allocate long term investments after maxing out my IRA and 401k. (My IRA maxes out at $5k/year, another $5k for my wife's, another $16.5k for my 401k.) Before I maxed that out I would have my house paid for and kid's education saved for. And by then it would make sense to pay a financial adviser to help you manage all those investments. They would be the one to ask about using a cash value policy similar to @lux lux's description.  I believe you should NEVER PUT YOUR MONEY INTO SOMETHING YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. Cash value policies are complex and I don't fully understand them. I should add that of course my calculations are subject to the standard disclaimer that those investment returns aren't guaranteed. As with any financial decision you must be willing to accept some level of risk and the question is not whether to accept risk, but how much is acceptable. That's why I used 7% in my calculation instead of just 10%. I wanted to demonstrate that you could still beat out whole life if you wanted to reduce your risk and/or if the stock market performs poorly."

negative: What is not permitted in Islam is the practice of making unethical or immoral monetary loans that unfairly enrich the lender. Originally, usury meant interest of any kind. A loan may be considered usurious because of excessive or abusive interest rates or other factors. But In case of financial markets, people borrow money to make money and both parties benefits, and no one is taking advantage of the other. I may be wrong in interpreting this way, God knows the best.

negative: As soon as the USA left the gold exchange standard, total factor productivity began to dramatically stagnate.   We can trace it back to the early 1900s, but because of electricity, oil, automobiles and computers it is best to track it from Nixon taking us off the gold standard:  http://azizonomics.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/tfp.jpeg  Coincidence? I don’t think so — a fundamental change in the nature of the money supply coincided almost exactly with a fundamental change to the shape of the nation’s economy. Is the simultaneous outgrowth in income inequality a coincidence too?  Keynesians may respond that correlation does not necessarily imply causation, and though we do not know the exact causation, there are a couple of strong possibilities that may have strangled productivity:  1.Leaving the gold exchange standard was a free lunch for policymakers: GDP growth could be achieved without any real gains in productivity, or efficiency, or in infrastructure, but instead by just pumping money into the system.  2.Leaving the gold exchange standard was a free lunch for businesses: revenue growth could be achieved without any real gains in productivity, or efficiency.  And it’s not just total factor productivity that has been lower than in the years when America was on the gold exchange standard — as a Bank of England report recently found, GDP growth has averaged lower in the pure fiat money era (2.8% vs 1.8%), and financial crises have been more frequent in the non-gold-standard years.  Bottomline, it is the best explanation for a fall in productivity even factoring in computers.

negative: Conceptually, yes, you need to worry about it.  As a practical matter, it's less likely to be exercised until expiry or shortly prior. The way to think about paying a European option is: [Odds of paying out] = [odds that strike is in the money at expiry] Whereas the American option can be thought of as: [Odds of paying out] = [odds that strike price is in the money at expiry] + ( [odds that strike price is in the money prior to expiry] * [odds that other party will exercise early] ). This is just a heuristic, not a formal financial tool.  But the point is that you need to consider the odds that it will go into the money early, for how long (maybe over multiple periods), and how likely the counterparty is to exercise early. Important considerations for whether they will exercise early are the strategy of the other side (long, straddle, quick turnaround), the length of time the option is in the money early, and the anticipated future movement. A quick buck strategy might exercise immediately before the stock turns around.  But that could leave further gains on the table, so it's usually best to wait unless the expectation is that the stock will quickly reverse its movement.  This sort of counter-market strategy is generally unlikely from someone who bought the option at a certain strike, and is equivalent to betting against their original purchase of the option.  So most of these people will wait because they expect the possibility of a bigger payoff. A long strategy is usually in no hurry to exercise, and in fact they would prefer to wait until the end to hold the time value of the option (the choice to get out of the option, if it goes back to being unprofitable).  So it usually makes little sense for these people to exercise early.  The same goes for a straddle, if someone is buying an option for insurance or to economically exit a position. So you're really just concerned that people will exercise early and forgo the time value of the American option.  That may include people who really want to close a position, take their money, and move on.  In some cases, it may include people who have become overextended or need liquidity, so they close positions.  But for the most part, it's less likely to happen until the expiration approaches because it leaves potential value on the table.  The time value of an option dwindles at the end because the implicit option becomes less likely, especially if the option is fairly deep in the money (the implicit option is then fairly deep out of the money). So early exercise becomes more meaningful concern as the expiration approaches.  Otherwise, it's usually less worrisome but more than a nonzero proposition.

negative: "Not all call options that have value at expiration, exercise by purchasing the security (or attempting to, with funds in your account).   On ETNs, they often (always?) settle in cash.  As an example of an option I'm currently looking at, AVSPY, it settles in cash (please confirm by reading the documentation on this set of options at http://www.nasdaqomxtrader.com/Micro.aspx?id=Alpha, but it is an example of this).  There's nothing it can settle into (as you can't purchase the AVSPY index, only options on it).  You may quickly look (wikipedia) at the difference between ""American Style"" options and ""European Style"" options, for more understanding here. Interestingly I just spoke to my broker about this subject for a trade execution.  Before I go into that, let me also quickly refer to Joe's answer:  what you buy, you can sell.  That's one of the jobs of a market maker, to provide liquidity in a market.  So, when you buy a stock, you can sell it.  When you buy an option, you can sell it.  That's at any time before expiration (although how close you do it before the closing bell on expiration Friday/Saturday is your discretion).  When a market maker lists an option price, they list a bid and an ask.  If you are willing to sell at the bid price, they need to purchase it (generally speaking).  That's why they put a spread between the bid and ask price, but that's another topic not related to your question -- just note the point of them buying at the bid price, and selling at the ask price -- that's what they're saying they'll do. Now, one major difference with options vs. stocks is that options are contracts. So, therefore, we can note just as easily that YOU can sell the option on something (particularly if you own either the underlying, or an option deeper in the money).  If you own the underlying instrument/stock, and you sell a CALL option on it, this is a strategy typically referred to as a covered call, considered a ""risk reduction"" strategy.  You forfeit (potential) gains on the upside, for money you receive in selling the option. The point of this discussion is, is simply: what one buys one can sell;  what one sells one can buy -- that's how a ""market"" is supposed to work.  And also, not to think that making money in options is buying first, then selling.  It may be selling, and either buying back or ideally that option expiring worthless. -- Now, a final example.  Let's say you buy a deep in the money call on a stock trading at $150, and you own the $100 calls.  At expiration, these have a value of $50.  But let's say, you don't have any money in your account, to take ownership of the underlying security (you have to come up with the additional $100 per share you are missing).  In that case, need to call  your broker and see how they handle it, and it will depend on the type of account you have (e.g. margin or not, IRA, etc).  Generally speaking though, the ""margin department"" makes these decisions, and they look through folks that have options on things that have value, and are expiring, and whether they have the funds in their account to absorb the security they are going to need to own.  Exchange-wise, options that have value at expiration, are exercised.  But what if the person who has the option, doesn't have the funds to own the whole stock? Well, ideally on Monday they'll buy all the shares with the options you have at the current price, and immediately liquidate the amount you can't afford to own, but they don't have to.  I'm mentioning this detail so that it helps you see what's going or needs to go on with exchanges and brokerages and individuals, so you have a broader picture."

negative: Dallas. I didn't say comfortable, I said happy. Being poor was much harder than not (thankfully, we're not any more) but we were fine and we never took (although we could have) govt assistance beyond standard tax credits. My wife is a great cook, she works wonders on a budget and there are creative ways to handle childcare, transportation and schedules as some here have already mentioned.

negative: "Of course there can always be _some_ ways you can integrate some amounts of social responsibility into product, but I don't think that's the point he's making. Social responsibility would be called ""business best practice"" if it improved the bottom line. It is inevitable that there are times when social responsibility and business goals diverge, and at that point given two companies that are in the same market space, the one who bets against society will win. This is the sort of thing that _must_ be handled in law, and absolutely cannot be handled by allowing the free market to work because the free market will not discover ethics, it will discover that ethics don't matter in an environment that doesn't require them.    It's the reason any claim that business does best when there are no regulations is absolutely false. If a company can make more by polluting and you don't have regulation that says clearly ""it may cost more, but we require you to compete by also being non-pollutiong"", then you should expect the market to converge on pollution as ""best practice"".  Removing regulation won't allow business to sort this out, it will allow business to not care that they are polluting.  There is the notion of a B-corp that is organized for the purpose of trying to be good guys without being sued. but it doesn't assure that they will have a fair stake int he market.  It just allows them to fail without getting sued by stock holders.  Basically if everyone is not required to be that level of good guy, though, B-corps are basically indulging unilateral disarmament. Sure, they can make a case that ethics matter, and that might work, but they don't need B-corp protection for that. If making the case that ethics matter was going to win in the market, any corporation could do it.  For more thoughts, so I don't have to drone on here, see my articles [Fiduciary Duty vs. The Three Laws of Robotics](http://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2009/02/fiduciary-duty-vs-three-laws-of-robotics.html) and [Losing the War in a Quiet Room](http://netsettlement.blogspot.com/2012/01/losing-war-in-quiet-room.html)."

negative: Depends on what measures were taken. *If* they followed standard best practices and were hacked, then would you still want them put out of business? Should airlines fold if one of their planes crashes?  Now if they were negligent, that's another story. You can read my other comment down the thread but shutting down Equifax is only going to hurt innocent people who had no say in the matter. Personally I don't think that is going to do the most good after the fact.

negative: If you think about it, the value of an option comes from the chance that the price at the expiration date can exceed the strike price. As it gets closer to the expiration date, the chance is getting smaller, because there is simply not enough time for an out-of-money option to hit that strike. Therefore, the value of an option decays.

negative: A 'bailout' is money from the government to keep open a business that is no longer viable and by rights deserves to fail.  What happened in this case was different. All banks rely on the overnight bank lending market for liquidity. It is the grease that oils the wheels of international banking. That is not a sign of weakness or recklessness. It is just standard banking practice. In 2008, during the failure of Bear Stearns and the Lehman Shock the overnight lending market simply stopped operating as nobody knew who they could trust and as a result nobody trusted anybody. Something needed to temporarily replace this overnight lending until the crisis was over. This is what that cash infusion was. It was not a bailout.

negative: Of course. But then, paper also has utility. So do seashells and pinecones.   There is no obvious reason why, even in a perfect world, we would go looking for a malleable, highly-conductive, corrosion-resistant metal as something to peg the value of our banknotes to.   The argument in favor of a gold standard is not whether gold is intrinsically more valuable than paper or seal skins or anything else, it's that gold is fairly inelastic in terms of supply, so it limits the ability of central bankers to mess up the value of the currency through interventionist funny business.   If you picked up a rock and started going around telling people that we should use it as money because it's highly malleable and conductive and can be used in computer parts, they would look at you like you're a crazy person. That's not why gold is/was/should be a currency.   Gold was indisputably the perfect currency for thousands of years, because it was easy to identify, easy to handle, hard to falsify, and rare. Those were important characteristics when strangers had to carry physical money to different places without any ATMs, credit-cards, or paypal accounts. They are somewhat less critical today, but still...  The one characteristic that might *still* argue in favor of a gold standard is rarity: Since the amount of gold in the world is somewhat fixed, forcing the currency supply to be restricted to the gold supply semi-prevents governments and central bankers from getting into too much mischief (or at least, that's the theory).   I will leave it to others to argue over whether a return to the gold standard would be a good idea, but the argument has nothing to with the intrinsic utility of gold. I'm sure we can all agree that gold is a fine metal with many good qualities.

negative: "Here's the story of EDI:   EDI is between a Vendor and Customer. Despite EDI being about standards, the truth is that the Customer is the bully and the Vendor is the wimp. So, for every trading partner, you need a unique EDI process.  In this particular case, inbound invoices from a supplier, the Supplier is huge, and despite us being the ""Customer"", we had to comply with their ""standard"".  And when it comes to inbound invoices, they have to be handled differently depending on what is purchased. In this case, office supplies, the details of the invoice have to be saved into a table besides in addition to 2 simple invoice created in A/P."

negative: An investigation about bailout money is not an audit.   And what's wrong with a gold standard? In the 40 years since we've been off it productivity is way down and gains have evaporated from the middle class going largely to the super rich.

negative: "Currency lives no more then 50 years. US currency did not expire in last 100 years, but it was reinstated few times, last one was 2009. Note that currency is not just what you hold in your hand. Currency is system of relations of money supply (currency is not money but we forced to use standard terminology), banking rules and government policy. Currency exists as long as government wants it to. In 2009 for example, US government decided it needs new currency and just printed whole new money supply. So US dollar is now counting as ""partially fresh new currency"". It was reinstated. Not expired. But today's dollar is totally different from 90s and 00s. Will it be accepted after 200 years? Yes (probably). But most likely at that time there will be totally new US dollars. And new Euros, new Pounds and so on. Currency is method of transfer. You can have that physical coins you have, but as economic agent it will die very quickly. It is not only related to inflation, in fact, inflation is the least of your worries. If you count all currencies in the world which ever existed, most of them 99.99% are completely dead by now (with governments which supported it). Not even single one currency which lived more then 100 years. US dollar was reinstated in 1860, 1907, 1930, 1973, 1987, 2009 and  in fact it is not single currency but dozen which were allowed to be used ""for compatibility reasons""."