query: Pros / cons of being more involved with IRA investments [duplicate]

positive: diversifying; but isn't that what mutual funds already do? They diversify and reduce stock-specific risk by moving from individual stocks to many stocks, but you can diversify even further by selecting different fund types (e.g. large-cal, small-cap, fixed- income (bond) funds, international, etc.).  Your target-date fund probably includes a few different types already, and will automatically reallocate to less risky investments as you get close to the target date. I would look at the fees of different types of funds, and compare them to the historical returns of those funds.  You can also use things like morningstar and other ratings as guides, but they are generally very large buckets and may not be much help distinguishing between individual funds. So to answer the question, yes you can diversify further - and probably get better returns (and lower fees) that a target-date fund.  The question is - is it worth your time and effort to do so?  You're obviously comfortable investing for the long-term, so you might get some benefit by spending a little time looking for different funds to increase your diversification. Note that ETFs don't really diversify any differently than mutual funds, they are just a different mechanism to invest in funds, and allow different trading strategies (trading during the day, derivatives, selling short, etc.).

positive: Let’s compare your target fund, FFFFX to a well-known ETF, SPY; SPDR S&P 500 ETF. Source: Yahoo Finance The difference in performance over a longer time-frame is significant, You can and should carefully research better funds in order to improve performance. FULL DISCLOSURE: My own IRA is at Fidelity. Less than 10% of my IRA is in Fidelity mutual funds. None is in FFFFX.

negative: The main problem I have with Uber is they represent themselves differently in some contexts than others. To most customers, Uber is Uber, not the individual who is driving.   Conceptually, individuals not being able to shield themselves behind a corporation is an interesting idea, with both pros and cons.

negative: "For me, the main benefit of using duplicate checks is that the copy is created automatically.  If I had to take an extra step, whether taking a photo or writing on a stub, I would probably not always remember to do it.  There is also the issue that you might need to write a check when you don't have your smartphone with you, or it is broken or has a dead battery, etc. There are various pros and cons of having an electronic record versus a paper record.  A paper copy of a check is more vulnerable to physical loss or intrusion, but an electronic record is more vulnerable to hacking.  You also have to keep the images organized somehow, and take care of data security and backups for the images.  You'll have to evaluate which is the greater concern for you. A minor side point is that check duplicates often omit the account number and obscure your signature.  A photo of the original check would include both of these. As far as ""evidence"", it seems to me they're both equally good evidence that you wrote the check - but that's not really that useful.  In most sorts of disputes, what you would need to prove is that you actually delivered the check to the intended recipient, and neither the photo nor the paper copy is evidence of that.  You could have written the check, taken your photo / copy, and then torn it up."

negative: Without commenting on your view of the TV market:  Let's have a look at the main ways to get negative exposure:  1.Short the stocks  Pros: Relatively Easy Cons: Interest rate, costs of shorting, linear bet    2.Options  a. Write Calls b. Buy puts  Pros: Convexity, leveraged, relatively cheap Cons: Zero Sum bet that expires with time, theta  3.Short Stock, Buy Puts, Write Calls  Short X Units of each stock, Write calls on them , use call premiums to finance puts.  Pros: 3x the power!, high kickout Cons: Unlimited pain

negative: The loan is private, so the business is more of a red-herring. The fact that you're closing it and lost a lot of money explains the loan, but is rather irrelevant otherwise as the loan is personal. Do consider potential tax benefits on writing off a loss, talk to a local tax adviser on that. Pros: Cons: I'm sure there are more considerations, of course, and I'm not familiar with the Canadian social safety nets to understand how much of a damage con #1 would be.

negative: "Canada would most likely not convert any time in the near future. The challenge for Canada converting to the US Dollar or the fictional ""Amero"" mentioned by JohnFX is that : Some of the benefits would be: The challenge right now for any government would be to sell the pros over the cons and from that viewpoint the cons would appear to have more negative impact to voters.  Considering that Canada currently has a minority government with no expected change to that status for some time the risk would be very high. For more details see Pros and Cons of Canadian Monetary Union and to see the Mexican impact see North American Currency Union It is interesting to note that currency union was first proposed in 1999 when the Canadian Dollar fluctuated between $0.64 to $0.69 US.  The Canadian Dollar is closer to par with the US Dollar currently (in fact it rose to $1.10 US in Nov. 2007).  Look-up historical rates at the Bank of Canada"

negative: I'm currently using Halifax. Pros: Cons: I'm might start using TD Waterhouse in future, as they claim to have no admin charge.

negative: What should I do? Weigh your options and decide which education investment lines up better with your goals. Some of the costs from pursuing a degree at the more reputable university may include: However there are probably some benefits to pursuing a degree at this university: You will know best which of these apply to you in addition to any pros or cons not mentioned. You need to evaluate each one in order to make a decision.

negative: PenFed Platinum Cashback Rewards Visa Card is another good choice. Pros: Cons:

negative: You need a blog, or a thread of your own. I want to learn about this, and you appear to be quite knowledgeable and thorough in your explanations. Would it be possible for you to make a thread, or reply, or pm explaining some of the pro's and cons of fiat money?

negative: this is not necessarily true. sometimes it makes sense for a public company to go private. usually a private equity firm will buy up the shares. the private equity firm would usually be financed by a bank and the cash flow from the company will help pay off the financing. there are pros and cons to both private and public companies. a pro for a private company is the reduced regulation and there is no need to follow sarbanes-oxley act.

negative: I use GnuCash which I really like.  However, I've never used any other personal finance software so I can't really compare.  Before GnuCash, I used an Excel spreadsheet which works fine for very basic finances. Pros Cons

negative: Most answers to this question only address the issue of providing personal information to a scammer. But considering that a lot of questions without the personal information addition get closed as duplicates of this one, I would like to answer the question in the subject: There are several criminal schemes which involve this.

negative: I've been budgeting with MS Money since 2004 and was pretty disappointed to hear it's being discontinued. Budgeting is actually a stress-relieving hobby for me, and I can be a bit of a control-freak when it comes to finances, so I decided to start early looking for a replacement rather than waiting until MS Money can no longer download transactions. Here are the pros and cons of the ones I've tried (updated 10/2010): You Need A Budget Pro (YNAB) - Based on the old envelopes system, YNAB has you allot money from each paycheck to a specific budget category (envelope). It encourages you to live on last money's income, and if you have trouble with overspending, that can be a great plan. Personally, I'm a big believer in the envelope concept, so that's the biggest pro I found. Also, it's a downloaded software, so once I've bought it (for about $50) it's mine, without forced upgrades as far as I've seen. The big con for me was that it does not automatically download transactions. I would have to sign on to each institution's website and manually download to the program. Also, coming from Money, I'm used to having features that YNAB doesn't offer, like the ability to store information about my accounts. Overall, it's forward-thinking and a good budgeting system, but will take some extra time to download transactions and isn't really a comprehensive management tool for all my financial needs. You can try it out with their free trial. Mint - This is a free online program. The free part was a major pro. It also looks pretty, if that's important to you. Updating is automatic, once you've got it all set up, so that's a pro. Mint's budgeting tools are so-so. Basically, you choose a category and tell it your limit. It yells at you (by text or email) when you cross the line, but doesn't seem to offer any other incentive to stay on budget.  When I first looked at Mint, it did not connect with my credit union, but it currently connects to all my banks and all but one of my student loan institutions.  Another recent improvement is that Mint now allows you to manually add transactions, including pending checks and cash transactions.  The cons for me are that it does not give me a good end-of-the-month report, doesn't allow me to enter details of my paychecks, and doesn't give me any cash-flow forecasting. Overall, Mint is a good casual, retrospective, free online tool, but doesn't allow for much planning ahead. Mvelopes - Here's another online option, but this one is subscription-based. Again, we find the old envelopes system, which I think is smart, so that's a pro for me. It's online, so it downloads transactions automatically, but also allows you to manually add transactions, so another pro. The big con on this one is the cost. Depending on how you far ahead you choose to pay (quarterly, yearly or biannually), you're paying $7.60 to $12 per month. They do offer a free trial for 14 days (plus another 14 days offered when you try to cancel). Another con is that they don't provide meaningful reports. Overall, a good concept, but not worth the cost for me. Quicken - I hadn't tried Quicken earlier because they don't offer a free trial, but after the last few fell short, I landed with Quicken 2009. Pro for Quicken, as an MS Money user is that it is remarkably similar in format and options. The registers and reports are nearly identical. One frustration I'd had with Money was that it was ridiculously slow at start-up, and after a year or so of entering data, Quicken is dragging. Con for Quicken, again as an MS Money user, is that it's budgeting is not as detailed as I would like.  Also, it does not download transactions smoothly now that my banks all ask security questions as part of sign-in.  I have to sign in to my bank's website and manually download.  Quicken 2011 is out now, but I haven't tried it yet.  Hopefully they've solved the problem of security questions.  Quicken 2011 promises an improved cash-flow forecast, which sounds promising, and was a feature of MS Money that I have very much missed.  Haven't decided yet if it's worth the $50 to upgrade to 2011.

negative: "Unfortunately I don't think any of the online personal finance applications will do what you're asking. Most (if not all) online person finance software uses a combination of partnerships with the banks themselves and ""screen scraping"" to import your data. This simplifies things for the user but is typically limited to whenever the service was activated. Online personal finance software is still relatively young and doesn't offer the depth available in a desktop application (yet). If you are unwilling to part with historical data you spent years accumulating you are better off with a desktop application. Online Personal Finance Software Pros Cons Desktop Personal Finance Software Pros Cons In my humble opinion the personal finance software industry really needs a hybrid approach. A desktop application that is synchronized with a website. Offering the stability and tools of a desktop application with the availability of a web application."

negative: Your NRI friend can use normal Banks or specialized remittance services. There are questions on this website that give pro's and con's. From Indian tax point of you, you have received a gift from friend and as such it falls under Gift Tax act. Any amount upto Rs 50,000 is tax free. Anything above it is taxable as per tax bracket.

negative: What if patents were kept a secret for, say, the first year or more? Then, if anyone was able to duplicate the patent once seen in the wild without the recipe within that timeframe the patent becomes void.  The whole purpose of the patent system was to bring difficult ideas out of being trade secrets and into the public's hands for their benefit with the offer of exclusivity for some time to keep the exchange fair.  If anyone can duplicate one-click without any hand-holding just by using Amazon.com once or twice, there was nothing to be gained from the patent in the first place. It should have remained a trade secret.

negative: Think I had to sign an NDA on pricing w them so can't get specific. Depends if you want realtime or just historical data. Historical obviously cheaper, realtime more. The prices aren't crushing though, one of cheapest tick data vendors around. You get pros and cons to that though - data is time stamped at 25ms and sent over WAN. But they also have self healing tapes w backfill etc so if your server knocks offline for a while you fill the gap when back up etc.

negative: "It sounds like you are describing ""seller-financed"" mortgages (also sometimes called ""self-financed"", where ""self"" is the seller).  In essence the buyer and seller enter into a legal contract (a promissory note) that specifies the payment schedule, interest rate, etc.  The nature of the agreement is similar to the kind of mortgage agreement you'd get from the bank, but no bank is involved; it's just an agreeement directly between the buyer and seller. If you search for ""seller-financed mortgage"" or ""self-financed mortgage"" you can find a good deal more info about this kind of arrangement.  Here is a useful article from Investopedia, here is one from Forbes, and here is one from Nolo. Broadly speaking, the advantages and disadvantages of seller financing are two sides of the same coin: by doing the agreement yourself without bank involvement, you can cut out procedural red tape, delays, and requirements that a bank might insist on --- but in so doing you may expose yourself to risks that those procedures are designed to shield you from.  Most obviously, as the seller, you receive only the down payment up front (not the entire purchase price, as you would if the buyer got a bank loan), and if the buyer doesn't follow through on the agreement, you're on your own as far as starting foreclosure, etc. You can read up on some of the linked pages for more details about the pros and cons.  In general, as those pages note, seller-financed mortgages are relatively rare.  A home is a big purchase, and if you don't know what you're doing it's easy to screw up in a way that could cost you a large amount of money if things go wrong."

negative: "I'd put more money down and avoid financing. I personally don't think car debt is good debt and if you can't afford the car, you are better off with a cheaper car. Also, you should read up on the 0% offer before deciding to commit.   Here's one article that is slightly dated, but discusses some pros and cons of 0% financing. My main point though is that 0% financing is not ""free"" and you need to consider the cost of that financing before making the purchase.  Aside from the normal loan costs of having a monthly payment, possibly buying too much car by looking at monthly cost, etc., a 0% financing offer usually forces you to give the dealer/financing company any rebates that are due to you, in essence making the car cost more."

negative: "I'm going to discuss this, in general, as specific investment advice isn't allowed here. What type of account is the $60K in now? I mean - Is it in a 401(k), IRA or regular account/CD/money market?  You are still working? Does your company offer any kind of matched 401(k)? If so, take advantage of that right up the level they'll match. If not, are you currently depositing to pretax IRAs? You can't just deposit that $60K into an IRA if it isn't already, but you can put $11k/yr ($5 for you, $6K for hubby if you make $11K or more this year.) Now, disclaimer, I am anti-annuity. Like many who are pro or con on issues, this is my nature. The one type of annuity I actually like is the Immediate Annuity. The link is not for an end company, it shows quotes from many and is meant as an example. Today, a 65 yr old man can get $600/mo with a $100K purchase. This is 7.2%, in an economy in which rates are sub 3%. You give up principal in exchange for this higher annual return.  This is a viable solution for the just-retired person whose money will run out when looking at a 4-5% withdrawal but 1% CD rate. In general, these products are no more complex that what I just described, unlike annuities sold to younger fold which combine high fees with returns that are so complex to describe that most agents can't keep their story straight.  Aside from the immediate flavor, all other annuities are partial sold (there's a quote among finance folk - ""annuities are sold, not bought"") based on their tax deferral features. I don't suspect you are in a tax bracket where that feature has any value to you.  At 48/54, with at least 10 years ahead of you, I'd research 'diversification' and 'asset allocation'. Even $60K is enough to proper invest these funds until you retire and then decide what's right for you.   Beginners' Guide to Asset Allocation, Diversification, and Rebalancing is an interesting introduction, and it's written by the SEC, so your tax dollars paid for it.  Some months ago, I wrote Diversifying to Reduce Risk, which falls short of a complete discussion of asset allocation, but it does illustrate the power of being in a stock/bond mix. The ups and downs were reduced significantly compared to the all stock portfolio.  (for follow up or to help others reply to you, a bit more detail on the current investments, and how you are devastated, eg was there a huge loss from what you had a few years ago?) Edit - The original poster hasn't returned. Posted the question and left. It's unfortunate as this was someone who would benefit from the dialog, and the answers here can help others in a similar position, but I feel more discussion is in order for the OP. Last, I caught a downvote on my reply today. I take no offense, but curious which part of my answer the DVer disagreed with."

negative: We don't make enough to really consider it a salary, but I've heard   using a draw without a salary is a bad idea. As any other illegal action, not paying yourself a  reasonable salary when being a corporate officer is indeed a bad idea. I have no idea what I need to do to actually get some money in our   pockets. The answer is simple. You need to earn more money. Since it is S-Corp, it doesn't matter if you keep the profits on the corporate account or distribute - the profits will be taxed to you. You are also, as I said above, required by law to pay yourself a reasonable salary. Reasonable meaning corresponding to market rates. Paying a CPA or a Software Engineer a minimum wage will not be reasonable. That is, of course, if you're profitable, you're not required to pay yourself more money than the corporation actually has. Just to be clear, my answer refers to the question asked, and the confusing answer above that made a claim that has no substantiation in the law. I do not intend to write a thesis about pros and cons of using S-Corp every time a question about reasonable salary is asked.

negative: It's no coincidence that the companies really putting muscle behind this are some of the biggest in the world (Google, IBM, EY). As the article points out, they're bypassing colleges altogether to better access the best available talent. With the mega resources those companies have, all training can be provided on site. There's no need to wait 3-5 years to hire when they can do it now. There are definitely pros and cons to this, but it certainly levels the playing field. In theory, someone from a inner-city ghetto may outperform an ivy league graduate in a well-designed competency test, proving their worth based on merit rather than money. I expect it's something that will slowly begin to catch on as more businesses spot the opportunity.

negative: I am very familiar with the Bloomberg terminal service and agree that their info on securities & markets, especially fixed income, is unparalleled.  However, their news and editorial departments espouse the viewpoints of Michael Bloomberg such as being permabullish in the face of data, pro gun control, pro immigration (legal+illegal), pro Israel, and pro Sunni monarchies (Saudi et al).

negative: Edited in response to JoeTaxpayer's comment and OP Tim's additional question. To add to and clarify a little what littleadv has said, and to answer  OP Tim's next question: As far as the IRS is concerned, you have at most one Individual Retirement Account of each type (Traditional, Roth) though the money in each IRA can be invested with as many different custodians (brokerages, banks, etc.) and different investments as you like. Thus, the maximum $5000 ($6000 for older folks) that you can contribute each year can be split up and invested any which way you like, and when in later years you take a Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) from a Traditional IRA, you can get the money by selling just one of the investments, or from several investments; all that the IRS cares is that the total amount that is distributed to you is at least as large as the RMD. An important corollary is that  the balance in your IRA is the   sum total of the value of all the investments that various custodians are holding   for you in IRA accounts. There is no loss in an IRA until every penny has been withdrawn from every investment in your IRA and  distributed to you, thus making your IRA balance zero.  As long as you have a positive balance, there is no loss: everything has to come out. After the last distribution from your Roth IRA (the one that empties your entire Roth IRA, no matter where it is invested and reduces your Roth IRA balance (see definition  above) to zero), total up all the amounts that you have received as  distributions from your Roth IRA. If this is less  than the total amount of money you contributed to your Roth IRA  (this includes rollovers from a Traditional IRA or Roth 401k  etc., but not the earnings within the Roth IRA that you re-invested inside the Roth IRA), you have a loss that can be deducted on Schedule A as a Miscellaneous Deduction subject to the 2% AGI limit. This 2% is not a cap (in the sense that no more than 2% of your AGI can be deducted in this category)  but rather a threshold: you can only deduct whatever part of your total Miscellaneous Deductions exceeds  2% of your AGI. Not many people have Miscellaneous Deductions whose total exceeds 2% of their AGI, and so they end up not being able to deduct anything in this category. If you ever made nondeductible contributions to your  Traditional IRA because you were ineligible to make a  deductible contribution (income too high, pension plan  coverage at work etc), then the sum of all these contributions is your basis in your  Traditional IRA. Note that your deductible contributions, if any, are not part of the basis.  The above rules apply to  your basis in your Traditional IRA as well.  After the last distribution from your Traditional IRA (the one that empties  all your Traditional IRA accounts and reduces your Traditional IRA balance to zero), total up all the distributions that you received (don't forget to include the nontaxable part of each distribution that represents a return of the basis). If the sum total is less than your basis, you have a loss that can be deducted on Schedule A as a Miscellaneous  Deduction subject to the 2% AGI threshold. You can only deposit cash into an IRA and take a distribution in cash from an IRA. Now, as JoeTaxpayer points out, if your IRA owns stock, you can take a distribution by having the  shares transferred from your IRA account in your brokerage to your personal account in the brokerage.  However, the amount of the distribution, as reported by the brokerage to the IRS, is the value of the shares transferred as of the time of the transfer, (more generally  the fair market value of the property that is transferred out of the IRA) and this is the amount you report on your income  tax return. Any capital gain or loss on those shares remains inside the IRA because your basis (in your personal account) in the  shares that came out of the IRA is the amount of the distribution.  If you sell these shares at a later date, you will have a (taxable) gain or loss depending on whether you sold the shares for more or less than your basis. In effect, the share transfer transaction is as if you sold the shares in the IRA, took the proceeds as a cash distribution and immediately bought the same shares in your personal account, but you saved the transaction fees for the sale and the purchase and avoided paying the  difference between the buying and selling price of the shares as well as any changes in these in the microseconds that would have elapsed between the execution of the sell-shares-in-Tim's-IRA-account, distribute-cash-to-Tim, and buy-shares-in-Tim's-personal account transactions.  Of course, your broker will likely charge a fee for transferring ownership of the shares from your IRA to you.  But the important point is that any capital gain or loss within the IRA cannot be used to offset a gain or loss in your taxable accounts.  What happens inside the IRA stays inside the IRA.

negative: "You ask about the difference between credit and debit, but that may be because you're missing something important. Regardless of credit/debit, there is value in carrying two different cards associated with two different accounts. The reason is simply that because of loss, fraud, or your own mismanagement, or even the bank's technical error, any card can become unusable for some period of time. Exactly how long depends what happened, but just sending you a new card can easily take more than one business day, which might well be longer than you'd like to go without access to any funds. In that situation you would be glad of a credit card, and you would equally be glad of a second debit card on a separate account. So if your question is ""I have one bank account with one debit card, and the only options I'm willing to contemplate are (a) do nothing or (b) take a credit card as well"", then the answer is yes, take a credit card as well, regardless of the pros or cons of credit vs debit. Even if you only use the credit card in the event that you drop your debit card down a drain. So what you can now consider is the pros and cons of a credit card vs managing an additional bank account -- unless you seriously hate one or more of the cons of credit cards, the credit card is likely to win. My bank has given me a debit card on a cash savings account, which is a little scary, but would cover most emergencies if I didn't have a credit card too. Of course the interest rate is rubbish and I sometimes empty my savings account into a better investment, so I don't use it as backup, but I could. Your final question ""can a merchant know if I give him number of debit or credit card"" is already asked: Can merchants tell the difference between a credit card and embossed debit card? Yes they can, and yes there are a few things you can't (or might prefer not to) do with debit. The same could even be said of Visa vs. Mastercard, leading to the conclusion that if you have a Visa debit you should look for a Mastercard credit. But that seems to be less of an issue as time goes on and almost everywhere in Europe apparently takes both or neither. If you travel a lot outside the EU then you might want to be loaded down with every card under the sun, and three different kinds of cash, but you'd already know that without asking ;-)"

negative: Idk if I would ask on reddit, personal finance will tell you the only way is joint bank accounts and relationship advice will tell you to break up. Personally I will always want my own bank account, with a joint account for a mortgage or utilities. I think it depends on if you are both financially savvy, if one of you aren't you might want to have a joint account to keep an eye on spending.  I think this site give you a good pro/con: https://www.thebalance.com/should-you-have-joint-or-separate-bank-accounts-1289664

negative: It takes a long time to bring these sort of cases to trial because of their complexity and the large sums of money that companies have to delay the process. It takes political will to go after these types of crimes. From the politics to building a case, it just seems to me that five years is a very short time frame.   I don't know how or why it was set at five years, but due to what we know now, it might  be a better idea to extend the statue, if the pros outweigh the cons.

negative: All Bank fees were included in the service tax ambit [For example Check bounce, issue of duplicate statement, fees charged for remittance etc]. However as quite a few Banks structured the Remittance Business to show less charges and cover the difference in the Fx rate involved, the Govt has redone the service tax and one needs to pay Rs 120 for an amount of Rs 100,000.  There is no way to avoid service tax on remittance if you are using a remittance service.

negative: Currently, the answer is no, you cannot get out of filing a tax return.  As noted in the comments, if you want to pay more to get out of the drudgery of working on your return, you can pay an accountant to do it for you. You are not alone in thinking that the current income tax system in the U.S. is overly complicated.  What you are essentially describing is a flat tax, a system where there would be a simple tax rate that is paid with no deductions, loopholes, etc., and minimal reporting requirements. Besides flat tax proposals, others have proposed eliminating the income tax altogether and switching to a national sales tax, such as the FairTax proposal. Each of these proposals has pros and cons over the current system, and if you have questions about them, feel free to ask a new question.  But what they have in common is that they would drastically simplify the system of taxation in this country.  If that sounds good to you, you can learn more about these proposals and support organizations and candidates that advocate these reforms.

negative: You can't control the number of special interest groups.  You can't control their stubbornness, animosity, or lack of foresight.  What you can do is limit how and when special interest groups can press their views.  Create a new team whose whole job is to field lobbying before it gets to congress.  They see all the new bills, etc. and boil them down to simple terms, pros, and cons, before presenting them to congress.  The final version must also be signed off on by the lobbying party before it is presented.  You need a second party in this group:  The Devil's Advocates - a group that is REQUIRED to argue against EVERY proposal.  The whole reason for this group is to ensure that no proposal passes without contest.  You need a group whose whole goal is to identify the impact of each proposal, and return the findings to fielders.  They also require a devil's advocate.  When the final proposal is signed off on, then the fielding group presents it to congress, not the lobbyists or their supporters.  The funding for these groups comes directly from the lobbyists, who must finance their bill through congress, unless special exception is made.  If a ton of special interest groups want to get their form in, they must wait their turn in line.  The less work the fielding group has to do to clean up their request, validate it, and discover the pros and cons, the faster the lobby request will go through.  This is just a rough idea off the top of my head.  What are the issues you see with it?

negative: "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://medium.com/@simon.sarris/after-universal-basic-income-the-flood-217db9889c07) reduced by 97%. (I'm a bot) ***** > We have at least hints from current behavior that UBI may be fundamentally attacking the wrong problem and I think many UBI advocates under-appreciate this.  > If the total UBI system cost as a percent of tax receipts becomes large, UBI may preclude these things from ever being built.  > I have a big list of pro/con worked out for Basic Jobs/Agriculture, which will eventually be Part 2.I would be happy to read any thoughts, especially about uncommon UBI plusses or alternatives.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/788a7w/after_universal_basic_income_the_flood/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~233563 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **UBI**^#1 **people**^#2 **money**^#3 **more**^#4 **problem**^#5"

negative: The quality of the discs generated through this process is definitely higher than the quality of the discs produced through duplication. On the contrary, in the process of CD/DVD replication, each disc is paid individual attention and the result is no compatibility issues and no lags too.Some clients might take this as lack of professionalism, but on the contrary, there is no such issue related to those being replicated.


query: US resident with Canadian income via T4A-NR

positive: As per the Canada-U.S. Tax Treaty (the “Treaty”), a U.S. corporation carrying on business in Canada is only subject to taxation on income earned in Canada through a fixed place of business or permanent establishment. Therefore, if a U.S. company does not have a permanent establishment (PE) in Canada then their Canadian source business income is not subject to Canadian federal tax. https://www.fin.gc.ca/treaties-conventions/USA_-eng.asp

negative: If possible, I would open a Canadian bank account with a bank such as TD Canada Trust. You can then have your payments wired into that account without incurring costs on receipt. They also allow access to their US ATM network via TD Bank without additional costs. So you could use the American Affiliate to pull the funds out via a US teller while only bearing the cost of currency conversion. If that option can't work then the best route would be to choose a US bank account that doesn't charge for incoming wire transfers and request that the money be wired to your account (you'll still get charged the conversion rate when the wire is in CAD and the account is in USD).

negative: If you are investing, via whoever you want, wherever you want, and you're a US tax resident - you will be taxed. As with all the other questions, clearly your transfer of funds to your parents is not a real gift, and as such you will be keeping interest in the amounts. Income will be attributed to you, and taxes will also be charged to you. Having the money lie in your parents' accounts doesn't make the money or the income any less yours.

negative: Here's a great Canadian college/university cost calculator I used; found at Canadian Business - they say: Our tool is divided into three easy   steps. First, calculate the tuition   cost for the university and faculty   you wish to attend. Then, calculate any additional fees   for residence (on campus student   housing), meal plans, athletics,   health and student services. This will   give you the total cost a student will   pay at a Canadian university in   2006/7. Once you know the total annual cost,   take the third step to calculate the   total cost for the duration of the   course of study. Of course, this only calculates what it will cost you NOW, not eighteen years from now, but it's a good start :)

negative: Both states will want to tax you. Your tax home is where you maintain a domicile, are registered to vote, etc. and you will probably want to keep this as MA since you state that MA is your permanent residence and you are staying in a rented place in PA. But be careful about voter registration; that is one of the items that can be used to determine your state of residence.  OK, so if you and your spouse are MA residents,  you should file jointly as residents in MA and as nonresidents in PA. Do the calculations on the nonresident return first, and then the calculations on the resident  return. Typically, on a nonresident tax return, the calculations are effectively the following: Report all your income (usually AGI from the Federal return).  Call this $X. Compute the PA state tax due on $X.  Note that you follow the rules for nonresidents in doing this, not the calculations used by PA residents. Call the amount of tax you computed as $Y. What part of the total income $X is attributable to PA sources? If this amount is $Z, then you owe PA $Y times (Z/X). On the resident return in MA, you will likely get some credit for the taxes paid to PA, and this will reduce your MA tax burden. Usually the maximum credit is limited to the lesser of actual tax paid to PA and what you would have had to pay MA for the same income. As far as withholding is concerned, your employer in PA will withhold PA taxes as if you are a PA resident, but you can adjust the amount via the PA equivalent of IRS Form W4 so as to account for any additional  tax that might be due because you will be filing as a nonresident.  Else you can pay estimated taxes via the PA equivalent of IRS Form 1040ES. Similarly, your wife can adjust her withholding to account for the MA taxes that you will owe on the joint income, or you can pay estimated taxes to MA too. Note that it is unlikely that your employer in Pennsylvania will withhold  Massachusetts taxes (and send them to Massachusetts) for you, e.g. if it is a ma-and-pa store, but there may be special deals available if  your employer does business in both states, i.e. is a MA-and-PA store.

negative: "The other answer has mentioned ""factual resident"", and you have raised the existence of a U.S./Canada tax treaty in your comment, and provided a link to a page about determining residency. I'd like to highlight part of the first link: You are a factual resident of Canada for tax purposes if you keep   significant residential ties in Canada while living or travelling   outside the country. The term factual resident means that, although you left Canada, you   are still considered to be a resident of Canada for income tax   purposes. Notes If you have established ties in a country that Canada has a tax treaty   with and you are considered to be a resident of that country, but you   are otherwise a factual resident of Canada, meaning you maintain   significant residential ties with Canada, you may be considered a   deemed non-resident of Canada for tax purposes. [...] I'll emphasize that ""considered to be a resident of Canada for income tax purposes"" means you do need to file Canadian income tax returns. The Notes section does indicate the potential treaty exemption that you mentioned, but it is only a potential exemption. Note the emphasis (theirs, not mine) on the word ""may"" in the last paragraph above. Please don't assume ""may"" is necessarily favorable with respect to your situation. The other side of the ""may"" coin is ""may not"". The Determining your residency status page you mentioned in your comment says this: If you want the Canada Revenue Agency's opinion on your residency   status, complete either Form NR74, Determination of Residency Status   (Entering Canada) or Form NR73, Determination of Residency Status   (Leaving Canada), whichever applies, and send it to the International   and Ottawa Tax Services Office. To get the most accurate opinion,   provide as many details as possible on your form. So, given your ties to Canada, I would suggest that until and unless you have obtained an opinion from the Canada Revenue Agency on your tax status, you would be making a potentially unsafe assumption if you yourself elect not to file your Canadian income tax returns based on your own determination. You could end up liable for penalties and interest if you don't file while you are outside of Canada. Tax residency in Canada is not a simple topic. For instances, let's have a look at S5-F1-C1, Determining an Individual’s Residence Status. It's a long page, but here's one interesting piece:  1.44 The Courts have stated that holders of a United States Permanent Residence Card (otherwise referred to as a Green Card) are   considered to be resident in the United States for purposes of   paragraph 1 of the Residence article of the Canada-U.S. Tax   Convention. For further information, see the Federal Court of Appeal's   comments in Allchin v R, 2004 FCA 206, 2004 DTC 6468.   [...] ... whereas you are in the U.S. on a TN visa, intended to be temporary. So you wouldn't be exempt just on the basis of your visa and the existence of the treaty. The CRA would look at other circumstances. Consider the ""Centre of vital interests test"": Centre of vital interests test [...] “If the individual has a permanent home in both Contracting States, it   is necessary to look at the facts in order to ascertain with which of   the two States his personal and economic relations are closer. Thus,   regard will be had to his family and social relations, his   occupations, his political, cultural or other activities, his place of   business, the place from which he administers his property, etc. The   circumstances must be examined as a whole, but it is nevertheless   obvious that considerations based on the personal acts of the   individual must receive special attention. If a person who has a home   in one State sets up a second in the other State while retaining the   first, the fact that he retains the first in the environment where he   has always lived, where he has worked, and where he has his family and   possessions, can, together with other elements, go to demonstrate that   he has retained his centre of vital interests in the first State.” [emphasis on last sentence is mine] Anyway, I'm acquainted with somebody who left Canada for a few years to work abroad. They assumed that living in the other country for that length of time (>2 years) meant they were non-resident here and so did not have to file. Unfortunately, upon returning to Canada, the CRA deemed them to have been resident all that time based on significant ties maintained, and they subsequently owed many thousands of dollars in back taxes, penalties, and interest. If it were me in a similar situation, I would err on the side of caution and continue to file Canadian income taxes until I got a determination I could count on from the people that make the rules."

negative: You're doing business in the US and derive income from the US, so I'd say that yes, you should file a non-resident tax return in the US. And in Connecticut, as well, since that's where you're conducting business (via your domestic LLC registered there). Since you paid more than $600 to your contractor, you're probably also supposed to send a 1099 to him on that account on behalf of your LLC (which is you, essentially, if you're the only member).

negative: I did this for a few years and the best way I found was via http://xe.com/ It uses a bank transfer from your UK bank to xe.com (no fees from bank or xe). On the Canadian side, they use EFT (Electronic Fund Transfer, no fees from bank or xe.com) They have very competitive exchange rates. To make a transfer, you log in to xe and arrange your transfer. This locks in the rate and tells you how many GBP you need to transfer in. Then, transfer your money from the UK bank into xe using the details they provide. Two or three days later the money shows up in your Canadian acount. There's a bit of paperwork they need to set it up but it's not very hard. After it's set up, everything else is online. Enjoy!

negative: "You'll need to read carefully the German laws on tax residency, in many European (and other) tax laws the loss of residency due to absence is conditioned on acquiring residency elsewhere. But in general, it is possible to use treaties and statuses so that you end up not being resident anywhere, but it doesn't mean that the income is no longer taxed. Generally every country taxes income sourced to it unless an exclusion applies, so if you can no longer apply the treaty due to not being a resident - you'll need to look for general exclusions in the tax law. I don't know how Germany taxes scholarships under the general rules, you'll have to check it. It is possible that they're not taxed. Many people try to raise the argument of ""I'm not a resident"" to avoid income taxes altogether on earnings on their work - this would not work. But with a special kind of income like scholarship, which may be exempt under the law, it may. Keep in mind, that the treaty has ""who is or was immediately before visiting a Contracting State a resident of the other Contracting State"" language in some relevant cases, so you may still apply it in the US even if no longer resident in Germany."

negative: As an Indian resident you can open an Resident Foreign Currency Account, i.e. an USD account. This facility is provided by all major banks.  I am not sure if PayPal would transfer money to these accounts or would convert. The alternative is to give this account number along with other Bank details to the company in US and ask them to send money via remittance services.

negative: You need to file IRS Form 1040-NR. The IRS's website provides instructions.

negative: "It depends on the rules in the specific places you stay.  Specific places being countries or states.   Some states may consider pension payments to be taxable income, others may not.  Some may consider presence for X days to constitute residency, X days may be 60 days in a calendar year whether or not those days are continuous.   It doesn't matter so much where your mailbox or mail handling service is located, it matters: You may owe taxes in more than one place.  Some states will allow you to offset other states' taxes against theirs.  Some states in the US are really harsh on income taxes.  It's my understanding that if you own real estate in New York, all of your income, no matter the source, is taxable income in New York whether or not you were ever in the state that year. Ultimately, you can't just put up your hand and say, ""that's my tax domicile so I'm exempt from all your taxes.""  There is no umbrella US regulation on this topic, the states determine who they consider to be residents and how those residents are to be taxed. While it's possible you may be considered a resident of multiple states and owe income taxes in multiple states, it's equally possible that you won't meet the residency criteria for any state regardless of whether or not that state has an income tax.  The issue you face, as addressed in @Jay's answer, Oklahoma will consider you a resident of OK until you have established residency somewhere else."

negative: If your parents were resident but not domiciled in the UK and were using the Remittance Basis in the year when they got the income or gains from which they're now lending you this money that could trigger UK income tax and or capital gains tax on the money the transfer to the UK whether to an account of their own or directly to your account. If they were non resident or using Arising Basis or it was UK income then this is not an issue.

negative: "If you are a resident of New Zealand for tax purposes, you will be taxed in New Zealand on all of your ""worldwide income"". This is income derived from New Zealand as well as income derived from all other countries Source: http://www.ird.govt.nz/international/nzwithos/income/overseas-income-index.html Another link that will be of use is this: https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/international-tax-for-individuals/work-out-your-tax-residency/ This is Australia's rules on if you qualify as a resident for tax purposes.  I am not an accountant or a lawyer but my reading of this is you actually have to reside in Australia to be considered a resident - whether or not you have a bank account there doesn't appear to play into it. Additionally, Australia and NZ have a ""double taxation agreement"", explained here: http://www.ird.govt.nz/yoursituation-nonres/double-tax/ So this should prevent you from being taxed in both places."

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

negative: The catch is that you're doing a form of leveraged investing. In other words, you're gambling on the stock market using money that you've borrowed. While it's not as dangerous as say, getting money from a loan shark to play blackjack in Vegas, there is always the chance that markets can collapse and your investment's value will drop rapidly. The amount of risk really depends on what specific investments you choose and how diversified they are - if you buy only Canadian stocks then you're at risk of losing a lot if something happened to our economy. But if your Canadian equities only amount to 3.6% of your total (which is Canada's share of the world market), and you're holding stocks in many different countries then the diversification will reduce your overall risk.  The reason I mention that is because many people using the Smith Maneuver are only buying Canadian high-yield dividend stocks, so that they can use the dividends to accelerate the Smith Maneuver process (use the dividends to pay down the mortgage, then borrow more and invest it). They prefer Canadian equities because of preferential tax treatment of the dividend income (in non-registered accounts). But if something happened to those Canadian companies, they stand to lose much of the investment value and suddenly they have the extra debt (the amount borrowed from a HELOC, or from a re-advanceable mortgage) without enough value in the investments to offset it. This could mean that they will not be able to pay off the mortgage by the time they retire!

negative: "Ed: Saw your comment, thank you. The short answer (a rough simplification), seems to be that you pay PA income tax for income made in PA. You pay IL income tax for income made in IL, not income made across both states. And you make sure the IL amount paid is correct via a credit calculated on Schedule CR. It looks to me (bear with me, I am no expert on tax law in IL, PA, or in general, so consult a professional for ""good"" advice :), like you basically do this on Schedule CR: It looks like there may be some more pertinent info on Publication 111, so that may potentially change the math a bit too. This check is 2014 income, during which you are a resident of IL. It's income from a PA employer. You must file a tax return in PA regardless, since you ""earned income in PA"". Did your former employer withhold PA income taxes on this particular paycheck? I'm not seeing where it says you should not include tax withheld; could you please point that out? Perhaps they mean you should only include tax actually considered ""due"" on the PA tax return. From IL's Schedule CR instructions: What is the purpose of Schedule CR?   Schedule CR, Credit for Tax Paid to Other States, allows you to   take a credit for income taxes you paid to other states on income   you received while a resident of Illinois. You are allowed this credit   only if you filed a required tax return with the other state. You must   use information from the tax return you filed with the other state to   complete Schedule CR.   ...    What taxes qualify for the credit?   Taxes that qualify for the credit are income taxes you paid to another   state of the United States,"

negative: "You've asked a number of questions. I can answer a few. I've quoted your question before each answer.   What are the ins and outs of a foreigner like myself buying rental   property in Canada? This is a pretty broad question which can address location, finances, basic suggestions etc.  Here's some things to consider: Provincial considerations:  Some ins and outs will depend on what province you are considering and what area in that Province. If you plan on owning in Montreal, for example, that's in the province of Quebec and that means you (or someone) will need to be able to operate in the French language. There are other things that might be different from province to province. See stat info below. Canadian vs. US Dollar:  Now might be a great time to buy property in Canada since the Canada dollar is weak right now. To give you an idea, at a non-cash rate of 1.2846, a little over $76,000 US will get you over $100k Canadian. That's using the currency converter at rbcroyalbank.com.  Taxes for non-resident rental property owners:  According to the T4144 Income Tax Guide for Electing Under Section 216 – 2015: ""When you receive rental income from real or immovable property in Canada, the payer, such as the tenant or a property manager, has to withhold non-resident tax at the rate of 25% on the gross rental income paid or credited to you. The payer has to pay us the tax on or before the 15th day of the month following the month the rental income is paid or credited to you."" If you prefer to send a separate Canadian tax return, you can choose to elect under section 216 of the Income Tax Act. A benefit of this way is that ""electing under section 216 allows you to pay tax on your net Canadian-source rental income instead of on the gross amount. If the non-resident tax withheld by the payer is more than the amount of tax payable calculated on your section 216 return, [they] will refund the excess to you.""  You can find this guide at Canada Revenue's site: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/t4144/README.html Stats: A good place for stats is the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC).  So, if you are interesting in vacancy rates for example, you can see a table that will show you that the vacancy rate in Ontario is 2.3% and in British Columbia it's 1.5%.  However, in New Brunswick it's 8%. The rate for metropolitan areas across Canada is 2.8%.  If you want to see or download this table showing the vacancy rates by province and also by metropolitan areas, go to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation site http://www.cmhc.ca/housingmarketinformation/.  You can get all sorts of housing information, reports and market information there.  I've done well with Condos/Town-homes and would be interested in the   same thing over there. Is it pretty much all the same? See the stat site mentioned above to get market info about condos, etc. What are the down payment requirements? For non-owner occupied properties, the down payment is at least 20%. Update in response to comments about being double taxed: Regarding being taxed on income received from the property, if you claim the foreign tax credit you will not be double taxed. According to the IRS, ""The foreign tax credit intends to reduce the double tax burden that would otherwise arise when foreign source income is taxed by both the United States and the foreign country from which the income is derived.""  (from IRS Topic 856 - Foreign Tax Credit)   About property taxes: From my understanding, these would not be claimed for the foreign tax credit but can be deducted as business expenses. There are various exceptions and stipulations based on your circumstance, so you need to read Publication 856 - Foreign Tax Credit for Individuals.  Here's an excerpt: ""In most  cases,  only  foreign  income  taxes  qualify for the foreign tax credit. Other taxes, such as foreign real and personal property taxes, do not qualify.  But  you  may  be  able  to  deduct  these other  taxes  even  if  you  claim  the  foreign  tax credit for foreign income taxes. In most cases, you can deduct these other taxes  only  if  they  are  expenses incurred  in  a trade  or  business  or  in  the  production  of  income.  However,  you  can  deduct  foreign  real property taxes that are not trade or business expenses  as  an  itemized  deduction  on  Schedule A (Form 1040)."" Disclaimers:  Sources: IRS Topic 514 Foreign Tax Credit and Publication 856 Foreign Tax Credit for Individuals"

negative: It essentially works the same. Some states don't have any income taxes at all (like Florida or Wyoming), some only tax income derived in the state, and some tax worldwide income (like New York or California), similarly to the Federal income taxes. However, if you're living abroad (i.e.: you're a citizen or resident of a foreign country and you live there), you're not considered resident by most of the states (check with your state for specific definitions) for most, if not all, the time of your residency abroad. In such case - you don't pay state taxes, only Federal. You have to remember that foreign income exclusion doesn't apply to the income from your 401k, so you pay the taxes as if you're in the US. You can not use foreign taxes credit as well (but depending on the tax treaty with the country you're moving to, your 401k income might not be taxable there). In some cases you may end up with double taxation: US will tax your 401k income as you're a US citizen and the income is derived from the US sources, and the foreign country will tax the income based on its own laws. This is not a tax advice, and this answer was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used by any taxpayer, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.

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

negative: "As I understand it the usual rule is that the country you are ""resident"" in taxes you on your worldwide income but gives you credit for foreign tax paid. The country you are not normally resident in taxes you only on income from that one country. Note that residence for tax purposes can have different rules from residence for immigration purposes. At least in the UK being resident in the country for more than half the tax year normally makes you tax resident and there are some other cases too. I expect other countries are similar but the details of the rules and the start/end of the tax years may vary. I don't know the exact rules for finland and belgium but I expect your Belgian taxes will be based on your Belgian income only and your Finnish taxes will be based on your worldwide income but with a credit for your Belgian taxes. Engaging accountants from both countries to confirm the exact rules and what exactly you should put on the forms is almost certainly a good idea."

negative: You won't be paying any taxes for income generated in the US as long as you are not-resident in India. You pay US taxes. You can file a null return in India just in case (all zeroes). If you have any income in India - bank deposits in your name, house rental income and so on - that needs to be declared and tax needs to be paid in India.

negative: "New York will want to you to pay taxes on income from ""New York sources"". I'm not sure what this means to a freelance web developer.  If your wife is doing freelance web development under the same business entity as she did in New York (ie. a New York sole proprietor, corporation, etc), you probably do need to file. From nonresident tax form manual: http://tax.ny.gov/pdf/2011/inc/it203i_2011.pdf If you were a nonresident of New York State, you are subject to New   York State tax on income you received from New York State sources in   2011. If you were a resident of New York State for only part of 2011, you are subject to New York State tax on all income you received while   you were a resident of the state and on income you received from New   York State sources while  you were a nonresident.  To compute the amount of tax due, use Form IT-203, Nonresident and   Part-Year Resident Income Tax Return. You will compute a base tax as   if you were a full-year  resident, then determine the percentage of   your income that is subject to New York State tax and the amount of   tax apportioned to New York State."

negative: "Within Canada, to send money to a friend online, you'd typically use the Interac e-Transfer service offered by most Canadian banks & credit unions. Here's a list of those that support it. My bank charges $1.50 to send money via Interac e-Transfer, and zero to receive. Charges are likely to vary by bank. FWIW, Interac is a not-for-profit organization & network founded about 30 years ago by some major Canadian banks to facilitate ATM, debit, and other electronic financial transactions within Canada. It's also possible at some banks to set up another person's bank account as a ""personal payee"" — at which point the account becomes available as a bill payment candidate in your online banking. I know at least three of the ""Big Five"" banks have this functionality. I use it at my own bank, but only for payees who also bank at my institution, and I'm not sure if it works between banks. You'll need to ask your candidate banks if they have such a feature, and whether it costs anything. The nice thing about the ""personal payee"" functionality is that, at least at my bank, there's no cost, so for recurring transfer scenarios it can keep costs down. To send payments outside of Canada, wire transfers remain an option – but doing so through a Canadian bank may be expensive. There exist some non-bank wire transfer providers that have more competitive fees and exchange rates.  PayPal remains an option as well."

negative: "Do I need to pay taxes in India in this scenario? For India tax purposes, you would still qualify as ""Resident Indian"". As a resident Indian you have to pay taxes on Global income. It is not relevant whether you transfer the money back to India to keep in US. The income is generated and taxable.  Depending on your contract, presumably you are working as a free lance; certain expenses are allowed to be deducted from your income, for example if you purchase equipment to help carry out the work, stay / entertainment costs, etc. Consult a professional CA who should be able to guide you on what is eligible and what is not. The balance along with your other income will be taxed as per tax brackets. There is exemption for certain category of workers, mostly in entertainment industry where such income is not taxable. This does not apply to your case."

negative: "Tax US corporate ""persons (citizens)"" under the same regime as US human persons/citizens, i.e., file/pay taxes on all income earned annually with deductions for foreign taxes paid.  Problem solved for both shareholders and governments.  [US Citizens and Resident Aliens Abroad - Filing Requirements](https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/us-citizens-and-resident-aliens-abroad-filing-requirements)  >If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien living or traveling outside the United States, **you generally are required to file income tax returns, estate tax returns, and gift tax returns and pay estimated tax in the same way as those residing in the United States.**  Thing is, we know solving this isn't the point.  It is to misdirect and talk about everything, but the actual issues, i.e., the discrepancy between tax regimes applied to persons and the massive inequality it creates in tax responsibility.  Because that would lead to the simple solutions that the populace need/crave.  My guess is most US human persons would LOVE to pay taxes only on what was left AFTER they covered their expenses."

negative: For example, if the Dow, S&P 500, NASDAQ are all down does that necessarily mean the Canadian stock will get negatively impacted? Or is it primarily impacted by the Canadian market? The TWMJF stock makes up a very small part of the Canadian market so it affects the overall market, but this doesn't mean that the overall market affects this stock. So then the answer is: no, the TWMJF stock price will not necessarily follow either US or Canadian market indexes.  However, there can be major events which can affect the markets, including the stocks which make up the markets. TWMJF will probably be more sensitive to Canadian events than US events.

negative: It is absolutely feasible to move your savings into Canada. There are a few ways you can do it. However it is unlikely you will benefit or avoid risk by doing so. You could directly hold your savings in the CAD. Investing in Canadian bonds achieves a similar goal as holding your money in the CAD. By doing so you will be getting re-payed with CAD. Some Canadian companies also trade on US markets. In addition some brokerage firms allow you to trade on Canadian markets. The problem with any of the options is the assumption that Canadian banks will fare better then US banks. The entire globe is very dependent on each other, especially the more developed nations. If large US banks were to fail it would create a domino effect which would spiral into a global credit crunch. It wouldn't matter if your invested in Canadian companies or US companies they would all suffer as would the global economy. So it would probably be more valid to refer to your question - enter link description here If you are referring to weather the Canadian bonds would be a safer investment over US Treasuries it would all depend on the scenario at hand. Investors would probably flock to both treasuries.

negative: Dom & Vinnie Briarcliff Yonkers- Best Italian Restaurant Westchester Country, NY Yonkers Avenue, Yonkers offers Pizza, Pasta, Salad, Specialty Sandwiches nr Nepperhan Ave, Best Pizzeria Feeding Westchesterites, Desserts, Appetizer, Soup, Sides, Burger, lunch and dinner with easy online ordering and Fast Delivery

negative: We've been in this situation for about 10 years now.  We don't have to send money back to Canada very often, but when we do, we typically just write a US$ check/cheque and send it to a relative back home to cash for us.  We've found that the Canadian banks are much more familiar with US currency than vice versa, and typically have better exchange rates than many of the other options.  That said, we haven't done an exhaustive search for the best deal. If you haven't left Canada yet, you might consider opening up a US funds account at the same bank as your Canadian funds account if the bank will allow you to transfer money between the accounts.  I haven't priced out that option, so I don't know what the exchange rate would look like there. Also, you didn't ask about this, but if you have any RRSP accounts in Canada, make sure they're with a broker that is licensed to accept trades from US-based customers.  Otherwise, you won't be able to move your money around to different investments within the RRSP. Once you're resident in the US, you will no longer be able to open any new accounts in Canada, but you will be able to maintain the ones you already have.

negative: "Canada did not introduce income taxes before World War I.  Specifically deficits forced them to in the later part of the war: The Conservatives opposed income tax as they wanted to attract immigrants primarily from the United Kingdom and the United States, as opposed to Eastern Europe, and they wanted to give their preferred choice of newcomers some incentive to come to Canada. Wartime expenses forced the Tories to re-consider their options and in 1917 the wartime government imposed a ""temporary"" income tax to cover expenses. Despite the new tax the Canadian government ran up considerable debts during the war and were unable to forego income tax revenue after the war ended. With the election of the Mackenzie King-led Liberal government, much of the National Policy was dismantled and income tax has remained in place ever since. So from a Canadian point of view they were introduced as part of the war effort."

negative: As NRI/PIO (Non-Resident Indian/Person of Indian Origin), the overseas income and transfers in foreign currency are exempt from Indian income taxes. However, the account in India has to be designated NRE or FCNR. There are three kind of accounts that an NRI can maintain Interest earned in NRE and FCNR accounts is exempt from income taxes. Interest earned in NRO accounts is not exempt from income taxes, in fact banks would withhold about 30% of interest (TDS). The exact tax liability would depend upon income generated in India and TDS could be applied towards that liability when the tax returns are filed. There are other implications also of designating the account as NRE or NRO. NRE accounts can only be funded via inward remittance of permitted foreign currency e.g. deposit USD/GBP. So proceeds like rental income, pension etc. that are generated in INR within India can't be deposited in this account. The money deposited in NRE account can grow tax free and can be converted back in any foreign currency freely. On the other hand NRO accounts can be funded through both inward remittance of permitted foreign currency or local income e.g. rental, pension etc. All the amount in this account is treated as Indian originated INR (even if remitted in foreign currency) and thus is taxed as any other bank account. The amount in this account is subject to the annual cap of convertibility of USD 1 million. Both NRE and NRO accounts are maintained in INR and can be Saving and Term Deposit. Any remittance made to these accounts in any foreign currency is converted to INR at the time of deposit and is maintained in INR. FCNR account are held in foreign currency and can only be Term Deposit. Official definitions: Accounts for Non Resident Indians (NRIs) and Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs)

negative: "Taxes are a tool for achieving social policy goals. While Americans consider ""Socialism"" to be a curse, the US is in fact quite socialistic. Mostly towards corporations, but sometimes even the normal people, not only the ""Corporation are people, my friend"" (M. Romney) get some discounts. The tax deduction on mortgage interest comes as a tool to encourage Americans to own their homes. It is important, socially, for people to own their home to be independent, and in general contributes to the stability of the society. As anything, when taken to the extreme, it in fact achieves exactly the opposite, as we've seen in 2008, but when balanced - works well. Capital gain is taxed in the US, because it is income. Generally, any income is taxed. However, gain sourced from the sale of primary residence is excluded, up to a certain (quite large) amount from this tax (if lived in the residence long enough - 3 of the last 5 years prior to sale). This, again, to encourage Americans to upgrade their houses and make it easier for Americans to relocate when needed (sell one house and buy another without losing cash on taxes). As to ""asset producing income"" - that is true in the US as well. You cannot deduct your personal expenses, in general. Mortgage interest on primary residence is a notable exception, because it serves a social cause. Similarly, medical expenses are allowed as a deduction, if they're above certain limit, and many other things (for example - if a US person totals his car, and insurance doesn't cover the loss - it is tax deductible, above certain limit, the higher the income - the higher the limit). These are purely social policy breaks. Socialism, something Americans like to have, and love to hate. Many ""anti-socialists"" in the US are in fact taking advantage of these specific tax breaks the most, because for rich folks these are limited or non-existent (mortgage interest limited up to 1 million, medical expenses are allowed only above certain percentage of income, etc)."