query: Why are auto leases stubbornly strict about visa status and how to work around that?

positive: "Uh, you want to lease a car through a dealer? That is the worst possible way to obtain a car. Dealers love leases because it allows them to sell a car for an unnegotiated price and to hide additional fees. It's the most profitable kind of sale for them. The best option would be to buy a used car off of Craigslist or eBay, then sell it again the same way when you leave. If you sell the car for what you paid, then you get the car for a year for free. If you are determined to go through with the expensive, risky and annoying plan of leasing a car, then you should use a leasing agent. I recommend reading some car buying guides before going out into the wilderness with the tigers and bears. Comment on Leasing Tricks Don't get tricked by the ""interest rate"" game. The whole interest thing is just a distraction to trick you into think you are getting some kind of reasonable deal. The leasing company makes most of their money from fees. For example, if you get into an accident it is a big payday for them. The average person thinks they will never get into an accident, but the reality is that most people get into an accident sooner or later. They also collect big penalties for ""maintenance failures"". Forget to change the oil? BOOM! money. Forget to comply with manufacture recall? BOOM! more money. Forget to do the annual service? BOOM! more money. Scratch the car? BOOM! more money. The original car mats are missing? BOOM! you just paid $400 for a set of mats that cost the leasing company $25 bucks. The leasing company is counting on the fact that 99% of people will not maintain the car correctly or will damage it in some way. They also usually have all kinds of other bogus fees, so-called ""walk-away fees"", ""disposition fees"", ""initiation fees"". Whatever they think they can get away with. The whole system is calculated to screw you."

positive: When getting a car always start with your bank or credit union. They are very likely to offer better loan rate than the dealer. Because you start there you have a data point so you can tell if the dealer is giving you a good rate.  Having the loan approved before going to the dealer allows you to negotiate the best deal for the purchase price for the car. When you are negotiating price, length of loan, down payment, and trade in it can get very confusing to determine if the deal is a good one. Sometimes you can also get a bigger rebate or discount because to the dealer you are paying cash. The general advice is that a lease for the average consumer is a bad deal. You are paying for the most expensive months, and at the end of the lease you don't have a car. With a loan you keep the car after you are done paying for it. Another reason to avoid the lease. It allows you to purchase a car that is two or three years old. These are the ones that just came off lease. I am not a car dealer, and I have never needed a work visa, but I think their concern is that there is a greater risk of you not being in the country for the entire period of the lease.

positive: In the U.S., most car dealers provide lease financing through one company (usually a subsidiary of the auto manufacturer). Whereas they provide loan financing through a variety of companies, some of whom offer very high interest rate loans and sell the loans as collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Have you checked whether Chase or First Tech Credit Union offers a suitable car lease?

negative: "We're discussing the ""why"" and ""how"" USA companies [ab]use H1B visas, when it is so clear and so obvious that companies do this purely to lower costs, even if there are US workers willing to do the work. The H1B visa is unequivically part of the race to the bottom. You defended it as, ""in an ideal economy...."" without presenting your idea that way to u/Yangoose and even told u/Yangoose they were wrong about how the economy works.  You didn't present your ideas as part of a hypothetical government that had far less regulation or far less corruption than the USA has to u/Yangoose"

negative: If John signs the lease he is entitled to stay there for the duration of the lease regardless of the foreclosure status.   http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/renters-foreclosure-what-are-their-30064.html I would suggest that signing a year lease (even by email), with the plan to leave as early as possible is a good thing.  The key will be to make sure the penalty for leaving early is nothing. John doesn't know the status of the foreclosure, how long it will take, who might own afterwards and a lot of other unknowns.  The worst case is to be unsure of where you are living. Sign the lease, and be secure for one whole year that you know where you will be living.  Spend that year finding a new place to live.   If the bank doesn't offer you clear and obvious ways to submit rent, open an account AT THE BANK and deposit the rent there, on time. You are establishing credibility that you deserve to stay.  You still owe the rent, so pay it. They don't want to be your landlord, but don't let a bank bully you around.

negative: Wells' auto portfolio is 4% of their asset base Wells' auto portfolio yields around 5.5% Wells' auto portfolio is about 15% of their consumer services Wells' auto portfolio is likely around 8% of their net income  After digging into it, I underestimated how much wells Fargo was exposed to the consumer side. You are right - definitely not something to sneeze at, even if I doubt the $800 million hit for damages will by any means cripple the stock to the tune of 15%  Leaving both comments up as a reminder to myself to do more research.

negative: I dont think the author really understands why or how credit bureaus work, why they exist, and therefore where the blame exists for incorrect data. No credit bureau wants incorrect data, for obvious reasons, but it happens. That's one reason why they let you get access to your credit score, to check it the data is correct and make the 'product' (data about you) better. The source of the data is always to blame for something being incorrect though.  That's banks, utilities companies, etc.  A credit bureau can't check any more than they do already. But they can improve how they deal with mistakes or badly matched data. Not sure about how that works in the US, but here in EU there are strict rules about how mistakes are corrected, and how long it takes.  As for storing it in block chain.. That wouldn't really solve OPs problem with credit bureaus. Someone still needs to collect and match data, and that's arguably harder than securing the data in the first place.

negative: As non-EU citizen who went to university in England and also doing an MBA in Spain, I can assure you they are not hard to get. It literally is filling out a form.  I went to university in England because of England's strong university status and I went to university in Spain because I wanted to improve my Spanish.  I'm sure a small percentage of people will maybe go to a different country due to having to fill out a visa application (maybe. We don't know if U.K. will allow visa-free studies for EU), but we don't have any way to measure the *possible* impact (if it even happens) right now.  If visas were such a hurdle then why do so many students from around the world come to the USA and Canada to study? They do it because US and Canada have some of the best universities in the world and students want to improve their English - all factors that British universities still have.  I get it. You don't like Brexit. But just try and look at it objectively.

negative: I have an eight year old Kia Spectra that my wife is after me to replace -- but it hadn't been giving me any trouble at all.  Soon after she started telling me I should replace it soon it started having problems; compressor, tires, and so on.  How did she know? Anyway, so now I'm looking -- not ready to buy yet, but I'm looking.  The reason I won't be leasing is mileage.  I live 45 miles from where I work, so with incidental driving, I put at least 100 miles a day on a car.  That's about 26,000 miles a year if I do nothing but drive back and forth to work. On a monthly basis the lease is advertised as being less than most payments, but that is with a mileage limitation.  Since most leases I've looked at top out the mileage well below that mark I won't be leasing. I am looking at the new cars that are available now -- but I don't plan on buying until next year, and buying a lightly used car that is only a year to two old.  So I'm looking at what I will be buying while I can still find information about them. So yeah, mileage is a strong reason why I'm not considering leasing.

negative: Why? Like someone else already said they are smart with their money and pay taxes like everyone. Why should they be punished for it? How about you don't file for auto insurance claim if you can afford the repair? Your argument is down right stupid.

negative: Full payment is always better than auto-loan if you are prudent with finances. I.E if you take a loan, you are factoring the EMI hence your savings will remain as is. However if you manage well, you can buy the car with cash and at the same time put aside the notional EMI as savings and investments. The other factor to consider is what return your cash is giving. If this more than auto-loan interest rate post taxes, you should opt for loan. For example if auto-loan is 10% and you are getting a return of 15% after taxes on investment then loan is better. Company Car lease depends on terms. More often you get break on taxes on the EMI component. But you have to buy at the end of lease period and re-register the car in your name, so there is additional cost. Some companies give lease at very favourable rates. Plus if you leave the job lease has to be broken and it becomes more expensive.

negative: Just tell your bank where you're going so they don't lock your account, and then take your Visa, and take enough cash to survive if something happens to your Visa account (sometimes banks lock them anyways out of idiocy). I usually take about 600 bucks cash for a week excursion (enough for food and a shack, or a mansion if you're in Asia). I figure, I'm carrying my passport which is worth thousands to criminals abroad around my neck. Why worry about carrying a little cash. As far as the Visa goes, just make sure your bank doesn't charge enormous fees for currency conversion. As far as carrying the local currency goes. I don't recommend it. Just figure out the conversion rate, and you'll save about  5% of your money from fees converting to and from. If you're going to Russia, do convert your currency first.

negative: If you itemize your deductions then the interest that you pay on your primary residence is tax deductible. Also realestate tax is also deductible. Both go on Schedule A. The car payment is not tax deductible.  You will want to be careful about claiming business deduction for home  or car. The IRS has very strict rules and if you have any personal use you can disqualify the deduction. For the car you often need to use the mileage reimbursement rates. If you use the car exclusively for work, then a lease may make more sense as you can expense the lease payment whereas with the car you need to follow the depreciation schedule.  If you are looking to claim business expense of car or home, it would be a very good idea to get professional tax advice to ensure that you do not run afoul of the IRS.

negative: "> You mentioned the customer experience randomly in some parts, then threw in Wikileaks in others.  Only random if you don't understand what I'm saying. But I'll just give up instead of repeating again.  > Visa and Mastercard have relationships with banks and/or processors, who have relationships with merchants. […] Cardholders aren't Visa and MC's clients  I still don't understand. Why is the indirect relationship merchant->processor/bank->VISA so much stronger than cardholder->bank->VISA? Presumably VISA also tell banks not to allow *hardholders* to do illegal stuff with their cards?  >> The WikiLeaks blockade was clearly political. What makes you say otherwise? And this is political.  > So your argument is that anything political is the same as anything else political?  No, it's that the wikileaks thing was clearly political, and trying to say ""that's not relevant because it was a legal matter"" doesn't make sense since everything after ""because"" was wrong.  > As long as their reasons for doing so aren't discriminatory based on status in a protected class, they are (and should be) allowed to refuse service.  I'm not saying they're legally in the wrong."

negative: Please explain how does this hurt the consumer? If anything, I'd say Amazon has a solid track record of *empowering* consumers. They absolutely are bad news for some very stubbornly offline-only mom & pops, but not for consumers.

negative: Nothing happens. A bank is a business; your relationship with the bank doesn't change because your visa or immigration status changes. Money held in the account is still held in the account. Interest paid on the account is still taxable. And so on. If the account is inactive long enough, abandoned account rules may apply, but that still has nothing to do with your status.

negative: As much as people on the internet and ZH-like blogs like to harp on auto deliquencies and other narrow metrics as broader statements about how life around us is all a sham, I feel this article does a good job at discussing the mitigants here.  Notably: 1) that the sub-prime auto market is rather small, so while delinquencies may rise it won't represent a catalyst for a broader financial crisis.   2) The securitized products Santander and others are putting together are structured in a way to account for these defaults and loss rates, so while the relative uptick in default rates is interesting to note, it doesn't necessarily spell doom in absolute terms.   3) The fact that many auto dealers don't verify income isn't uncommon and in fact an industry standard practice due to point #2 above. The statement these dealers have been lying about incomes and/or is not verifying incomes certainly pulls at the heart strings of the 2008 Housing Crisis, but when discussed within the context of how the auto lending market works, it isn't nearly as scary as those statements would suggest in isolation.

negative: Alex's answer is very helpful. However, I would like to add why it might be convenient to use money factor instead of APR when computing lease payments. Money factor makes it easier to compute the lease payments manually. Lease payments have two parts: Here is how to calculate them: Where, This is a computation that anyone can perform without any tools.

negative: Heres what you need to know: This can be prevented by what a previous renter did to us. This is a smart, kind of a jerky way to do it but its VERY SMART, as long as your property is worth it, raise the rent higher. You must have a very nice, clean, everything working, house. You must be willing to have anything fixed. this is all to make up the high rent. You don't want the rent way out of proportion but just a bit higher. This is because, more than likely, people who are going to pay for a higher rent don't usually leave a mess, (higher class families vs lower class people living alone..) What might also help from the risk of damage is create a fee (also what my renter did) of any painting needed done like finger prints on the wall, nails in the wall, carpet stains, etc when the tenant is ready to move out. I would suggest a required professional carpet cleaning as well when lease is up. My renter was very nice, but very strict and did all these things. He has a few properties that are very nice middle class houses. Your home sounds like it could easily pass for this kind of business depending on where you live. If the tenant leaves before his lease is up you could charge a 1-2 month's rent to be able to find a new tenant. Be proactive on finding a tenant before the lease is up.  This would be a bit of work to first set up and usually maintain, but its a good thing to think about.

negative: The problem is that both the H1b and L1 visas have problems and are gamed and this is what is probably causing resentment.  H1b visas have quotas that run out in one day a year, it means for a company to employ someone with skills they need to throw a bunch of them at this yearly crap shoot and hope they manage to win a visa for one of them.  The rest will have to wait another year to try again.  This is not how businesses employ, if they find a highly skilled foreign worker with skills they can't find in the US and are even willing to pay him more than anyone in the US, they can't unless they want to play that yearly gamble.  A highly skilled employee also don't want to sit around waiting for it, so they'll work for someone else.  The L1 visa at least allows large multi national companies to first employ people at one of their foreign offices for a year before carting them over to the US.  It's also good in a way to be able to figure out if the employee is as good as he seems on paper and in interviews, even before he gets to the USA.  This means most of the better skills probably enter the USA this way, which leaves the H1b visas to consultancies who systematically game the system.  They find a lot of young graduate applicants who are willing to wait for the yearly crapshoot and then take all those who win a visa and then employ them and contract them out 'competitively'.  The L1 visa can also be systematically gamed, those who don't win an H1b visa could be working for a foreign office of this consultancy in the meantime and then get a transfer to the USA on an L1 visa.  I think what needs to happen is that the H1b visa bar should be raised, e.g. a minimum salary, and then the quotas should be spread over a year like they do in the UK.  That means companies have more certainty that they can actually bring a skilled worker in, and it would make sure it's a skilled worker and not someone who is just a cheaper worker.  Then that would ideally shift the route for most skilled workers to H1b instead of L1 visas, which means L1 visas can be tightened to make sure they are used appropriately too, for example having to have worked for the company for 2 years instead of one and also a minimum salary.

negative: There were several incidences of cash shortages in the Danish system recently. On particular saturdays when the streets were bloated with shoppers, you could see the queues for the ATMs stretching for 40-50 yards, and people shaking their heads about why their cards didnt work in the shops.  They have a separate national system to visa called Dankort which everyone is very proud of. But it is curiously prone to failures from time to time. Large cash transactions (over 10,000 DKK) are monitored and questioned verbally when withdrawn or deposited in banks. Interesting also how Danish banks are the most heavily leveraged in Europe...

negative: Actually it is because of trade tariffs/import tax which the US charges on automobiles. The big auto manufacturers in the US have lobbied extensively to help increase the cost of vehicles manufactured overseas and imported into the US. So as a work around, international auto manufacturers set up plants within the US so as to avoid paying some of the import tariffs.

negative: This is not shocking news actually. Nothing happened to these banks that made them lose their ratings. Rather, it's the rating agencies that have set up more strict rules, especially when it comes to triple A status.  Specifically, it's no longer possible that banks or similar institutions can have a triple A status.This effectively means that only the richer countries can be triple A.

negative: "Discounting premiums based on some past history is not unique to auto policies.  Other insurers will discount premiums based on past claims history they just don't shout about it as a marketing means to attract customers.  Life insurance is underwritten based on your health history; if you want to consider your ""preferred"" underwriting status based on your clear health history a ""discount based on your healthy habits"" you're free to do so.  All sorts of lines of insurance use all sorts of things to determine an underwriting classes.  The fact that auto insurers trumpet specific discounts does not mean the same net effect is not available on other lines of coverage. Most states require auto rates and discounts to be filed and approved with some state regulator, some regulatory bodies even require that certain discounts exist.  You could likely negotiate with your business insurance underwriters about a better rate and if the underwriters saw fit they could give you a discount.  Auto insurers can offer discounts but are generally beholden to whatever rate sheet is on file with the applicable regulatory body. For the person who downvoted, here's a link to a spreadsheet outlining one of the CA department of insurance allowable rating factor sheets related to auto insurance."

negative: >If everyone in auto manufacturing labor was replaced by a cheap robot tomorrow, then cars would be cheaper.  Why?  *All* the auto manufacturers installed robots, so they've *all* got the same incentive to keep prices the same and pocket the additional productivity as profits.  Auto manufacturers *have* switched largely to robotic labor.  Prices have stayed mostly the same, adjusted for inflation.  Quality has increased, which is good, but fewer and fewer people can afford the higher-quality vehicles due to lack of jobs and other factors in the cost of living rising (housing, health-care, education, energy).  >video game and plastic surgery business, robot manufacturing, and robot programming  Actually, programmers work *more* than auto workers.  Auto workers were unionized and thus had a 40-hour work-week, sometimes even with lunch breaks out of work hours instead of leisure hours!

negative: Sure, they can still vacation in the US. However working in the US requires a seperate visa than a vacation visa which requires that they pay taxes on income earned within the US etc.   I'm fairly certain using complicated intelectual property tax tricks to avoid paying any taxes in the US might be a violation of that visa.   Actually, why can't I owe myself a large amount of money in another country that I'm paying myself back slowly thus zeroing my taxable income?

negative: "I usually recommend along these lines.  If you are going to drive the same car for many years, then buy. Your almost always better to buy, and then drive a car for 10 years than to lease and replace it every 2 years. If you want a new car every two years then lease. You're usually better off leasing if you're going to replace the car before the auto loan is paid off or shortly there after. Also you can get ""more car"" for the same monthly money via leasing. I honestly would advise you to either buy out your lease, or buy a barely used car. Then drive it for as long as you can. Take the extra money you would spend and spend it on an awesome vacation or something.  Also, if you're only driving 15 miles a day, then get a cheap, but solid car. Again, just my advice."

negative: Matt Levine talked about a cute scam that this resembles, a kind of extended short squeeze. You manipulate up the stock of a company, so that it's obviously way above the fundamental value. Word will get out. Then the shorts come in. But the value remains stubbornly high. All the stock is held by a few insiders, but they didn't manipulate the stock price to do a pump and dump. They did it to milk the shorts on borrow cost.

negative: Its not H1-B visa, its the L1 Visa. L1 Visa have no minimum wage and people working on L1 can get Green Card faster. Some guys I know make around 40k/year in Silicon Valley @ Apple.   H1-B scare is little bit overhyped in comparison to L1 visa. Anyway, people dont do their research and believe only these news channel say. H1-B is really helping US, atleast 60-65% are useful. Even if you a person is hired by H1-B, company has to invest more in HR and lawyer fees as a company by itself would not be able to apply. L1 Visa on other hand has no limit on salary so you can keep a worker at a drastically low rate which would for sure increase your profits. There are no year limit on L1. While H1-B have a max limit of 6 years. (Source: my collegues and USCIS website). Let me know if anything is wrong here .. still researching on this..

negative: "It's a status symbol, but that status isn't about money. It's about virtue signaling, and showing that you ""care"" about the environment. It's the same reason that the Prius didn't sell as well until after it was given a distinctive look, and why nondescript electric versions of Honda's and others don't have similar market share, even when they outperform more visible competitors."

negative: "> But I explicitly mentioned the customer experience, which is completely different and no matter how much you want your industry experience to matter for that, it doesn't affect it.  You mentioned the customer experience randomly in some parts, then threw in Wikileaks in others. If we're talking about the customer experience, we need to drop the payment processors aspect, because the majority of the time, the consumer doesn't even know who processes their card payments let alone care, and again, PayPal is not even close to the only option. If this were 1998 and people were really wary of buying online, then it would be a bigger deal to be banned from PayPal. But it's not 1998, and a ton of people don't care, and there are all kinds of alternatives.  PayPal can deny service all it wants (and it does that on a regular basis) and that in no way means that a business can't accept cards. You're ""customer experience"" premise is flawed. I literally spend all day helping businesses set up credit card processing, and PayPal is a drop in the bucket.   >Could you clarify for me how VISA/MasterCard managed to block a merchant, who presumably wasn't a direct customer (but instead a payment processor customer), but cannot block a card holder? (yes, this is an honest question)  Visa and Mastercard have relationships with banks and/or processors, who have relationships with merchants. Visa and MC's agreements with banks and processors stipulate that those banks and processors can't offer services to companies engaging in illegal activity. Wikileaks was (allegedly) engaging in illegal activity, and it's on that basis that Visa and MC denied service to WL.  Visa and Mastercard have almost nothing to do with cardholders. They don't issue credit cards to cardholders, they aren't the ones that do credit checks to determine creditworthiness, they aren't the ones helping you with your monthly statement or a dispute, etc. Cardholders aren't Visa and MC's clients. When a transaction is run, it's authenticated by the bank that issued the card, not by Visa or MC, and it's the bank, not Visa or MC, that would block transactions or freeze a cardholder account.   >The WikiLeaks blockade was clearly political. What makes you say otherwise? And this is political.  So your argument is that anything political is the same as anything else political? Kind of a stretch..  Wikileaks was denied service by the card brands for allegedly engaging in illegal activity. PayPal is denying service of its own volition, which FYI, it does every day to legal businesses. As long as their reasons for doing so aren't discriminatory based on status in a protected class, they are (and should be) allowed to refuse service."

negative: "Do you know if you were approached by a carrier or a tower vendor?  Edit/addendum:  As someone in the telecommunications industry, I will say that you should NOT lease to a vendor who will sublease the space to the phone companies for a profit.  Depending on the availability of space, the population of the area, and the value of the location, and the amount and size of hardware to be installed, the rental pricing can vary wildly.  A cell site on a choice tall building in Chicago, NYC, Boston, LA, etc., can go for over $25000 per year (more in the case of rental of inside equipment room).  On the other hand, renting space on a church steeple in the middle of a low population rural town, with the equipment installed in a gated paddock at ground level, may only net around $1500 per month.  A ""small cell"" site, which is actually small enough to put on a lamp post or utility pole, can go for around $250-750 per month.  A turf contractor/tower vendor actually leasing a chunk of land to build a structure whose space will be leased out to telecoms should be expected to pay between $2500 and 8000 per month depending on the value of your site.  This value is determined by land form details like elevation, nearby tall forests (can the tower ""see"" over the tree line), terrain contours, and need (local population/tourist/traveler numbers).  Carriers prefer to lease from vendors rather than building their own structures, but roof top sites are a different story.  Carriers are generally more than happy to work with you to lease a portion of your tall building's roof.  FYI...  If they offer to compensate you for the electrical requirements if they cannot get their own meter in, don't worry.  A cell site uses less than 1000 watts, which translates to about $.10-15 per hour in most locations."

negative: I'll read between the lines: you're (justifiably) feeling smart about how you manage your money: debt-free, smart about your spending, saving for retirement, etc. But you're looking at all those fancy cars and feeling a little left out. And Americans especially have a love for automobiles -- it's not just transportation, a car is a status symbol. Yes, some of those people afford their cars just fine. But a lot of people out there are AWFUL about saving and spend recklessly. Americans are notoriously bad at saving for retirement, for example.  So if they aren't saving, where does that money go? They buy stuff they don't need. They live paycheck-to-paycheck. They run up debt. They buy cars. Overspending on cars is so easy to do: leases have low payments, or you can get a 6 year loan. There are many financial tricks for people that think only in terms of monthly payments. So instead of lamenting that the grass is greener as all those BMWs whiz by, smile deeply and enjoy that feeling of sleeping well at night instead of stressing out about the next credit card bill and car payment waiting for you in the mailbox. (And at the same time, if you really want a luxury car and want that to be a priority, you can make it happen and not go broke. Get a late model year certified pre-owned vehicle just out of lease, for example. Saves a ton of money, is still under warranty, and satisfies the lust for luxury.)

negative: "Are “auto income generators” scams or alternative investment channels? I wouldn't go so far as to say that these are scams so much as grossly exaggerated marketing claims. If it sounds too good to be true then it usually is. Auto auto income generator, for example, hosts a site that you can use to produce revenue from ads. In order to get enough traffic to generate the amount of income they promise you have to put in a lot of work, hardly making it ""automatic."" I can't find anything on auto bit coin builder, however. They promise to pay out an outrageously high fixed-return with vague descriptions about ""investments."" This is purely speculation since there is not very much information about this small site, but it may be a ""pyramid"" or ""Ponzi"" scheme. They promise a return higher than traditional investments, offer extra incentives for referrals, and offer a list of excuses for why funds may be pending even though the transfer happens ""INSTANTLY"" on their end. The fact that they only deal in crpytocurrency may also be an attempt to remain anonymous."

negative: My experience is in the United States only. In the past, American Express marketed its products as more exclusive and prestigious than other cards.  There was an attempt to give the impression that cardholders were more qualified financially.  In return, fees were higher both to merchants and to cardholders.  At the time (early 1990's), it was not common to use credit cards for small purchases, such as groceries or fast food.  Credit cards were used for larger purchases such as jewelry or electronics or dinner in a nicer restaurant. Once it became popular to use credit cards for everyday purchases, the demand for customers using credit cards changed to the highest number of people instead of people of higher status.  At that point, Visa (and to a lesser extent Mastercard) transaction volume increased dramatically.  Merchants needed the largest number of customers with cards, not the most financially stable.  As Visa volume grew, and people started using Visa for small purchases, the use of American Express decreased as their habits changed (once someone got used to pulling out Visa, they did it in every situation).  Merchants are less willing to go through the extra hassle of accepting cards that are used by fewer people.  Over time, I suspect this process led to the gap between Visa and American Express. As a merchant, in order to accept credit cards, you have to set up a bank account and maintain a merchant account.  Accepting Visa, MC and Discover can all be done through one account, but American Express has traditionally required a separate relationship, as well as its own set of rules and fees that were generally higher.  Since there are relatively few American Express cardholders compared to Visa, there is doubt about whether it is worth it accept the card.  It depends upon the customer base.  Fine restaurants still generally accept American Express.


query: Applying for and receiving business credit

positive: "I'm afraid the great myth of limited liability companies is that all such vehicles have instant access to credit.  Limited liability on a company with few physical assets to underwrite the loan, or with insufficient revenue, will usually mean that the owners (or others) will be asked to stand surety on any credit. However, there is a particular form of ""credit"" available to businesses on terms with their clients.  It is called factoring. Factoring is a financial transaction   whereby a business sells its accounts   receivable (i.e., invoices) to a third   party (called a factor) at a discount   in exchange for immediate money with   which to finance continued business.   Factoring differs from a bank loan in   three main ways. First, the emphasis   is on the value of the receivables   (essentially a financial asset), not   the firm’s credit worthiness.   Secondly, factoring is not a loan – it   is the purchase of a financial asset   (the receivable). Finally, a bank loan   involves two parties whereas factoring   involves three. Recognise that this can be quite expensive.  Most banks catering to small businesses will offer some form of factoring service, or will know of services that offer it.  It isn't that different from cheque encashment services (pay-day services) where you offer a discount on future income for money now. An alternative is simply to ask his clients if they'll pay him faster if he offers a discount (since either of interest payments or factoring would reduce profitability anyway)."

positive: Banks will usually look at 2 years worth of tax returns for issuing business credit.  If those aren't available (for instance, for recently formed businesses), they will look at the personal returns of the owners. Unfortunately, it sounds like your friend is in the latter category. Bringing in another partner isn't necessarily going to help, either; with only two partners / owners, the bank would probably look at both owners' personal tax returns and credit histories.  It may be necessary to offer collateral. I'm sorry I can't offer any better solutions, but alternative funding such as personal loans from family & friends could be necessary.  Perhaps making them partners in exchange for capital.

negative: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/GST/ Some of the costs are indeed related to the conversion rate, which, as we all know,changes daily. You don't say whether you're using a credit card. If so, some cards do charge foreign transaction fees; some do not. However, Australia, like many European countries, does use a VAT system. Therefore your charges will be increased. Please be aware that these taxes are built into the economic system. In many cases, you van apply for and receive a waiver to be reimbursed if the purchase is made through a duty free store.

negative: "Ally Bank $0 - from their website (emphasis mine): To receive a wire transfer from a non-U.S. bank: Incoming wire transfers from a non-US bank are processed by our   designated receiving bank, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. You'll need to provide the following information to the person or   business sending the wire transfer to you: Receiving Bank: JP Morgan   Chase Bank, N.A. ABA/Routing Number: 021000021 Address: 1 Chase   Manhattan PLZ, New York, NY 10005 SWIFT Code or Bank Identification   Code: CHASUS33 Beneficiary Account Number: 802904391 Beneficiary Name:   List 'Ally Bank' since the wire is being processed by JP Morgan Chase   Bank, N.A. Further Credit: Your Ally Bank Account Number and your name   as it appears on your Ally Bank account. Note: We won't charge you to receive a wire transfer into your Ally   account. https://www.ally.com/help/search.html?term=SWIFT&console=false&context=Help&domain=www.ally.com&section=Help+%26+FAQs Alliant Credit Union $0 - from their website (emphasis mine): Direct international wire transfers  International wire transfers are   handled through our correspondent bank for processing. International   wires can take up to 10 business days to be credited to the receiving   institution. Funds should be wired to: Northern Trust ABA# 071000152 ""Note: US   Banks do not use SWIFT codes. This ABA # is used in place of SWIFT   codes for US Banks."" 50 South La Salle Street, Chicago, IL 60603 For further credit: Alliant Credit Union Account Number 35101804 11545   W. Touhy Avenue, Chicago, IL 60666 For final credit: Member’s name and complete address (No P.O. Box)   Member’s 14-digit account number Destination of funds (checking,   savings or loan number)  Incoming wire transfers: Wire transfers received Monday - Friday,   7:00am - 3:00pm, CT, will be credited to your account the same day.   Wire transfers received after 3:00pm, CT, Monday - Friday and on the   weekend will be credited the next business day. Fees:   We do not charge a fee to receive incoming wire funds. However, the financial institution wiring the funds may charge for this   service. http://www.alliantcreditunion.org/help/receiving-a-wire-transfer-to-your-alliant-account"

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

negative: Generally, unless you're doing a wire transfer, bank transactions are processed in batches overnight. So the credit card company won't be able to confirm your transfer until the next business day (it may take even longer for them to actually receive the money).

negative: The fee to withdraw cash from an ATM using your credit card (as opposed to your debit card) is akin to the merchant fees paid by any business that accepts your credit card as payment. These fees range from around 2.75% of the transaction to upwards of 5%, and are charged to the merchant. The fees are split among the various vendors that provide the infrastructure to conduct the credit card transaction — resulting in the merchant receiving the money and the charge on your credit account. These fees are used by each vendor to cover their costs and, ultimately, generate a profit. (Note: Most vendors in the value chain DO NOT receive any revenue from any interest you may pay on your outstanding balance.) Therefore, when you withdraw cash from an ATM, you are paying the merchant fees instead of whatever merchant you are purchasing goods/services from with the cash withdrawn.

negative: "This is not a problem. SWIFT does not need the Beneficiary Account Currency. The settlement account [or the Instruction amount] is of interest to the Banks. As I understand your agreement with client is they pay you ""X"" EUR. That is what would be specified on the SWIFT along with your details as beneficiary [Account Number etc]. Once the funds are received by your bank in Turkey, they will get EUR. When they apply these funds to your account in USD, they will convert using the standard rates. Unless you are a large customer and have special instructions [like do not credit if funds are received in NON-USD or give me a special rate or Call me and ask me what I want to do etc]. It typically takes 3-5 days for an international wire depending on the countries and currencies involved. Wait for few more days and then if not received, you have to ask your Client to mention to his Bank that Beneficiary is claiming non-receipt of funds. The Bank that initiated the transfer can track the wire not the your bank which is supposed to receive the funds."

negative: It looks like the resource to deciding these is here  Concerning the meals, the law seems a bit vague to me. You can exclude the value of meals you furnish to an employee from the   employee's wages if they meet the following tests. This exclusion does not apply if you allow your employee to choose to   receive additional pay instead of meals. If the whole point of google providing meals is to benefit Google as such people will not leave the googleplex when to obtain meals elsewhere causing increased productivity for Google, then this is covered as a business expense.  (Even if it wasn't, Google would have to notify you that it was providing you a non-expensable benefit, i.e. compensation, by giving you a 1099 at the end of the year). Concerning the other benefits, the only way I could see those items not being taxable benefits is if one of the two applies.

negative: Trade credit is fine and works without a central bank.  All it needs is contract law.  The perversion of that is using trade credit collected from somebody else to pay for goods and services mandated by the government as legal tender.  That creates false savings that expand exponentially.  It probably wouldn't happen much in a free market unless bought at a steep discount by the person receiving it.  This is how collection companies work, they buy receivables from telephone companies or other businesses at a steep discount and try to collect on them.    In a non-fiat system there would be plenty of trade credit, because how else are you going to drum up business?  Personal relationships would ensure that debts were made good, everyone in the economy would be a banker with their own money or goods.    I'm not saying we need libertarian minarchist government here for any of this to work.  The government could intervene from time to time and tax to build infrastructure or raise a military for defence or whatever they really wanted but at least they wouldn't be creating booms and busts with their borrowing activity.

negative: If bank B has a transfer limit set, you bet that there is a nice reason for that. Either risk of fraud, liability, client preferences, profiling, credit scoring, etc, etc. For a bank, the cost of denying something [1] is way lower than the potential damages and liabilities of allowing something to go through.  Regarding your concerns for the ACH, here is the summarized transaction walkthrough source: An Originator– whether that’s an individual, a corporation or another entity– initiates either a Direct Deposit or Direct Payment transaction using the ACH Network. ACH transactions can be either debit or credit payments and commonly include Direct Deposit of payroll, government and Social Security benefits, mortgage and bill payments, online banking payments, person-to-person (P2P) and business-to-business (B2B) payments, to name a few. Instead of using paper checks, ACH entries are entered and transmitted electronically, making transactions quicker, safer and easier.  The Originating Depository Financial institution (ODFI) enters the ACH entry at the request of the Originator.  The ODFI aggregates payments from customers and transmits them in batches at regular, predetermined intervals to an ACH Operator.  ACH Operators (two central clearing facilities: The Federal Reserve or The Clearing House) receive batches of ACH entries from the ODFI.  The ACH transactions are sorted and made available by the ACH Operator to the Receiving Depository Financial Institution (RDFI).  The Receiver’s account is debited or credited by the RDFI, according to the type of ACH entry. Individuals, businesses and other entities can all be Receivers.  Each ACH credit transaction settles in one to two business days, and each debit transaction settles in just one business day, as per the Rules.  Take heed of this like:  The Originator initiates a direct deposit/payment transaction. In your scenario, the originator would be B. But since the transaction amount is higher than the limit, B would not even initiate the ACH transaction. The request would be denied. So the transaction would look like this: [1] Usually this cost comes down to just the processing costs of the denied transaction (and it is rather fail-fast like). For the other parties involved it may have additional costs (missed deadlines, penalties for not fulfilling an obligation, fines, etc), but for the bank that is irrelevant.

negative: "I cannot tell you what is or is not allowed under Islamic law. What I can tell you is that when most investors talk about the ""power of compound interest,"" they are not actually necessarily talking about interest! The idea of the magic of compound interest is that when you receive an interest payment on your investment, you now have a larger investment, earning more interest. Your investment grows exponentially. This doesn't just apply to interest payments, however, but can apply to any type of investment where the profits of the investment cause the investment to get larger.  For example, if you invest in a company's stock, and the value of the stock goes up 10% in a year, after that year your investment is worth more than it was at the beginning. If it goes up another 10% the following year, you have gained more money in the second year than you did in the first. Your gains are compounding, even though interest payments are not involved at all. The same is true if you reinvest dividends or if you use business profit to expand your business, for example.  The term ""power of compound interest"" is so named for historical reasons, but really applies to any type of investment where the investment itself is growing."

negative: "For simplicity, let's start by just considering cash back. In general, cash back from credit cards for personal use is not taxable, but for business use it is taxable (sort of, I'll explain later). The reason is most personal purchases are made with after tax dollars; you typically aren't deducting the cost of what you purchased from your personal income, so if you purchase something that costs $100 and you receive $2 back from the CC company, effectively you have paid $98 for that item but that wouldn't affect your tax bill. However, since businesses typically deduct most expenses, that same $100 deduction would have only been a $98 deduction for business tax purposes, so in this case the $2 should be accounted for. Note, you should not consider that $2 as income though; that would artificially inflate your revenue. It should be treated as a negative expense, similar to how you would handle returning an item you purchased and receiving a CC refund. Now for your specific questions: Part 1: As a small business owner, I wish to attend an annual seminar to improve my business. I have enough credit card reward points to cover the airfare, hotel, and rental car. Will those expenses still be deductible at the value displayed on the receipt? Effectively no, these expenses are not deductible. If you deduct them they will be completely counter-acted by the ""refund"" you receive for the payments. Part 2: Does it matter if those points are accrued on my personal credit card, rather than a business credit card? This is where it gets hairy. Suppose your company policy is that employees make purchases with their own personal credit cards and submit receipts for reimbursement. In this case the employer can simply reimburse and would not know or care if the employee is racking up rewards/points/cashback. The trick is, as the employee, you must always purchase business related items normally so you have receipts to show, and if you receive cashback on the side there seems to be a ""don't ask, don't tell"" rule that the IRS is OK with. It works the same way with heavy business travelers and airline miles- the free vacations those users get as perks are not treated as taxable income. However, I would not go out of my way to abuse this ""loophole"". Typically, things like travel (airfare, hotel, car rental, meals) are expected. But I wouldn't go purchase 100 company laptops on your personal card and ask the company to reimburse you. The company should purchase those 100 laptops on a company card and effectively reduce the sale price by the cashback received. (Or more realistically, negotiate a better discount with your account rep and just cut them a check.) Part 3: Would there be any difference between credit card points and brand-loyalty points? If the rental car were paid for with points earned directly on the rental car company's loyalty system (not a CC), would that yield a different result? There is no difference. Perhaps the simplest way to think about this is you can only deduct an expense that you actually incur. In other words, the expense should show up on a bank or CC statement. This is why when you volunteer and work 10 hours for a charity, you can't call that a ""donation"" of any amount of money because there is no actual payment made that would show up on a bank statement. Instead you could have billed the charity for your 10 hours of work, and then turned around and donated that same amount back to them, but it ends up being a wash."

negative: "Q) Will I have to submit the accounts for the Swiss Business even though Im not on the payroll - and the business makes hardly any profit each year. I can of course get our accounts each year - BUT - they will be in Swiss German! You will have to submit on your income from the business.  The term ""partnership"" refers to a specific business entity type in the U.S.  I'm not sure if you're using it the same way.  In a partnership in the U.S. you pay income tax on your share of the partnership's income whether or not you actually receive income in your personal account.  There's not enough information here to know if that applies in your case. (In the U.S., the partnership itself does not pay income tax - It is a ""disregarded entity"" for tax purposes, with the tax liability passed through to the partners as individuals.) Q) Will I need to have this translated!? Is there any format/procedure to this!? Will it have to be translated by my Swiss accountants? - and if so - which parts of the documentation need to be translated!? As regards language, you will file a tax return on a U.S. form presumably in English.  You will not have to submit your account information on any other form, so the fact that your documentation is in German does not matter.  The only exception that comes to mind is that you could potentially get audited (just like anyone else filing taxes in the U.S.) in which case you might need to produce your documentation.  That situation is rare enough that I wouldn't worry about it though.  I'm not sure if they'd take it in German or force you to get a translation. I was told that if I sell the business (and property) after I aquire a greencard - that I will be liable to 15% tax of the profit I'd made. I also understand that any tax paid (on selling) in Switzerland will be deducted from the 15%!? Q) Is this correct!? The long-term capital gains rate is 15% for most people. (At very high incomes it is 20%.)  It sounds like you would qualify for long-term (held for greater than 1 year) capital gains in this case, although the details might matter. There is a foreign tax credit, but I'm not completely sure if it would apply in this case. (If forced to guess, I would say that it does.)  If you search for ""foreign tax credit"" and ""IRS"" you should get to the information that you need pretty quickly. I will effectively have ALL the paperwork for this - as we'll need to do the same in Switzerland. But again, it will be in Swiss German. Q) Would this be a problem if its presented in Swiss German!? Even in this case you will not need to submit any of your paperwork to the IRS, unless you get audited.  See earlier comments."

negative: In many cases yes.  In the case of an employer handing employees a credit card to use, that is clearly income if the card is used for something other than a business expense. Generally speaking, if you're receiving something with a significant value without strings attached, it is likely taxable. Google no doubt has an army of tax attorneys, so perhaps they are able to exploit loopholes of some sort.

negative: For the US government, they've just credited Person B with a Million USD and haven't gained anything (afterall, those digits are intangible and don't really have a value, IMO). Two flaws in this reasoning: The US government didn't do anything. The receiving bank credited the recipient. If the digits are intangible, such that they haven't gained anything, they haven't lost anything either. In practice, the role of governments in the transfer is purely supervisory. The sending bank debits the sender's account and the receiving bank credits the recipient's account. Every intermediary makes some money on this transaction because the cost to the sender exceeds the credit to the recipient. The sending bank typically receives a credit to their account at a correspondent bank. The receiving bank typically receives a debit from their account at a correspondent bank. If a bank sends lots of money, eventually its account at its correspondent will run dry. If a bank receives lots of money, eventually its account at its correspondent will have too much money. This is resolved with domestic payments, sometimes handled by governmental or quasi-governmental agencies. In the US, banks have an account with the federal reserve and adjust balances there. The international component is handled by the correspondent bank(s). They also internally will credit and debit. If they get an imbalance between two currencies they can't easily correct, they will have to sell one currency to buy the other. Fortunately, worldwide currency exchange is extremely efficient.

negative: Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that maintence CapEx is viewed as required cash spend in order to *maintain* the business at its current levels, whereas as expansionary CapEx is viewed as voluntary. If I were to value your Company I would want to know how well it cash flows as is given that whatever voluntary growth CapEx investments current management is making may not apply to my plan for the company if I were to purchase it.  Secondly, often times expansionary CapEx is funded through credit facilities, and thus from a credit perspective it is helpful to break out maintenance capex and growth capex when determining certain credit metrics, such as a Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio.

negative: "It depends on when you can get the money, not when you know that you won or when you choose to take the ticket in.  If you can present your ticket this year and get paid this year, the taxes are due this year, whether or not you actually choose to claim the prize this year.  If you cannot receive payment until next year, then taxes will be due next year.  This is ""constructive receipt,"" which applies to most individual tax situations. This assumes that you chose to receive a lump sum.  If you get installments, then your taxes would be due as the installments are available, but the constructive receipt still applies."

negative: Corey Rockafeler is president of Vaalk Consulting Group. He is also small business financing expert and part of leadership team at Bell Funding Solutions in New York City. Some of the city’s top businesses regard him as their first choice when it comes to securing growth and expansion capital. He offers complete financing solutions for growing business. His custom solutions include everything from multi-year terms, lines of credit, asset and collateral based loans, factoring and receivable financing to SBA and SBA bridge loans. When asked about his key to success, Corey stated, “It’s all about passion

negative: According to GOV.UK, you can only apply for Student Finance if: Since you don't fulfill the criterion 2 and 3, you are technically not eligible for Student Finance. Since you have received information from Student Finance England that you can apply for the maintenance loan, you should either write to them or call them again, to confirm the information given to you.

negative: "This election only applies to payments that you make within 120 days of your having received loan money. These wouldn't be required payments, which is why they are called ""early"" payments. For example, let's say that you've just received $10,000 from your lender for a new loan. One month later, you pay $500 back. This election decides how that $500 will be applied.  The first choice, ""Apply as Refund,"" means that you are essentially returning some of the money that you initially borrowed. It's like you never borrowed it. Instead of a $10,000 loan, it is now a $9,500 loan. The accrued interest will be recalculated for the new loan amount.  The second choice, ""Apply as Payment,"" means that your payment will first be applied to any interest that has accrued, then applied to the principal. While you are in school, you don't need to make payments on student loans. However, interest is accruing from the day you get the money. This interest is simple interest, which means that the interest is only based on the loan principal; the interest is not compounding, and you are not paying interest on interest. After you leave school and your grace period expires, you enter repayment, and you have to start making payments. At this point, all the interest that has accrued from the time you first received the money until now is capitalized. This means that the interest is added to your loan principal, and interest will now be calculated on this new, larger amount. To avoid this, you can pay the interest as you go before it is capitalized, which will save you from having to pay even more interest later on.  As to which method is better, just as they told you right on the form, the ""Apply as Refund"" method will save you the most money in the long run.  However, as I said at the beginning, this election only applies if you make a payment within 120 days from receiving loan funds. Since you are already out of school and in repayment, I don't think it matters at all what you select here.  For any students reading this and thinking about loans, I want to issue a warning. Student loans can ruin people later in life. If you truly feel that taking out a loan is the only way you'll be able to get the education you need, minimize these as much as possible. Borrow as little as possible, pay as much as you can as early as you can, and plan on knocking these out ASAP. Great Lakes has a few pages that discuss these topics:"

negative: Work on your own site is certainly not relevant here, that's just a part of your trade, not a service you provided to yourself. The business received the benefit of that work, not you. Suppose your business sold televisions. If you took a TV from stock for your own lounge, that would be included in this box because you have effectively paid yourself with a TV rather than cash. If you take a TV from stock to use as a demo model, that's part of your trade and not goods you have taken out of the business for your own use. For services provided to your dad it's less clear. As Skaty said, it depends whether it's your business providing the service, or you personally. If you gave your dad a free TV then it would be clear that you have effectively paid yourself with another TV and then given it to your dad as a gift. With services it's less clear whether you're receiving services from the business for free. You might consider how it would be treated by your employer if you weren't self-employed. If you were just applying your skills to help your dad in your free time, your employer wouldn't care. If you used your employer's equipment or facilities, or hosted his site on a server that your employer pays for, your employer would be more likely to discipline you for effectively stealing services from them, as they would if you took a TV from their warehouse for him.

negative: According to the answers to this question, you generally aren't taxed on gains until you sell the asset in question. None of those answered specifically for the U.K., so perhaps someone else will be able to weigh in on that. To apply those ideas to your question, yes your gains and losses are taxable. If you originally traded something worth $100 for the bitcoins, then when you converted back to dollars you received $200, you would have a $100 gain, simply on the foreign exchange trade. That is, this $100 of income is in addition to any income you made from your business (selling goods).

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: They specifically state on their website this waiver does not apply to this incident.  It only applies to the use of their credit monitoring product.  [link to website](https://www.equifaxsecurity2017.com/).    So basically you can't have identify fraud then blame it on their credit monitoring tool.  In this case, Equifax is guilty of several things, not related to this product, so they can't just sneak in a clause like this.

negative: "Summary: the fees used to differ but no longer do. Fees are the same. If you have a personal account, feel free to upgrade it to premier to get access to more features. Longer answer: the two account types USED to differ but that changed a few years ago (maybe circa 2011?). PayPal wants person-to-person payments to be free (except where they must pass along credit card charges or else they would loose their shirt) but wants to charge merchants for receiving payments. Originally PayPal required merchants to have premier (or business) accounts, and charged fees for payments made to those account types. Personal accounts had significant limitations on receiving payments, but did not pay fees upon receiving payments.  Eventually PayPal decoupled the question of ""is this a person-to-person payment or a payment to a merchant for goods and services?"" from the paypal account type. So now the same account can receive both a p2p payment (e.g. splitting lunch costs), on which it will NOT pay fees, and can receive a payment for goods or services e.g. from a web checkout, on which it WILL pay fees. Regardless of the account type."

negative: While one credit provider (or credit reference agency) might score you in one way, others may score you differently including treating different things that contribute to your score differently. Different credit providers may also not see all of your credit score as potentially some data may not be available to all credit suppliers. Further too many searches may trigger systems that recognise behavior that is a sign of possible fraudulent activity (such as applying for many items of credit in a short space of time). Whether this would directly affect a score or trigger manual checks is also likely to vary. In situations like this a person could have applied for (say) a dozen credit cards, with all the credit checks being performed before there is any credit history for any of those dozen cards.

negative: Is it possible to pay off my balance more than once in a payment period in order to increase the amount I can spend in a payment period? Yes you can pay off the balance more than once even if its not due. This will get applied to outstanding and you will be able to spend again. If so, is there a reason not to do this? There is no harm. However note that it generally takes 2-3 days for the credit to be applied to the card. Hence factor this in before you make new purchases. I just got a credit card to start rebuilding my credit.  Spending close to you credit limit does not help much; compared to spending less than 10% of your credit limit.   So the sooner you get your limit on card increased the better.

negative: That's sort of irrelevant. We're talking about merchant responsibilities, not their agreements with VISA/MC.  Different merchants handle this in different ways. Since I've seen successful businesses set an example by forcing their employees to verify signatures, there is no justification for other businesses half-assing it, which is exactly what they are doing.  > It was never really intended to be used to authenticate the card  That is untrue. The whole point of signing your receipt when you purchase something via credit card is authentication. Should your purchase be charged back, the bank will ask to see the signature so they can look for evidence of fraud. Merchants are often required to turn in signed receipts to receive their money.

negative: I assume you kept the receipt for your money order, in which case there's no reason you can't call the issuer and find out if the money order has been posted for payment. It does beg the question as to why you didn't send it registered mail or by some other means which would allow you to at least verify it was received by the IRS. As someone else mentioned, why can't you simply call the IRS and ask them if the money order was received and applied?

negative: It's possible the recipient of the payment is not setup to receive funds form PayPal from a credit card, too.

negative: Amazon has 2 different cards you can apply for, a store card and a credit card. The credit card is through Chase. The deal is not a scam, I can confirm this because I applied for their credit card and got $70 in the form of a digital gift card. By giving customers free money for signing up for their cards they get more people who are willing to give it a try. Once you have a card, you get benefits like 3-5 percent back on Amazon purchases that will entice consumers to use the card. Amazon likely has an agreement with Chase and they are hoping to get you hooked with the free money and benefits.

negative: "Your first question has been answered quite well already. To answer your second question: ""If you pay extra, do you want the extra to go toward the interest or   toward the principal?"" This gives the consumer some flexibility to decide how additional payments are applied. It might seem like a no-brainer to always apply extra payments towards principal - that way, the interest amounts on future payments will be lower and (if you're billed a fixed amount each month) more of each regular payment will then be applied to principal, shortening the term of the loan. However, while it would mean spending more over the life of the loan, there are certain advantages to applying extra payments towards interest†. The main advantage is that it pays your account ahead and means you don't have to make another payment as soon. You could use this strategy to give yourself a buffer of several months, so that if you should ever run into financial hardship you can stop making mortgage payments for a while without the risk of foreclosure. † Note, in most cases it's more likely that you are simply paying more without specifying to the lender that it should be used as principal curtailment. I haven't seen cases where you can explicitly ask the extra to be ""applied toward interest"". In this situation the funds would be held until you've provided enough to cover one or more monthly payments in full, at which point your ""next payment due"" date will simply be extended.  Another advantage is that the funds that are being held (not due yet, not allocated toward any specific payment, maybe held in escrow) may be refundable to you, upon request. This would depend on the lender's policy. Some will permit refunds of credit balances that go beyond what is necessary to cover the current month's bill. Whether you apply extra payments towards principal or not, it makes little difference to the bank. Any additional payments received increase their immediate cash flow. The cash can be reinvested immediately by them into whatever they are currently focusing on."

negative: "QUICK ANSWER What @Mike Haskel wrote is generally correct that the indirect method for cash flow statement reporting, which most US companies use, can sometimes produce different results that don't clearly reconcile with balance sheet shifts.  With regards to accounts receivables, this is especially so when there is a major increase or decrease in the company's allowances for doubtful accounts. In this case, there is more to the company's balance sheet and cash flow statements differences per its accounts receivables than its allowances for doubtful accounts seems responsible for.  As explained below, the difference, $1.25bn, is likely owing more to currency shifts and how they are accounted for than to other factors. = = = = = = = = = = DIRTY DETAILS Microsoft Corp. generally sells to high-quality / high-credit buyers; mostly PC, server and other devices manufacturers and licensees.  It hence made doubtful accounts provisions of $16mn for its $86,833mn (0.018%) of 2014 sales and wrote off $51mn of its carrying balance during the year. Its accounting for ""Other comprehensive income"" captures the primary differences of many accounts; specifically in this case, the ""foreign currency translation"" figure that comprises many balance sheet accounts and net out against shareholders' equity (i.e. those assets and liabilities bypass the income statement).  The footnotes include this explanation: Assets and liabilities recorded in foreign currencies are translated at the exchange rate on the balance sheet date. Revenue and expenses are translated at average rates of exchange prevailing during the year. Translation adjustments resulting from this process are recorded to other comprehensive income (“OCI”) What all this means is that those two balance sheet figures are computed by translating all the accounts with foreign currency balances (in this case, accounts receivables) into the reporting currency, US dollars (USD), at the date of the balance sheets, June 30 of the years 2013 and 2014. The change in accounts receivables cash flow figure is computed by first determining the average exchange rates for all the currencies it uses to conduct business and applying them respectively to the changes in each non-USD accounts receivables during the periods. For this reason, almost all multinational companies that report using indirect cash flow statements will have discrepancies between the changes in their reported working capital changes during a period and the dates of their balance sheet and it's usually because of currency shifts during the period."