query: Is there a way to open a U.S. bank account for my LLC remotely?

positive: "Yes, it is possible.  Although there may be red tape for a business account, Alliant Credit Union offers completely online signup and their representatives are reachable by email. You'll probably need to send in the LLC articles this way http://www.alliantcu.com/checking-accounts.html (as pointed out by @littleadv this site defaults to ""personal checking"" accounts, there is a business checking tab which doesn't generate a direct link, some might miss that) And even if there are a ton of regulations that some pencil pushers at larger banks anecdotally cite (without citing), there will be enough banks that don't care. Good Luck"

negative: Do you have a separate bank account for your business?  That is generally highly recommended. I have a credit card for my single-member LLC.  I prefer it this way because it makes the separation of personal and business expenses very clear. Using a personal credit card, but using it for only business expenses seems to be a reasonable practice.  You may be able to do one better though... For your sole proprietorship, you can file a DBA which establishes the business name.  The details of this depend on your state.  With a DBA, I believe you can open a bank account in the name of your business and you may also be able to open a credit card account in the name of the business.  I'm not sure what practical difference it makes, but it does make the personal/business distinction clearer.  Though, at that point, you might as well just do the LLC...

negative: The LLC will not be liable for anything, it is disregarded for tax purposes. If you're doing any work while in the US, or you (or your spouse) are a green card holder or a US citizen - then you (not the LLC) may be liable, may be required to file, pay, etc. Unless you're employing someone, or have more than one member in your LLC, you do not need an EIN. Re the bank - whatever you want. If you want you can open an account in an American bank. If you don't - don't. Who cares?

negative: It seems that you're complicating things quite a bit.  Why would you not create a business entity, open one or more bank accounts for it, and then have the money wired into those accounts?  If you plan on being a company then set up the appropriate structure for it. In the U.S., you can form an S-corporation or an LLC and choose pass-through taxation so that all you pay is income tax on what you receive from the business as personal income.  The business itself would not have tax liability in such a case. Co-mingling your personal banking with that of your business could create real tax headaches for you if you aren't careful, so it's not worth the trouble or risk.

negative: "We use Cater Allen for our business banking (recommended/introduced by our accountants so we've saved the standard ""minimum funds per month"" limit) which was set up all remotely - our accountants sent us the forms (which you can get from Cater Allen's site), we photocopied the identity documents (driving licence etc) and sent them off. Within a couple of weeks we had the account open. Cater Allen hasn't got any physical branches, so that's ""one way"" of working around the ""come into a branch"" solution - pick a bank without branches! Girobank (which became Alliance and Leicester Business Banking and then became part of Santander) used to allow all account creations remotely - but that was back in the 90s and I've got no idea if Santander still do. Since you've setup an Ltd company, you are probably looking for an accountant too (even if it just to do your year end or payroll) - ask them for their recommendations."

negative: First, yes, your LLC has to file annual taxes to the US government.  All US companies do, regardless of where their owners live.  Second, you will also probably be liable to personally file a return in the US and unless the US has a tax treaty with India (which I don't believe it does) you may end up paying taxes on your same income to both countries.  Finally, opening a US bank account as a foreign citizen can be very tricky. You need to talk to a US accountant who is familiar with Indian & US laws.

negative: You're confusing a lot of things here. Company B LLC will have it's sales run under Company A LLC, and cease operating as a separate entity These two are contradicting each other. If B LLC ceases to exist - it is not going to have it's sales run under A LLC, since there will be no sales to run for a non-existent company. What happens is that you merge B LLC into A LLC, and then convert A LLC into S Corp. So you're cancelling the EIN for B LLC, you're cancelling the EIN for A LLC - because both entities cease to exist. You then create a EIN for A Corp, which is the converted A LLC, and you create a DBA where A Corp DBA B Shop. You then go to the bank and open the account for A Corp DBA B Shop with the EIN you just created for A Corp. Get a better accountant. Before you convert to S-Corp.

negative: "Like you said, it's important to keep your personal assets and company assets completely separate to maintain the liability protection of the LLC. I'd recommend getting the business bank account right from the beginning. My wife formed an LLC last year (also as a pass-through sole proprietorship for tax purposes), and we were able to get a small business checking account from Savings Institute and Trust that has no fees (at least for the relatively low quantity of transactions we'll be doing). We wrote it a personal check for startup capital, and since then, the LLC has paid all of its own bills out of its checking account (with associated debit card). Getting the account opened took less than an hour of sitting at the bank. Without knowing exactly where you are in Kentucky, I note that Googling ""kentucky small business checking"" and visiting a few banks' web sites provided several promising options for no-fee business checking."

negative: "I have checked with Bank of America, and they say the ONLY way to cash (or deposit, or otherwise get access to the funds represented by a check made out to my business) is to open a business account. They tell me this is a Federal regulation, and every bank will say the same thing.  To do this, I need a state-issued ""dba"" certificate (from the county clerk's office) as well as an Employer ID Number (EIN) issued by the IRS. AND their CHEAPEST business banking account costs $15 / month. I think I can go to the bank that the check is drawn upon, and they will cash it, assuming I have documentation showing that I am the sole proprietor. But I'm not sure.... What a racket!!"

negative: "I think your best bet here would be HSBC.  They will provide the required currencies, credit/debit cards, and very easy to use online banking transfers.  This includes an online ""Global Account View"" which features all of your accounts on a single screen and allows you to ""drag and drop"" money between accounts. Regarding fees, I suspect you will need to be a ""Premier Account"" holder in order to avoid any fees imposed on transactions such as money transfers and exchanging money between currencies.  In my experience HSBC offers extremely good exchange rates when exchanging ""large"" amounts of money ( greater than $10,000 / GBP 5,000 ).  Exchanging small amounts will carry a larger spread but still much better than most banks offer. In my experience, exchanging GBP 5000 will have a spread of about 0.50-to-0.75 percent, while exchanging more than GBP10,000 will have a spread of as little as 0.10-to-0.20 percent. In order to qualify for a ""Premier Account"", if my memory of HSBC UK serves me correctly, you will need to have at least GBP 50,000 net across all of your HSBC managed accounts, including stockbroking and other investment accounts. In order to open a banking Swiss account, you will need to travel to Switzerland and apply in person.  You cannot open a foreign bank account remotely.  With a foreign investment account, I believe you can open accounts remotely.  For example, I opened an account with Fidelity Switzerland using my Fidelity UK account directly from the UK, however obviously Fidelity does not provide banking services so this is not of interest to you. The simplest thing to do is to visit your local HSBC branch and discuss it with them in person. Other UK banks, such as Barclays, will also provide such services, but in my experience they are not as competitive on fees."

negative: You can consider opening accounts either in Paypal or Google Wallet. In this way, you link your bank information to these accounts and the only information you need to provide your tenant is your e-mail id. Its safe and in this scenario -- just money transfer through bank account, there is no fee either for the sender (your tenant) or the receiver (you).

negative: How would I go about this so that I can start using this money? You would open the LLC. The checks were not written out to you, they were written out to the LLC. Only the LLC can endorse them.

negative: With the recent drive in AML [Anti Money Laundering], quite a few countries being signatories; the central banks in almost all countries[that matter] have put in stronger KYC guidelines. This means you will not be able to remotely open a Bank Account in Thailand. More info at below links http://www.bangkokbank.com/BANGKOKBANK/PERSONALBANKING/SPECIALSERVICES/FOREIGNCUSTOMERS/Pages/Openinganaccountnew.aspx http://www.samuifinder.com/en/koh-samui-info/money-in-thailand/bank-account-thailand/

negative: "It is unusual to need a consultant to open a bank account for you, and I would also be concerned that perhaps the consultant could take the money and do nothing, or continue to demand various sums of money for ""expenses"" like permits, licenses, identity check, etc.  until you give up.    Some of the more accepted ways to open a bank account are: A: Call up an established bank and follow their instructions to open a personal account . Make sure you are calling on a real bank, one that has been around a while. Hints: has permanent locations, in the local phone book, and has shares traded on a national stock exchange.  Call the bank directly, don't use a number given to you by a 3rd party consultant, as it may be a trick... Discuss on the phone and find out if you can open an account by mail or if you need to visit in person.  B: Create a company or branch office in the foreign country, assuming this is for business or investing.   and open an account by appointing someone (like a lawyer or accountant or similar professional) in the foreign country to represent the company to open an account in person.  If you are a US citizen, you will want to ask your CPA/accountant/tax lawyer about the TD F 90-22.1 Foreign Account Bank Report form, and the FATCA Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. There can be very large fines for not making the required reports.   The requirements to open a bank account have become more strict in many countries, so don't be surprised if they will not open an account for a foreigner with no local address, if that is your situation."

negative: Yes you can. I'm a foreigner who uses a tourist visa to enter America and Bank of America opened a checking account for me. I had to go into the branch with my passport and a driving license and it was opened with $100. You do need to give a US address so statements can be sent out but that's about it.

negative: I have a very similar situation doing side IT projects.  I set up an LLC for the business, created a separate bank account, and track things separately.  I then pay myself from the LLC bank account based on my hours for the consulting job.  (I keep a percentage in the LLC account to pay for expenses.)  I used to do my taxes myself, but when I created this arrangement, I started having an accountant do them.  An LLC will not affect your tax status, but it will protect you from liability and make things more accountable come tax time.

negative: They are the worst.  I knew all about these deceptive practices when I decided to open a checking account for my business with them in 2015.  I was working in a remote place and it was one of the two banks that had locations germane to both work sites.I didn't like signing up with them because of all this bullshit but hey, they had the branches, right?  Then I found out they were charging my workers $5 to cash checks.  Pressured them to open an account or else: $5.  Fuck you and the carriage you rode in on, Mr. Wells.  I went to the other small regional bank and even though they don't have a slick web interface that makes it easier for me they DON'T charge my guys to get their money.  Never again.

negative: or just input it in my accounting software along with receipts, and   then when I'm doing taxes this would go under the investment or loses   (is it somewhere along that line)? Yes, this. Generally, for the long term you should have a separate bank account and charge card for your business. I started my business (LLC) by filing online, and paying a fee for a   registration, and that makes it a business cost right? Startup cost. There are special rules about this. Talk to your tax adviser. For the amounts in question you could probably expense it, but verify.

negative: How much are we talking about here?  My own experience (Switzerland->US, under $10K) was that the easiest way was just $100 bills.  Alternatively, I just left a bunch in the Swiss bank, and used my ATM card to make withdrawals when needed.  That worked for several years (I was doing contract work remotely for the Swiss employer, who paid into that account), until the bank had issues with the IRS (unrelated to me!) and couriered me a check for the balance.

negative: There's no requirement of US citizenship to open a bank account in the US. Any person, citizen or not, can do that. I don't know where this assumption of yours come from, but it is false. So the easiest solution is to open a bank account for your nephew next time he visits the US and get him an ATM card from that account. You can then deposit money to that account as much as you want (beware of the gift tax consequences). If he doesn't want to travel to the US and cannot open a US bank account remotely from Russia (which is probably the case), then follow the @BrenBarn's suggestion: have him open a bank account in Russia and just wire money there. Having a foreigner tapping freely into your own personal bank account may cause legal issues both with regards to gift tax and money laundering provisions that require you to certify that the money on the account is yours only. Also, check if there's an issue for a Russian resident to have control over foreign accounts (there's definitely such an issue for a US resident, Russians are generally not far behind when it comes to government oppression).

negative: Yes, you can do this.  I do this for my own single-member LLC, but I usually do it online instead of writing a check. Your only legal obligation is to pay quarterly estimated tax payments to the IRS. I'm assuming you are not otherwise doing anything shady. For example, that you have funds in your business account to pay any expenses that will be due soon or that you are trying to somehow pull a fast one on someone else...

negative: Many enterprise owners inside the United States select to form their enterprise as a Delaware LLC because of the felony advantages from the state’s predictable enterprise friendly legal guidelines. Delaware LLC formation is easy, too — there's no need to visit the kingdom and minimal data is needed to form your LLC in Delaware. The method may be accomplished online; IncNow can assist shape a Delaware LLC in your enterprise in just five mins. You can form an LLC in Delaware without visiting, opening an office, or maintaining a bank account in Delaware.

negative: Short Answer: Go to the bank and ask them about your options for opening a business account. Talk to an attorney about the paperwork and company structure and taxes. Long Answer: You and your buddies jointly own an unincorporated business. This is called a partnership. Yes, there is paperwork involved in doing it properly and the fact that you guys are minors might complicate that paperwork a little bit. In terms of what type of account to open: A business account! Running a business through a personal account (joint or otherwise) is a sure way to get that account shut down. Your bank will want to know the structure of the business, and will require documentation to support that. For a partnership, they will probably want a copy of the partnership agreement. For an LLC, they'll probably want a copy of the filing with Ohio Secretary of State as well as the operating agreement etc. That said, pop into a local bank and ask a business banker directly what you should do. They deal with new businesses all the time, and would probably be best qualified to help you figure out the bank account aspect of it. Regarding business structure... this really impacts a lot more than just the type of bank account to open and how you file your taxes. It is something you guys should really discuss with an attorney. What happens if down the road one of you quits? What happens if you want to bring in a new partner later?  What if there is a disagreement about something?  These are all things that the attorney can help you address ahead of time - which is a heck of a lot easier (and cheaper) than trying to figure it out later. You're brining in enough that you should certainly be able to buy a couple hours of a lawyer's time. Getting the formation stuff right could save all of you a lot of money and heartache later.

negative: Recommend using quickbooks for account management. If you use the manufacturing and wholesale you can track POs from vendors, estimates, bill payment quotes and invoicing (there's an editor to customize your set up)Also, most accountants are very familiar with this platform so come tax time they'll be able to give you a hand no problem. For accepting payments I highly suggest asking for checks. If you do accept credit cards keep in mind most  payment processors charge a percent (1.5-3%) depending on transaction amounts and quantities of transactions. So you'll want to mark up your products by at least that amount.   Another area is sales tax. Since you are not the end user you should be able to avoid sales tax on the items you will be selling to customers. You then charge the customer this sales tax. Not sure about NJ but in Texas we are 8.25%. I then pay the state of Texas the taxes collected quarterly.   Edit: also make sure you have separate finances for the LLC. Separate checking, separate credit card, separate everything! If you end up using an account that is tied to you personally then you run into the risk of losing the protective nature of an LLC from a legal standpoint.   Edit2: by separate I mean using your IRS issued EIN number to open accounts with the LLC name. When you sign anything on behalf of the company make sure to add the name of the company next to it to show the company is making the signature not you. For instance   u/sexlessnights Company name, LLC

negative: There are a few company they can help you open an offshore account. I searched and found rtrsupportslimited.com on another discussion forum. It is a company which does the exact same thing. I got my own company incorporation and bank account from them.

negative: "Yes, kinda.   Talk to local banks about a business account, and tell them you want to enable certain employees to make deposits but not withdrawals.  They don't need to know you're all the same person.   For instance I have a PayPal account for business.  These allow you to create ""sub accounts"" for your employees with a variety of access privileges.  Of course I control the master account, but I also set up a ""sub account"" for myself.  That is the account I use every day."

negative: I took littleadv's advice and talked to an accountant today. Regardless of method of payment, my US LLC does not have to withhold taxes or report the payment as payments to contractors (1099/1042(S)) to the IRS; it is simply a business expense.  He said this gets more complicated if the recipient is working in the US (regardless of nationality), but that is not my case

negative: Someone I know had an idea to open a savings account as an LLC or corporation to receive better interest rates on savings, and set up a system where anyone can pool money in and receive a larger cut through savings interest than with a personal account. Is this legal/feasible in any way?

negative: "You can always ask. The answer is likely to be ""no"" -- the company is probably not set up to be able to tweak that number  on a case by case basis. I'm not sure whether there are regulations which might kick in, as well; these plans are regulated to prevent abuse and that tends to make doing anything unusual difficult. Find another tax-deferred/tax-advantaged investment and route the money there?"

negative: It can be done, but I believe it would be impractical for most people - i.e., it would likely be cheaper to fly to Europe from other side of the world to handle it in person if you can.  It also depends on where you live. You should take a look if there are any branches or subsidiaries of foreign banks in your country - the large multinational banks most likely can open you an account in their sister-bank in another country for, say, a couple hundred euro in fees.

negative: yes you can open bank account you should have a address in us and personally visit bank to deposite $1500 only to get you a debit card.you are required to maintain min balance of $1500 only. I have done it

negative: No there is no way to have untaxed earnings.  Single Member LLC are taxed on your personal taxes.  Partnership LLC is taxed on your and your partners personal taxes.  An C-Corp LLC has its own tax bracket.  An S-Corp is taxed on your personal taxes (but does not get taxed as self-employment taxes).   At $500,000, YOU SHOULD BE AN S-CORP or C-CORP to save on self-employment taxes.

negative: "I'm pretty sure that the banks here will only allow a joint account with either all citizens or all ""foreign resident"" or tourists. You may be able to do something with Leumi since they have a US branch in NYC. What many people do (who are US citizens) is open a bank account either at a physical branch or online and then it can be managed all online. Make sure no monthly balance fees or atm fees etc. If you need to transfer money most banks will ""buy"" a US check (I have done this with Leumi) or you can go to the ATM and pull out a few thousand shekel from the USA account and deposit it right back into the Israeli account.  My wife and I did this when we first arrived. Discount Bank seemed to have no fees for pulling money out and a good USD/ILS rate. Just make sure you don't have foreign transaction fees / high rates on the US account. If you need to deposit checks for him you can use the remote deposit feature and just take a picture. בהצלחה!"


query: Taxes due for hobbyist Group Buy

positive: "From the poster's description of this activity, it doesn't look like he is engaged in a business, so Schedule C would not be appropriate. The first paragraph of the IRS Instructions for Schedule C is as follows: Use Schedule C (Form 1040) to report income or loss from a business   you operated or a profession you practiced as a sole proprietor. An   activity qualifies as a business if your primary purpose for engaging   in the activity is for income or profit and you are involved in the   activity with continuity and regularity. For example, a sporadic   activity or a hobby does not qualify as a business. To report income   from a nonbusiness activity, see the instructions for Form 1040, line   21, or Form 1040NR, line 21. What the poster is doing is acting as a nominee or agent for his members. For instance, if I give you $3.00 and ask you to go into Starbucks and buy me a pumpkin-spice latte, you do not have income or receipts of $3.00, and you are not engaged in a business. The amounts that the poster's members are forwarding him are like this.  Money that the poster receives for his trouble should be reported as nonbusiness income on Line 21 of Form 1040, in accordance with the instructions quoted above and the instructions for Form 1040. Finally, it should be noted that the poster cannot take deductions or losses relating to this activity. So he can't deduct any expenses of organizing the group buy on his tax return. Of course, this would not be the case if the group buy really is the poster's business and not just a ""hobby."" Of course, it goes without saying that the poster should document all of this activity with receipts, contemporaneous emails (and if available, contracts) - as well as anything else that could possibly be relevant to proving the nature of this activity in the event of an audit."

positive: You do actually have some profits (whatever is left from donations). The way it goes is that you report everything on your Schedule C. You will report this: Your gross profits will then flow to Net Profit (line 31) since you had no other expenses (unless you had some other expenses, like paypal fees, which will appear in the relevant category in part II), and from line 31 it will go to your 1040 for the final tax calculation.

negative: I can say for certain that everyone in my group of friends had to wait a long time to buy homes, some including me still rent, due to the impossibility of saving for a downpayment with sky high rent and $1000+ dollar a month student loan payments. It basically took until they paid the loans off after 10 years or got management level positions at excellent salaries before they could start saving for a down payment.  Probably hundreds of thousands of people have this same experience.

negative: My gut reaction is to agree with you. Then I realize that I'm shopping for a laptop that would have been a supercomputer ten years ago and planning to spend about $500. I think there's going to be a tipping point in 3D printing where it will just explode. And with the platform vendors locking their platforms down, figure a lot of the hobbyists are going to explode in that direction.   Pick the date you think we'll be able to print an electric motor (or at least the parts so it can be assembled) and I wouldn't be shocked if by that date some geek has actually printed him/herself a car.

negative: Form 1127 (updated link) should be filed in paper (with the supporting documents) to the IRS office that has jurisdiction in the area where you live. From the instructions (see the link above):  File Form 1127 with the Internal Revenue Service (Attn: Advisory Group   Manager), for the area where you maintain your legal residence or   principal place of business. See Pub. 4235, Collection Advisory Group   Addresses, to find the address for your local advisory group. However, if the tax due is a gift tax reportable on Form 709, send Form 1127   to: Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service Center Cincinnati, OH 45999

negative: Most 401k plans (maybe even all 401k plans as a matter of law) allow the option of moving the money in your 401k account from one mutual fund to another  (within the group of funds that are in the plan).  So, you can exit from one fund and put all your 401k money (not just the new contributions) into another fund in the group if you like.  Whether you can find a fund within that group that invests only in the companies that you approve of is another matter. As mhoran_psprep's answer points out, changing investments inside a 401k (ditto IRAs, 403b and 457 plans) is without tax consequence which is not the case when you sell one mutual fund and buy another in a non-retirement account.

negative: Many (if not all) of these companies have former I-bankers in their corp dev groups.  The author's platform is one of many that can connect buyers and sellers directly. At the end of the day, if you are a buyer, do you have the resources and competence to conduct proper due diligence? Quite possibly.  As a seller, do you have the ability to understand industry dynamics and the ability to maximize your valuation? Doubtful.  Buy side M&A has merit, but sell side M&A has proven to deliver value to the majority of clients.

negative: Realistically, no, I can't really say that for certain, but generally, if two groups are paying such vastly-different amounts, its due to one group having either a stronger negotiation arm, or one group being large enough that their volume is highly desired.  Apple fit all of those.

negative: "You can group your like-kind (same symbol, ST/LT) stock positions, just be sure that your totals match the total dollar amounts on the 1099.  An inconsistency will possibly result in a letter from IRS to clarify. So, if you sold the 100 shares, and they came from 7 different buys, list it once.  The sell price and date is known, and for the buy price, add all the buys and put ""Various"" for the date. If you have both long term and short term groups as part of those 7 buys, split them into two groups and list them separately."

negative: "It seems like if that were true, then if everyone were in one group, you'd get the biggest discount of all.  My preference has been for single payer, but recently I saw a guy suggesting single-group, multi-payer, or SGMP. This was just a comment from a physician in a medical journal, and I don't have the link and haven't been able to find out anything more about it, but it seems intriguing. It had something to do with insurance companies bidding to provide coverage services.  edit: [Here it is](http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1211514#t=comments):  > JOEL SPALTER, MD | Physician - Infectious Diseases | Disclosure: None  > FAYETTEVILLE AR  > October 02, 2012  > Single Group Multi-Payer  > True reform resulting in universal health insurance and access to care is achieved by state mandates for insurance with replacement of individual or group underwriting with underwriting by ""Dutch auction"" for a percentage of the single group consisting of all of the residents of a State – Single Group – Multi-Payer (SGMP). Each successful insurance company would be responsible for payment of the percentage of the total costs for medical services equal to the percentage of the population insured. This preserves the integrity of the bidding process.    > States are free to establish the public contribution to premiums. SGMP prevents exclusion of insurance for pre-existing conditions or due to genetic background, absent individual underwriting; guarantees maintenance of health care insurance independent of place, or even existence of employment; assures equality of access to providers due to a single established remuneration scale; and assures patients' choice of providers free from any empanelling by insurance companies. Market forces will govern providers' attempts to gain and hold market share.   > A single group eases statistical comparison, with EMR, of 50, State patterns of care."

negative: The problem there is that there's a tax due on that dividend. So, if you wish, you can buy the ETF and specify to reinvest dividends, but you'll have to pay a bit of tax on them, and keep track of your basis, if the account isn't a retirement account.

negative: For insurance pricing, it seems as though it doesn't matter all that much which group it is in if they are adjusting it based on just the Tesla data.  I imagine Tesla is more concerned about the perception.  They want to market the car as a safer vehicle to drive.  So if AAA came out and said the increase was due to repair costs, I doubt you'd hear anything from Tesla.  But AAA said that it is also due to accident frequency, which goes against Tesla's marketing strategy.

negative: > Yes, you reduce your tax bill if your profits go down due to a losing business. It's not debatable.  That's utter stupid ignorant garbage. Why would anyone ever buy a failing business so that it loses money so they aren't taxed on the losses? Why the fuck would he just not buy the business? You lose the capital, only to get back a portion of the loss as tax credits.   Why are you unable to understand the stupidity of what you're saying? How have you not wandered into traffic if you're this fucking stupid?

negative: Historically the advice was to buy the best policy possible (not cheapest), at the lowest price, with the highest benefit.  The cost relative to the benefit is very cheap, and your much more likely to use disability than life insurance (for instance).  It is usually cheaper to pay for it with after tax dollars than to buy more insurance. In theory, you want to buy enough disability to replace 100% of your after tax income -- or more since there is no inflation protection built into most policies.  Insurance companies often will not sell this due to moral hazard -- although you may be able to combine policies to reach 80% or so.   Keep in mind that you will need to continue to save / invest if you are on long term disability, since most policies cease payment at 65 or when your eligible for Social Security.  In addition, your expenses often rise due to the increased medical expenditures, possibly needing COBRA / private health insurance, etc.

negative: "It sounds like maybe you want an ""investment club"".  As defined by the SEC: An investment club is a group of people who pool their money to make investments. Usually, investment clubs are organized as partnerships and, after the members study different investments, the group decides to buy or sell based on a majority vote of the members. Club meetings may be educational and each member may actively participate in investment decisions. These ""typically"" do not need to register: Investment clubs usually do not have to register, or register the offer and sale of their own membership interests, with the SEC. But since each investment club is unique, each club should decide if it needs to register and comply with securities laws. There's more information from the SEC here: http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/invclub.htm The taxes depend on how you organized the club, i.e. if you organize as a partnership, I believe that you will be taxed as a partnership. (Not 100% sure.)  Some online brokerages have special accounts specifically for investment clubs.  Check around."

negative: "They do not. M&A execution is housed within industry coverage groups; there's no separate group that executes. They have a group called ""M&A"" that advises on tax structuring, anti-raid, and other assorted issues (e.g. MASA) but they don't run the model and they're not really executing. Most of the people there are ex-lawyers or experienced bankers.  Trust me on this, if you tell someone at GS you're interested in working in the M&A group, you're not getting an offer."

negative: As someone who has worked for both an insurance carrier and an insurance agent, the reason people buy insurance is two fold: to spread risk out, and to get the benefits (when applicable) of approaching risk as a group. What you are really doing when you buy insurance is you are buying in to a large group of people who are sharing risk.  You put money in that will help people when they take a loss, and in exchange get a promise of having your losses covered.  There is an administrative fee taken by the company that runs the group in order to cover their costs of doing business and their profits that they get for running the group well (or losses they take if they run it poorly.) Some insurances are for profit, some are non-profit; all work on the principle of spreading risk around though and taking risk as a larger group. So let's take a closer look at each of the advantages you get from participating in insurance.  The biggest and most obvious is the protection from catastrophic loss.  Yes, you could self-insure with a group size of one, by saving your money and having no overhead (other than your time and the time value of your money) but that has a cost in itself and also doesn't cover you against risk up front if you aren't already independently wealthy.  A run of bad luck could wipe you out entirely since you don't have a large group to spread the risk around.  The same thing can still happen to insurance companies as well when the group as a whole takes major losses, but it's less likely to occur because there are more rare things that have to go wrong.  You pay an administrative overhead for the group to be run for you, but you have less exposure to your own risks in exchange for a small premium. Another significant but less visible advantage is the benefit of being part of a large group.  Insurance companies represent a large group of people and lots of business, so they can get better rates on dealing with recovering from losses.  They can negotiate for better health care rates or better repair rates or cheaper replacement parts.  This can potentially save more than the administrative overhead and profit that they take off the top, even when compared to self-insuring. There is an element of gambling to it, but there are also very real financial benefits to having predictable costs.  The value of that predictability (and the lesser need for liquid assets) is what makes insurance worth it for many people.  The value of this group benefit does decrease a lot as the value of the insurance coverage (the amount it pays out) decreases.  Insurance for minor losses has a much smaller impact on liquidity and is much easier to self insure.  Cheaper items that have insurance also tend to be high risk items, so the costs tend to be very high relative to the amount of protection.  If you are financially able, it may make more sense to self-insure in these cases, particularly if you tend to be more cautious.  It may make sense for those who are more prone to accidents with their devices to buy insurance, but this selection bias also drives the cost up further.  Generally, the reason to buy insurance on something like a cellphone is because you expect you will break it.  You are going to end up paying for an entire additional phone over time anyway and most such policies stop paying out after the first replacement anyway. The reason why people buy the coverage anyway, even when it really isn't in their best interest is due to two factors: being risk averse, as base64 pointed out, and also being generally bad at dealing with large numbers.  On the risk averse side, they think of how much they are spending on the item (even if it is less compared to large items like cars or houses) and don't want to lose that.  On the bad at dealing with large numbers side, they don't think about the overall cost of the coverage and don't read the fine print as to what they are actually getting coverage for.  (This is the same reason that you always see prices one cent under the dollar.)   People often don't really subconsciously get that they are paying more even if they would be able to eat the loss, so they pay what feels like a small amount to offset a large risk.  The risk of loss is a higher fear than the known small, easy payment that keeps the risk away and the overall value proposition isn't even considered.

negative: If you have a view on housing you can buy a real estate investment trust and use proceeds to pay rent. Downside is, depending on where you live, you'll have to pay tax on dividend income from REITs. So if you invest the same amount in a REIT as in a house you'll effectively loose some money due to the tax. You can also think of it this way: you wouldn't pay tax on the rent that you don't have to pay as a result of owning a house, but you pay tax on rent that other people pay you.

negative: There's nothing new about Whole Life Insurance. The agent stands to earn a pretty hefty commission if he can sell it to you. I don't think your assets warrant using it for avoiding the taxes that would be due on a larger estate. I don't see a compelling reason to buy it.

negative: "If you want to do #1, then you should form an ""investment club."" This is an entity that is recognized by the SEC and the IRS.  From the SEC: An investment club is a group of people who pool their money to make investments. Usually, investment clubs are organized as partnerships and, after the members study different investments, the group decides to buy or sell based on a majority vote of the members. Club meetings may be educational and each member may actively participate in investment decisions. https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/invclub.htm You should do your own legal research on how to organize, but I believe that a common way is to form a formal partnership, which then provides the legal structure for distributing gains, tax liability, income, and other costs to the members.  IRS publication 550 has a section on Investment Clubs from a tax perspective, but I'd definitely recommend get professional help on this in addition to whatever you can read yourself. As for #2, I believe that's illegal unless you're licensed."

negative: The answer likely depends a bit on which state you are in, but this should be true for most states.  I don't know anything about Pennsylvania specifically unfortunately. The Affordable Care Act created the SHOP marketplace, which allows small businesses to effectively form larger groups for group coverage purposes.  SHOP stands for Small Business Health Options Program, and requires only one common-law employee on payroll. This would effectively allow you to offer group coverage without having a group.  Talk to your tax accountant for more details, as this is still very new and not necessarily well understood. There are some other options, all of which I would highly suggest talking to a tax accountant about as well.  HRAs (health reimbursement accounts) allow the employer to set aside pre-tax funds for the employee to use for approved medical expenses; they're often managed by a benefits company (say, Wageworks, Conexis, etc.).  That would allow your employee to potentially pick a higher deductible health plan which offers poorer coverage on the individual marketplace (with after-tax dollars) and then supplement with your HRA. There are also the concept of Employer Payment Plans, where the employer reimburses the employee for their insurance premiums, but those are not compatible with the ACA for the most part - although there seems to be a lot of disagreement as to whether it's possible to have something effectively the same work, see for example this page versus this for example.

negative: It will be said that Delaware incorporation is a type popular technique of growing incorporation, for each; human beings residing in US or remote places. For example, Delaware incorporation is powerful to businesses that plan to provide their stocks to the public. Delaware incorporation is simply a whole lot easier and beneficial for groups as opposed to different country, due to these kinds of contributors. Another gain of Delaware incorporation is Delaware's comprehensive and frequently without problems interpretable law. Delaware incorporation is also useful due to the fact buyers and administrators could make selections by means of single posted approval in area of reputable meetings.

negative: He needs to go see a lawyer to find out what all his options are, and the consequences of any of them. Then he needs to get help extricating himself from this situation, in whatever fashion he chooses: buyout, giveaway, what have you. This situation involves property, which involves money, so definitely get professional advice on this. Otherwise, 20 years from now, he could be hit with a bill for back taxes or what have you, if whatever he does, isn't done correctly and completely. The situation does stink, on ice. Either he's going to be the pissed-off party in this situation, or she is, or they both are...but there's money involved, and property involved, and at least one recalcitrant family member involved. Best case scenario, he writes up the story and sells the plot to Lifetime for a movie-of-the-week. (If I were in this situation, I would donate my half of the property to some charitable group, then have a lawyer send Sis a letter saying that it had been donated. Maybe even pick a charitable group aligned with Sis' interests, so that if Sis does want to try and negotiate with them to buy it out, she's giving the sales money to a group/cause that she believes in. But...then, it would No Longer Be My Problem. But that has consequences of its own, and your boyfriend needs to be aware of all of them, including any tax implications for him, before taking any such step.)

negative: No.  You don't need to pay the IRS before such a transfer – though you'll need to fill out certain paperwork to report the money transfer to authorities if it exceeds a threshold amount.  If the money is income, you'll need to declare it on your income tax return and then pay the taxes due.  If it is a gift, other rules apply and tax may be due.  Do proper due diligence and consult with a trusted tax professional. However:   Please see the comments above – this sounds like a potential scam.

negative: "> Income inequality comes from too much government intervention...  Right, those Monopoly games all ended the way they did due to government interventions.  > ...the divergence in income growth began around the same time as the increase in regulatory burden.  Correlation does not prove causality.  > Look up the Mercatus Center's regulatory growth studies.  You think I'm going to accept studies about government intervention from a think-tank headed and funded by Koch Industries people and groups and self-describing itself as ""the world’s premier university source for market-oriented ideas""?  Can you find something from a group that at least appears to be impartial?"

negative: "There are tax free bonds in the United States.  They are for things like public housing and other urban projects.  They are tax free for everyone but only rich people buy them.  Why?   The issue is that the tax free nature of the bond is included in its yield.  So rather than yielding say a 5% return, they figure that the owner is getting 20% off due to not paying taxes.  As a result, they only give a 4% return but are as risky as a 5% return investment.  Net result, only rich people invest in tax free bonds.  ""Rich"" is defined here to mean people paying a 20% tax on long term investment returns.   Or take the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction, which has been in the news recently.  Again, it is technically open to everyone.  But there is also a standard deduction that is open to everyone.  For the typical family, state and local taxes might be 5% of income.  So for a family making $100k a year, that's $5k.  The same family can take a $13k or so standard deduction instead of itemizing.  So why would they take the smaller deduction?   As a practical matter, two groups take the SALT deduction.  People rich enough to pay more than $13k in state and local taxes and people who also take the mortgage interest deduction.  So it helps a lot of people who are rich quite a bit.  And it helps a few middle class people some.   But if you are lower middle class with a $30k mortgage on a tiny house and paying 4% interest, then that's only $1200 a year.  Add in property taxes of $3000 and SALT of $2.8k and that's only $7k.  Even if the person gives $3k to charity, the $13k deduction is a lot better and requires less paperwork.   Contrast that with someone who has $500k mortgage at 3.6% interest.  That's $18k in interest alone.  Add in a SALT of $7k and property taxes of $50k, and there's $75k of itemized deductions, much better than $13k.  Now a $7k donation to charity is entirely deductible.  And even after the mortgage interest deduction goes away, the other $64k remains."

negative: So in your screenshot, someone or some group of someones is willing to buy 3,000 shares at $3.45, and someone or some group of someones is willing to sell 2,000 shares at 3.88. Without getting in to the specific mechanics, you can place a market buy order for 10 (or whatever number) shares and it will probably transact at $3.88 per share because that's the lowest price for which someone will currently sell their shares. As a small fish, you can generally ignore the volume notations in the bid/ask quotes.

negative: It is unlikely that UK tax will be due on the money -- see here: Foreign students usually don’t pay UK tax on foreign income or gains, as long as they’re used for course fees or living costs But if the UK doesn't tax you on the money then double-taxation agreements probably won't apply, and so any Italian tax due will be payable.

negative: At the end of each calendar year the mutual fund company will send you a 1099 form. It will tell you and the IRS what your account earned. You will see boxes for: You will end up paying taxes on these, unless the fund is part of a 401K or IRA. These taxes will be due even if you never sold any shares. They are due even if it was a bad year and the value of your account went down. Most if not all states will levy an income tax yon your dividends and capital gains each year. When you sell your shares you may also owe income taxes if you made a profit. The actual taxes due is a more complex calculation due to long term vs short term, and what other gains or losses you have. Partial sales also take into account which shares are sold.

negative: Question One: Question Two: Your best reference for this would be a brokerage account with data privileges in the markets you wish to trade. Failing that, I would reference the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Group (CME Group) website. Question Three: Considering future tuition costs and being Canadian, you are eligible to open a Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP). While contributions to this plan are not tax deductible, any taxes on income earned through investments within the fund are deferred until the beneficiary withdraws the funds. Since the beneficiary will likely be in a lower tax bracket at such a time, the sum will likely be taxed at a lower rate, assuming that the beneficiary enrolls in a qualifying post secondary institution. The Canadian government also offers the Canada Education Savings Grant (CESG) in which the federal government will match 20% of the first $2500 of your annual RESP contribution up to a maximum of $500.

negative: "This forum is not intended to be a discussion group, but I would like to add a different perspective, especially for @MrChrister, on  @littleadv's rhetorical question  ""... estates are after-tax money, i.e.: income tax has been paid on them,    yet the government taxes them again. Why?"" For the cash in an estate, yes, that is after-tax money, but consider other assets such as stocks and real estate. Suppose a rich man bought stock in a small computer start-up company at $10 a share about 35 years ago, and that stock is now worth $500 a share. The man dies and his will bequeaths the shares to his son. According to US tax law, the son's basis in the shares is $500 per share, that is, if the son sells the shares, his capital gains are computed as if he had purchased the shares for $500 each. The son pays no taxes on the inheritance he receives. The deceased father's last income tax return (filed by the executor of the father's will) does not list the $490/share gain as a capital gain since the father did not sell the stock (the gain is what is called an unrealized gain), and so there is no income tax due from the father on the $490/share. Now, if there is no estate tax whatsoever, the father's estate  tax return pays no tax on that gain of $490 per share either. Would this be considered an equitable system? Should the government not tax the gain at all? It is worth noting that it would be possible for a government to eliminate estate taxes entirely, but instead have tax laws  that say that unrealized gains on the deceased's property would be taxed (as capital gains) on the deceased's final tax return."

negative: "It makes little sense from that perspective.  The owners are the ""very large"" consumers of public goods such as National defense, not the legal entity that the owners make in order to create wealth.    And you can't tax dividends any more than any other capital gains made within the corporation, otherwise the corporation would be stupid to ever disperse dividends instead of buying back shares.     Tax the rich their due share on the profits they made after investing, or just set up a progressive consumption tax that taxes the rich for what they spend.  I don't care.  Just don't over-tax people for doing things you actually want them to do, like re-invest."

negative: (Oops - I had been meaning to come back to this Q. sooner. Just saw my reminder, so here goes.) Shortly before this question was asked, I actually read a good blog post on the subject of disability insurance at Evolution of Wealth - 7 Ways Your Group Disability Will Fail.  I know the OP doesn't have group disability (and hence the question), but the reason I'm highlighting it is: Even somebody with a group disability policy from their employer may want to consider supplementing it with an individual policy that has better coverage. In my case, the reason I opted for an individual policy was due to point #6 from the post: ... ways that group disability coverage will fail you:  ...  [etc]   6) You can go work somewhere else.   With disability insurance there is a   feature called own-occupation.  This   means that you are unable to perform   the duties of your specific occupation   even if you are able to work in an   other occupation.  Good group   disability coverage will cover your   own-occupation for a period of 2 years   after that if you can work anywhere   (yes, even McDonald’s) then you   receive no more benefits.  Notice I   said ‘good’ coverage, a lot of   policies don’t even have the   own-occupation benefit. ... I made sure my own individual LTD policy included coverage of own-occupation until age 65.  So, do pay attention to the specific features and limitations of LTD policies when shopping for one.

negative: It's not stealing from people who create value. Or create jobs. Taxing money earned by dividends isn't harming anyone. Simple math says if you're paying 10m in taxes it's because you didn't use your wealth to create jobs. And someone who paid 10m in taxes isn't going to decide not to buy that 10k ring because they paid 20m and only have 40 left for the year. Walmart makes 15b a year they're not going to create more jobs or wealth because they made 20b with a tax cut. Lowering taxes will only be beneficial to the middle class due to the fact they are the ones stimulating the economy. It's easy to live paycheck to paycheck making 120k a year when you actually get to enjoy life.


query: What are the ins/outs of writing-off part of one's rent for working at home?

positive: Be ruthlessly meticulous about the IRS regulations for deducting a home office.  If it's allowed, it's allowed.

positive: Tax regulations vary from country to country - some permitting more deductions, some less - but here are a few guidelines. As regards the home-office: As regards the deductions: Think of it like this: in order to have space for a home-office you needed a bigger home.  That leads to increased rates, heating, insurance and so on.  Many tax regulators recognise that these are genuine expenses.  The alternative is to rent a separate office and incur greater expenses, leading to increased deductions and less overall tax paid (which won't finance the deficit). The usual test for deductions is: was the expense legitimately incurred in the pursuit of revenue?  The flexibility permitted will vary by tax authority but you can frequently deduct more than you expected.

positive: Before starting to do this, make sure that you are squeaky clean in all aspects of your tax preparation and are prepared to back up any claims that you make with documentation. Home office deductions are a huge red flag that often trigger audits. Follow mbhunter's advice and be incredibly meticulous about following the rules and keeping records.

negative: "A couple of distinctions. First, if you were to ""invest in real estate"" were you planning to buy a home to live in, or buy a home to rent out to someone else?  Buying a home as a primary residence really isn't ""investing in real estate"" per se.  It's buying a place to live rather than renting one.  Unless you rent a room out or get a multi-family unit, your primary residence won't be income-producing.  It will be income-draining, for the most part.  I speak as a homeowner. Second, if you are buying to rent out to someone else, buying a single home is quite a bit different than buying an REIT.  The home is a lot less liquid, the transaction costs are higher, and all of your eggs are in one basket.  Having said that, though, if you buy one right and do your homework it can set you on the road for a very comfortable retirement."

negative: 10 people live in country X in 10 separate households, 5 own their homes and the others rent unrelated property. Home ownership = 50% 10 people live in Country Y in 5 seperate households, 5 own their homes while the others rent from them. Home ownership = 50% One day, person 1 leaves his rented spot in one of the homes to opt for a new home elsewhere. Home ownership = 50%. It doesn't work out, so he moves back in with mom and dad. Home ownership = 50% Where am I making a mistake?

negative: I was clarifying a point someone else made. I don't take any ownership of the claim, however none of what I said is particularly far fetched, especially considering [Wal-Mart has a net income of close to $16,000,000,000 annually](http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=WMT+Income+Statement&annual)  Also, I didn't say that the job *deserves* higher pay. In addition, there's no reason I can see why a pay increase would result in Wal-Mart laying off 30-50% of its workforce. They either need the manpower to operate the stores or they don't, and that financial statement would indicate that they could absorb a slight increase in overhead.  Sorry for the way you were treated there, particularly the 39hr55min a week part. I don't know the ins and outs of Wal-Mart's policies, but I'm guessing this was a way to circumvent a policy that grants certain benefits to 40/hr week workers?

negative: "Lol, wtf kind of question is this?    First off, there is no single ""derivatives market"".  There's listed derivatives (ETD's) and OTC.  Then you can break each of those broad markets down into forwards, futures, options (includes all exotics such as binaries, single barriers, double barriers, one touches, double no touches, knock ins, knock outs, reverse knock ins, reverse knock outs, window barriers, etc), and swaps (including swaptions).  All of these are product specific (FX, FI, Credit, Equities, Commodities, etc).... so its more appropriate to look at derivatives with respect to the market they are in rather than all derivatives across all markets.  Now to your question... your question makes absolutely no sense.  Are you wondering what the daily volume is?  Notional outstanding?  Total exposure?"

negative: People rave about Basecamp by 37signals.  The impressive part is all the add-ins you can get for it.  There are add-ins for invoicing, billing, accounting, and time tracking.

negative: When it comes to Real Estate, there are 2 school of thoughts:  1. People who swear that it's the one and best way to make lots of money with RE: flipping, fixer upper, leveraging, whatnot  2. People who don't believe people in #1 above.  I belong to #2 with some addendum(s):  * you can make a lot of money in Real Estate by becoming a RE Broker (but it's not for everyone) even better if you own a RE agency employing brokers (but it's not for everyone); it's like collecting tolls on the highway, no matter what, you collect a fee.  * every portfolio should have a portion allocated to Real Estate, either directly or by means of a REIT. Alas most people who own a home are over-allocated in Real Estate  * in some, and very few, parts of the USA one can make a lot of money by buying and managing directly small apartment complex to rent out; these are remote small urban settings, low prices for both buying and renting, but the ratio of price/rent is favorable.  Run your own numbers and see if it's profitable *enough* ***for you***.

negative: What kind of financial analysis would make you comfortable about this decision? The HELOC and ARM are the biggest red flags to me in your current situation.  While I don't expect interest rates to skyrocket in the near future, they introduce an interest rate risk that is easy to get rid of.  Getting rid of the HELOC and converting to a fixed mortgage would be my first priority. If you also want to upgrade to a new home at the same time (meaning buy a new home contingent on the sale of your first, paying off the HELOC and mortgage), that's fine, but make sure that you can comfortably afford the payment on a fixed-rate mortgage with at least 20% down. I would not take additional cash out of your equity just to save it.  You're going to pay more in interest that you're going to get in savings.   From there things get trickier.   While many people would keep the first property on a mortgage and rent it out, I am not willing to be a landlord for a part-time job, especially when the interest on the mortgage gouges my return on the rent.  PLus leverage increases the risks as well - all it takes is to go one or two months without rent and you can find yourself unable to make a mortgage payment, wrecking your credit and possibly risking foreclosure. So my options in order of precedence would be: At what point does it make sense to become a landlord? The complicated answer is when the benefits (rent, appreciation) relative to the costs (maintenance, interest, taxes, etc.) and risks (lost rent, bad renters, home value variance) give you a better return that you could find in investments of similar risk.  The simple answer is when you can pay cash for it.  That takes interest and lost rent out of the equation.   Again, some are willing to take those risks and pay 20% down on rental property.  Some are able to make it work.  Some of those go broke or lose their properties.   when calculating the 20% down of a new property, does that need to be liquid funds, or can that be based on the value of the home you are selling You can make the purchase of the new home contingent on the sale of the first if you need to get the equity out of it to make the 20%.  Do NOT refinance the first just to pull out the equity to make a down payment.  It's not worth the fees of a refinance.

negative: >means less demand for absurdly priced homes which means prices will drop to affordable levels.  Rent and home prices are obviously variable but in my area home prices are pretty aligned with rents.  Assuming both home prices and rent goes up with inflation and accounting for insurance, taxes, tax advantages, maintenance and a list of other issues the prices are comparable.  If you have the capital for a down payment and plan to stay in one house (or aparment) for 5 years you are probably better off buying.  To say home prices are absurd you need to be comparing it to what you consider it's true worth but how are you determining that?  Edit: Perhaps both rent and home prices will go down as more people live with their parents and room mates but I haven't seen that trend start yet and vacancy rates aren't that high (as far as I know) so I don't see it starting soon.  If that trend did start I imagine new construction would be the first ones to go but housing developments are going strong around me.

negative: This solution obviously wouldn't work for everyone, and is contingent on the circumstances of your parents' finances with regards to their house, but...  Have you considered buying your parents' house?  This way your parents' desire for you to get a house as an investment would be satisfied, they wouldn't have to worry about losing their home, and you might even be able to work out a financing/rent deal that is beneficial to everyone involved.  There are definitely fewer costs going this route anyway, for instance, your parents won't have any marketing costs associated with selling the house and could pass this savings along to you.  Also, having lived in the house for a large part of your life you will also know what you are getting in to.

negative: "You are mixing issues here. And it's tough for members to answer without more detail, the current mortgage rate in your country, for one.  It's also interesting to parse out your question. ""I wish to safely invest money. Should I invest in real estate."" But then the text offers that it's not an investment, it's a home to live in. This is where the trouble is. And it effectively creates 2 questions to address.  The real question - Buy vs Rent. I know you mentioned Euros. Fortunately, mortgages aren't going to be too different, lower/higher, and tax consequence, but all can be adjusted. The New York Times offered a beautiful infographing calculator Is It Better to Rent or Buy?  For those not interested in viewing it, they run the math, and the simple punchline is this - The home/rent ratio can have an incredibly wide range. I've read real estate blogs that say the rent should be 2% of the home value. That's a 4 to 1 home/rent (per year). A neighbor rented his higher end home, and the ratio was over 25 to 1. i.e. the rent for the year was about 4% the value of the home. It's this range that makes the choice less than obvious.  The second part of your question is how to stay safely invested if you fear your own currency will collapse. That quickly morphs into too speculative a question. Some will quickly say ""gold"" and others would point out that a stockpile of weapons, ammo, and food would be the best choice to survive that."

negative: If I was an upside down homeowner and I went to my bank to refinance the mortgage at a lower rate and they declined, I'd give them the middle finger by not paying the mortgage and declaring bankruptcy.    A homeowner has no incentive to continue paying a mortgage for a home that is no longer the value of the mortgage and if the bank is unwilling to work with the upside down homeowner to get the home owner a lower interest rate (that is the least the bank could do) - then make the home the bank's problem and let them eat their cake.   This home owner is not asking the bank to forgive part of the mortgage or write it off, but asking for his mortgage to be refinanced at the lower rate - that is pretty straight forward and simple. We as taxpayers bailed the banks out in 2008, the least they could do is help upside down homeowners. The banks reluctance to help upside down homeowners is why we have a stagnant housing market.   **The bank by not working with this home owner to refinance his mortgage at a lower interest rate is a bank that indicates they don't care about having a paying customer.**

negative: "What you need will depend on a number of factors that aren't clear from the question. This coverage is simply called ""Vacant home insurance"", but not all companies are willing to offer this coverage. Unfortunately, in New York, insurers can also legally drop your standard homeowners' coverage if they become aware that your property has become vacant for 30 days or more. The Insurer's Concerns Typically, a ""standard"" homeowners policy will have an exclusion clause for vacant homes. The insurance company's concern is that without someone in the home, they will be at risk for break-ins, squatters and vandalism. If you've ever seen ""Flip Men"" on Spike, you'll know this is a serious concern (great show, by the way). They will use a risk model to calculate an estimated risk for the property (this is why a seasonal vacation home in a sparsely-populated area is often less of a concern than a family home in an urban area). If they estimate the risk to be low, some insurance companies will allow to you buy back that exclusion so that vacant properties are covered. In your case, they have probably decided that either: Your Options First, you need to find a company that is comfortable with taking on the extra risk of a vacant home. This will vary quite a bit by location, but the main ones are Farmer's (they use the Foremost brand name in New York) and Castle Rock. There are lots of insurance agencies that also advertise these products, but most of them are middlemen and use one of these two companies to actually write the coverage. Additionally, since this is a specialty policy, make sure you understand all of the details of the policy, and how they vary from a regular policy including: How to Reduce your Premium costs These are general tips from the Murray Group's website (an independent broker in NY) on how to lower the additional cost of vacant coverage: This may sound expensive, but these steps will all reduce the risk of something really bad happening when you're not there. Additionally, do you know anyone you completely trust (relative, unemployed friend) that might want to live in your old house rent-free for a while? This could work out for you if they are willing to keep the place 100% clean around the clock so that you can show the house at any time. If you have additional/specific questions, you should be able to find an independent insurance broker in your area that would be willing to advise you on your specific situation for a flat fee. Best of luck with getting the home covered and sold quickly!"

negative: You can be a millionaire and either not own a home (e.g. rent) or have a home whose value has declined to less than the original purchase price.  Bankruptcy is for people unable to pay their debts. There is a difference between being unable to pay ones debts and unemployed. Unemployment benefits exist simply to help those out of work. Additionally, hiring a lawyer and filing for bankruptcy is neither free nor cheap.

negative: There are probably thousands of houses that you could buy. If you want to buy a house, it is very unlikely that the one you are renting right now is the best possible buy.  Usually people living in the houses they own are more interested in the quality of their property and the quality of their neigborhood than people who are renting, so I'd say that you are generally better off finding a home to buy in an area where the majority own their homes.

negative: I've tried to argue this to some close friends who bought homes, pre/post-crisis, if the crisis ever ended, they thought it was ridiculous. There is a clear fulcrum where renting makes more sense than buying, when appropriate inputs of data are entered into the model. I think Khan Academy did a good 10-minute run down on the subject and used a relatively good model, as well.   Further than that, I read the first few paragraphs and stopped reading, it was a commercial. I was shocked. The entire thing up till' 2 paragraphs in is literally a commercial.   The supposed 'antagonist', explicitly implied by the title isn't actually an antagonist, it's a click-bait commercial -article posing as a real article, (imitation), that actually might have some real science below the commercial, as you've indicated, but that part also sounds like junk finance; to sell the idea to consumers that they should in fact buy homes (instead of rent), and get loans from banks (preferably this one), and do anything to achieve that, if need be, even move in with their parents.   This financial institution appears to have a sophisticated public relations marketing team doing their commercials-posing-as-news campaign(s).   Very interesting to see the marketing beast morph itself into something so sophisticated, as to contain such clear imitation, junk science, and click-bait. I wonder what kind of penetration they are getting with this model, and what percentage of those see it for what it is.   I suppose that would be a big-data question, answerable through analytics.

negative: We have a lot of debt - at this point I don't even know how much This is your problem. Find out, and while you're at it find out how much income you have and also what your total expenditures are. You seem to be facing up to the problem, but not looking it in the eyes. You just need to take some time, and a little bravery, to get all your financial documentation together and lay it all out so you know what your situation actually is. Its not hard to do this, get a box and put all (old) bills and statements in that you can find, and at the end of a month, pick them out and write down the totals. Then work out your income and all that you've spent that month. This is known as a Statement of Affairs and there are calculators to help you. Then you can work out how much you need to pay off, and how much spare money you have to do this with. You can also start to cut down on all the really unnecessary stuff to increase your spare money that you can use to pay off the debts. Hopefully this won't take too long, and you can easily (if boringly) work the debt off over time. If it really is unsurmountable there are things you can do to help - firstly contacting your creditors and seeing what they can do to either part write off the debt, or freeze it as you pay it off (most creditors understand that if you're desperate enough to talk to them (!) then they may not see any of their debt back and are at least willing to help you pay them back). Generally though, it sounds like you are not in a total mess as you can pay it off. There are people in far worse states than you! But you really do need to be fully aware of your financial situation. Sit down and 'count your money' one lazy Sunday. There are links to help. Try the Motley Fool's guide, and its dealing with debt forum, both of which are very practical (if UK based, the Fool has a US site too, see for yourself if there's the same stuff on it, but this kind of thing tends to be fundamental to people of all nations).

negative: When purchasing a condo in a university town, it is almost guaranteed that the prices will be inflated as a result.  This is because you are competing not only with single-home, primary residence homeowners, but also with a multitude of investment buyers and landlords who want to purchase a rental property.  Universities are popular rental markets due to their stability (there will always be students looking for a place to live), and as a result the areas attract investors more than other markets. This can work in your favor, however.  If you don't mind sharing your residence with other students, and you don't mind the part time work that being a landlord requires, you can live much cheaper and even make money over the next few years as your roommates pay your bills.  Owning a primary residence rental property also brings a lot of tax benefits because you can claim expenses and depreciation against your income.  This could benefit your father who could be a co-owner and would certainly benefit from the write-offs against his higher tax bracket. The real trick that makes or breaks the experience is finding mature, responsible roommates who will cause the minimum amount of headache.  If this part of the equation is missing, it can lead to distractions from school and even legal worries when you have to think about things like unpaid rent and/or evictions.

negative: Seems a little early.  Here's my advice: if you don't feel ready, you're probably not completely ready. In that case, it would probably be best if you worked as the assistant to the president of your business for a while to learn the ins and outs.  Even if you are confident, keep the current president around to help. Maybe they can occupy the vice president position while you take over ownership. You'll want somebody there who knows what's up when shit hits the fan.

negative: The rent versus buy question is a deeply personal one in which your personal desires for a living space need to be carefully combined with what makes economic sense.  Do you want your own place with all the joys of having it be yours and all the pains of having to handle all the maintenance and be the one ultimately responsible?  Have you tried living for a few months putting aside the amount required for not only a mortgage payment but the taxes and insurance on a house/condo in your price range to see if you can really afford it?  You can use a real estate website such as trulia to see the assessments of some for sale homes and figure out tax values.  The average home insurance in the US is around $900/year if I remember right - more for homes that are more expensive and less for less expensive ones, with flooding and other hazards as a factor.  Make sure you can afford to pay for all these items. From a financial perspective realize that you'll always be spending money on your living space.  Even if you pay for a house with cash you will be paying property tax and maintenance and would be wise to continue paying for insurance.  The value of the house at that point is, as contributor fennec often says, the rent you aren't paying. I personally don't recommend trying to time the market.  You can't predict the future - will real estate in your area be a double dip or has it bottomed and is it going up?  What you can do is buy a home only when you are sure that you can deal with its relative lack of liquidity by staying there for a long time.  Five years is usually a reasonable minimum.   There is a way that I recommend figuring out if it is likely bad financial decision to buy, and that's by looking at a financial comparison of renting versus buying.  In some cases even with the bursting of the bubble it is still a bad deal to buy.  DC went from renting being more cost effective to buying, but San Francisco is one area where buying is still not necessarily the best choice.  To figure out what the case is for your area, look at the New York Times rent versus buy calculator.  Find a home for rent on craigslist similar to what you'd look to buy.  Find a home for sale on one of the MLS aggregator sites that represents something you think you'd like.  Plug in the numbers.  Figure out how many years you'd have to stay in your purchase for it to be a good deal. In the likely event that the calculator says buy, start saving if that's what you really want.  You're never going to be able to absolutely guarantee that you won't be upside down.  What you can control is getting as much principal in that house as you can.  The more you have, the less likely you will be upside down.  Build a down payment now, reap the rewards later.

negative: Yeah.  Screw that old lady.  She should have known all the ins and outs of legal process.  It's totally her fault that one of the US's ten million douche bag lawyers fucked her in the ass with a rusty metal bat.

negative: "I recommend reading What's the catch in investing in real estate for rent? and making a list of expenses.  You have a known expense, the rent, and the assumption that it will rise a bit each year. If not each year, eventually the landlord will bump it, and on average, the rent should track inflation.  The buy side is the complete unknown, especially to us here. The mortgage and taxes are just the beginning. My ongoing issue in the buy/rent debate is that it's easy to buy ""too big"" or at least far bigger that what you are renting.  One extreme - a couple moves from their one bedroom apartment into their purchased 3BR home with far more space than they ever use. No need to paint the full picture of numbers, the house is a money pit, and they live for the house.  Other end - Couple already renting a nice sized home, and they buy a similar one. They rent out the two spare bedrooms for 5 years until they have kids and want their privacy back. They bought smart, for less than market price, and from day one, the mortgage was lower than the rent they paid. By year 5, having sent the extra income to pay down the mortgage, they've paid down half the loan. As the kids come along, they refi to a new 30 yr fixed at 3.5%, and the payment is tiny compared to the rest of their budget.  Simply put, the ratio of house price to rent for that same house is not a constant. When the ratio is high, it's time to rent. When it swings very low, it's worth considering a purchase. But the decision is never clear until every detail is known. The time may be perfect, and the day after you close, you lose your job, or in a good scenario, get a raise and are relocated. Just because you bought low yesterday, doesn't mean the market will pay you a good price today, it takes time for out-of-whack pricing to come back to normal.  A simple question? Maybe. But we first need a lot of details to help you understand what you are considering."

negative: > the less chance of people defaulting,  You know a non-trivial part of the mortgages out there are adjustable right?  Did you never study what happened when in '07 after rates went up 4% in a year or two?  Rising interest rates are also a factor in rent prices. Meaning rent prices go up and people won't be saving as much. Investment accounts (savings) will be taking a shit because of severe contractionary fiscal policy.   > more people buying with flat cash,  How much cash do you think the average American has ready to pay for a home?  I agree higher interest rates will definitely lead to lower home prices (that's ultimately what happened in '07) but you need to stop thinking about a ceteris paribus model and begin considering the cascade of other variables and what the impact of housing affordability is from their respective changes as well.

negative: Real estate is a lousy investment because: Renting a home and buying a home, all else being equal, are pretty similar in costs in the long term (if you can force yourself to invest the would-be down payment). So, buy a home if you want to enjoy the benefits of home ownership. Buy a home if you need to hedge against rising housing prices (e.g. you're on a fixed income and couldn't cope if rent increased a bunch when the economy heated up). Maybe buy a home if you're in a high tax bracket to save yourself from being taxed on your imputed rent, if it works out that way (consult your financial advisor). But don't consider it a really great investment vehicle. Returns are average and the risk profile isn't that attractive.

negative: If commuting is a big budget item, then can you: A side job is one way to make extra money, but I'd suggest a home business.  If your wife substitute teaches, I bet she writes fairly well, and in any case you can.  Write a personal finance blog or just a site with articles.  Focus on surviving and thriving with child(ren) in a one-income Christian household in the suburbs of Philadelphia.  Or if you have a hobby that stokes your furnace, write about that.  Heck, do both.  The content just stays there and gets traffic day after day that you can monetize. My main suggestion would be to start this now because it's not overnight money.  But in the long run it can turn into a nice, fairly passive income. The big advantage of this is that mommy gets to stay home with the kids and build up a decent business.  The cost is $10/year for the domain (per domain) and maybe $10/month for hosting. Or, if some other legitimate work-at-home business presents itself, go with that.  I suggest blogging because it's what I know, but everyone's an expert in something unique.

negative: "As others have pointed out, you can't just pick a favorable number and rent for that amount. If you want to rent out your house, you must rent it for a value that a renter would agree to.  For example there is a house on my street that has been looking for renters for 3 years. They want $2,500 a month. This covers their mortgage, and a little bit more for taxes and repairs. It has never been rented once. Other homes in my neighborhood rent for around $1,000 a month. There is no value to a renter in renting a house that is $1,500 more then a similar house 2 doors down. Now what you can look at is cost mitigation. So I am using data from my area. Houses in my part of Florida must have A/C running in the wet months to keep the moisture from ruining the house. This can easily be $100 a month (usually more). The city requires you to have water service, even when not occupied, though the cost is very small. Same with waste, which is a flat fee: $20 a month. Yard watering is a must during the dry months (if you want to keep grass). Let's say that comes out to $50 a month, year round. Pest control is a must, especially if your house has wooden parts (like floors or a roof). Even modest pest control is $25 a month. Property taxes around $240 a month. Let's say your mortgage is around $1,000 a month. That means to sit empty your house would cost $1,435. Now if you were to rent the house, a lot of those costs could ""go away"" by becoming the tenants' responsibility. Your cost of the house sitting full would be $1,240. Let's pad that with 10% for repairs and go with $1,364. Now let's assume you can rent for $1,000 a month. Keep in mind all these rates are about right for my area but will change based on size and amenities.  Your choices are let the house sit empty for $1,435 a month or fill it and only ""lose"" $240 a month. Keep in mind that in both cases you will be gaining equity.  So what a lot of people do around here is rent out their houses and pay the $240 as an investment. For every $240 they pay, they get $1,000 in equity (well, interest and fees aside, but you get the point). It's not a money maker for them right now, but as they get older two things happen. That $240 a month ""payment"" pays off their mortgage, so they end up owning the house outright. Then that $240 a month payment turns to extra income. And at some point, their rental can be sold for (let's guess) $400,000. SO they paid $86,400 and got back $400,000. All the while they are building equity in their rental and in the home they are living in.  The important take away from this, is that it's not a source of income for the landlord as much as it is an investment. You will likely not be able to rent a house for more then a mortgage + costs + taxes, but it does make a good investment vehicle."

negative: Gonna have to think about this one yourself. How much is the old house worth if you sell it? How much can you rent it out for? If you can sell it for a decent amount, you might be able to pay off the current house completely, save yourself nearly 200k in interest, and maybe end up with a bit more cash. If you can rent it for a high amount, it might be worth doing that and you could possibly use that and get more money than what the interest is.   Just gotta weigh up your options, find out what you can get for the house if you rent or sell.

negative: The other thing that you may or may not be considering is the fact that when she moves or otherwise ceases to live in that condo, you could then rent the unit out to others at the inflation adjusted rent price for the area. You could continue to build equity in the property for a fraction of the cost, and it would continue to be a tax write-off once your mother is not living there. While you have more maintenance and repairs cost when renters live there (typically, anyway), if inflation continues to carry on at about 4-5%, then you would be potentially renting the unit out at between $2,500 and $2,850 by the 10th year from now. Obviously, there are other considerations to be made as well, but those are some additional factors that don't seem to have been addressed in any of the above comments.

negative: Are you interested in refurbishing your rented home here in Singapore? If you are struggling with financial difficulties, you can apply for a renovation loan offered by banks. Most banks in Singapore offer renovation loans and home loans only to those who own a property. It is very hard to find a renovation loan for a rented home.  **Home loans for renovation**  You can take a home loan for your rented property and top up your home loan to finance your renovation project. If you already have a home loan, all you need to do is ask your bank representative to add extra financing to your [home loan](https://www.bankbazaar.sg/home-loan.html) for renovation purpose. Applying for a home loan for a rented property is simple. You can use an online loan calculator and compare home loans provided for a rented property. According to your repayment capacity and financial requirements, you can choose a home loan and use it for renovation. Make sure you have a good credit score while applying so that your home loan gets approved easily.  **Personal loans for renovation**  If you are not able to find too many home loans or renovation loans for rented property, you need not worry. Have you considered taking a personal loan to make awesome home improvement measures? That’s right; you can apply for a personal loan and use the funds to renovate your abode. The best thing about a personal loan is that a lender does not enquire about the purpose for your loan application. So, you can use your personal loan for any of your needs.  *Eligibility criteria for personal loans*  The general criteria to be qualified for a personal loan in Singapore are: The applicant should be 21 to 65 years old. The applicant should be a Singaporean or a permanent resident or a foreigner. The minimum income requirement for a Singaporean or PR is generally S$20,000 p.a. and S$40,000 p.a. for a foreigner.  **When are personal loans ideal for renovation?**  There are a few situations when a personal loan is the best option for renovating your rented property: Many banks give personal loans with attractive promotions such as interest-free loan for a certain period. You can take this loan and even repay the full amount before the zero-interest period expires. This will help you save efficiently on your renovation project. The minimum income required to secure a home loan is generally higher than the income requirement for a personal loan. Hence, a personal loan is a better option. A home loan generally gives a higher sum of money than a personal loan. This high amount is suitable for a construction project but will be excessive for renovation work. Therefore, it makes more sense to apply for a personal loan to give the perfect makeover to the kitchenette in your home. The approval process for a home loan is typically very lengthy. Personal loan applications get approved within 24 hours by most banks in Singapore. So now you can apply for a personal loan without any tension and remodel your balcony to have a party at home sweet home! Personal loan rates are generally lower than home loan rates. You can refurbish your living space by paying your loan at an interest rate not more than 4%. Now, you would have got a fair idea about how to finance your remodelling work. Always remember to enquire about every loan’s terms and conditions. Never sign any loan contract without being absolutely clear about the loan’s features.

negative: "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://voxeu.org/article/bail-ins-and-bailouts-incentives-connectivity-and-systemic-stability) reduced by 94%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The Financial Stability Board has since included bail-ins as one of its primary components of post-crisis resolution regimes.  > In earlier work without considering intervention, dense connections between financial institutions seemed to enhance financial stability, unless a shock was large enough to cause a systemic default.  > An endogenous network formation model that takes into account banks&#039; anticipation of credible bail-in strategies would lead to the informed design of structural policies aimed at preventing banks from reaching a network structure, in which the government&#039;s &#039;no intervention&#039; threat fails to be credible.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/77esvr/a_bailin_is_possible_when_the_losses_of_a_failing/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~231346 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*: **bank**^#1 **bail-in**^#2 **Financial**^#3 **network**^#4 **structure**^#5"

negative: I don't see how this is a problem.  It's their homes, not yours.  And why are your needs as a long term renter more important than the needs of the other people renting short term? If it truly were a problem, the returns on investment to short term would be lower than long term.  I.e., you are ripping off your landlord, he should raise his rent or kick you out and make an airbnb.

negative: I used to work at a record keeping company, and while we worked with plan administrators through transitions in investment offerings, we never actually worked through a forced sale.  From what I recall I thought that was illegal, and that all the administrator can do is stop offering the investment (i.e. no new buy ins), but people who still have their money in it can either continue to hold or sell.

negative: "In some cases perhaps, but in others not.  Several homes near me were sold over and over again during the bubble years (at incrementally higher and higher sale prices) -- the last owners in nearly all cases defaulted and the banks (after dragging their feet for a couple of years) finally foreclosed and sold the homes off cheap.  In all but one of the ""distressed sale"" cases, the people buying the houses now ARE in fact moving into them as their primary home (the exception being a current resident who bought the adjacent home with the intentions of fixing it up & renting it out, I believe at least initially to a family member); but in ALL cases (in no small part due to the fact that they were able to purchase the properties cheap) these new owners are investing substantial money into fixing them up (new roof & gutters, new windows & doors, paint and/or siding, often all new carpeting, some landscaping, etc).  Also, from the perspective of our homeowners association, all of these new people think our annual HOA fees are a ""bargain"", whereas the previous bubble-era ""homeowners"" (if, having invested almost nothing, they could truly be called that) did nothing but whine and complain (well, and once they began defaulting on their mortgages, they also defaulted on their HOA fees).  So it's a win-win for our neighborhood. We're getting good, solid residents who are planning on taking care of their properties... the exact opposite of what you are claiming.   (The ""house-flippers"" you decry were the ones buying with ""no money down"" during the bubble era -- and they nearly killed the neighborhood.)"