Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
ParticipantBinding contract entered into on or before April 30, 2010.
Under state law, it wasn’t binding until you signed it (real estate contracts must be in writing).
ParticipantBinding contract entered into on or before April 30, 2010.
Under state law, it wasn’t binding until you signed it (real estate contracts must be in writing).
ParticipantBinding contract entered into on or before April 30, 2010.
Under state law, it wasn’t binding until you signed it (real estate contracts must be in writing).
Participant[quote=evsdca]Currently, if your annual gift to any single person is $13,000 or less, you are in the annual gift exclusion meaning you are not required to file a separate tax return to report tax on your gifts. However, if your give to anyone is more than $13,000, you have to file separate tax return (Form 709) to report your gifts, but it doesn’t mean that you have to pay tax unless you already used up all your unified credit. Every US citizen has $345,800 of unified gift credit which mean you can give up to $345,800 (your first $13,000 for each person every year is always excluded) before you start paying tax on your gift. You must take any availabel unified credit against gift tax until it all exhausted. I hope it is not too confused. As alway, consult your tax specialist.[/quote]
Dude, you are so close! You’re right on the unified credit. (at least I think you are, it’s somewhere in that neighborhood anyway). But it’s a tax credit, not the amount of the effective gift exclusion. The first $1,000,000 of lifetime gifts in excess of the annual exclusion is exempt from tax. The $34X,XXX of tax credit is equal to the tax on $1,000,000 of reportable gifts.
As to the question posed in the post, beware of SSI rules. No idea if it’s still true, but at one time gifts had to be reported in an annual SSI declaration and can put recipients at risk of losing SSI benefits if those gifts exceeded specified limits. Obviously there are ways around those rules, but be careful. You don’t want to get caught defrauding the government.
Participant[quote=evsdca]Currently, if your annual gift to any single person is $13,000 or less, you are in the annual gift exclusion meaning you are not required to file a separate tax return to report tax on your gifts. However, if your give to anyone is more than $13,000, you have to file separate tax return (Form 709) to report your gifts, but it doesn’t mean that you have to pay tax unless you already used up all your unified credit. Every US citizen has $345,800 of unified gift credit which mean you can give up to $345,800 (your first $13,000 for each person every year is always excluded) before you start paying tax on your gift. You must take any availabel unified credit against gift tax until it all exhausted. I hope it is not too confused. As alway, consult your tax specialist.[/quote]
Dude, you are so close! You’re right on the unified credit. (at least I think you are, it’s somewhere in that neighborhood anyway). But it’s a tax credit, not the amount of the effective gift exclusion. The first $1,000,000 of lifetime gifts in excess of the annual exclusion is exempt from tax. The $34X,XXX of tax credit is equal to the tax on $1,000,000 of reportable gifts.
As to the question posed in the post, beware of SSI rules. No idea if it’s still true, but at one time gifts had to be reported in an annual SSI declaration and can put recipients at risk of losing SSI benefits if those gifts exceeded specified limits. Obviously there are ways around those rules, but be careful. You don’t want to get caught defrauding the government.
Participant[quote=evsdca]Currently, if your annual gift to any single person is $13,000 or less, you are in the annual gift exclusion meaning you are not required to file a separate tax return to report tax on your gifts. However, if your give to anyone is more than $13,000, you have to file separate tax return (Form 709) to report your gifts, but it doesn’t mean that you have to pay tax unless you already used up all your unified credit. Every US citizen has $345,800 of unified gift credit which mean you can give up to $345,800 (your first $13,000 for each person every year is always excluded) before you start paying tax on your gift. You must take any availabel unified credit against gift tax until it all exhausted. I hope it is not too confused. As alway, consult your tax specialist.[/quote]
Dude, you are so close! You’re right on the unified credit. (at least I think you are, it’s somewhere in that neighborhood anyway). But it’s a tax credit, not the amount of the effective gift exclusion. The first $1,000,000 of lifetime gifts in excess of the annual exclusion is exempt from tax. The $34X,XXX of tax credit is equal to the tax on $1,000,000 of reportable gifts.
As to the question posed in the post, beware of SSI rules. No idea if it’s still true, but at one time gifts had to be reported in an annual SSI declaration and can put recipients at risk of losing SSI benefits if those gifts exceeded specified limits. Obviously there are ways around those rules, but be careful. You don’t want to get caught defrauding the government.
Participant[quote=evsdca]Currently, if your annual gift to any single person is $13,000 or less, you are in the annual gift exclusion meaning you are not required to file a separate tax return to report tax on your gifts. However, if your give to anyone is more than $13,000, you have to file separate tax return (Form 709) to report your gifts, but it doesn’t mean that you have to pay tax unless you already used up all your unified credit. Every US citizen has $345,800 of unified gift credit which mean you can give up to $345,800 (your first $13,000 for each person every year is always excluded) before you start paying tax on your gift. You must take any availabel unified credit against gift tax until it all exhausted. I hope it is not too confused. As alway, consult your tax specialist.[/quote]
Dude, you are so close! You’re right on the unified credit. (at least I think you are, it’s somewhere in that neighborhood anyway). But it’s a tax credit, not the amount of the effective gift exclusion. The first $1,000,000 of lifetime gifts in excess of the annual exclusion is exempt from tax. The $34X,XXX of tax credit is equal to the tax on $1,000,000 of reportable gifts.
As to the question posed in the post, beware of SSI rules. No idea if it’s still true, but at one time gifts had to be reported in an annual SSI declaration and can put recipients at risk of losing SSI benefits if those gifts exceeded specified limits. Obviously there are ways around those rules, but be careful. You don’t want to get caught defrauding the government.
Participant[quote=evsdca]Currently, if your annual gift to any single person is $13,000 or less, you are in the annual gift exclusion meaning you are not required to file a separate tax return to report tax on your gifts. However, if your give to anyone is more than $13,000, you have to file separate tax return (Form 709) to report your gifts, but it doesn’t mean that you have to pay tax unless you already used up all your unified credit. Every US citizen has $345,800 of unified gift credit which mean you can give up to $345,800 (your first $13,000 for each person every year is always excluded) before you start paying tax on your gift. You must take any availabel unified credit against gift tax until it all exhausted. I hope it is not too confused. As alway, consult your tax specialist.[/quote]
Dude, you are so close! You’re right on the unified credit. (at least I think you are, it’s somewhere in that neighborhood anyway). But it’s a tax credit, not the amount of the effective gift exclusion. The first $1,000,000 of lifetime gifts in excess of the annual exclusion is exempt from tax. The $34X,XXX of tax credit is equal to the tax on $1,000,000 of reportable gifts.
As to the question posed in the post, beware of SSI rules. No idea if it’s still true, but at one time gifts had to be reported in an annual SSI declaration and can put recipients at risk of losing SSI benefits if those gifts exceeded specified limits. Obviously there are ways around those rules, but be careful. You don’t want to get caught defrauding the government.
ParticipantAccording to Citibank:
When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future.
ParticipantAccording to Citibank:
When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future.
ParticipantAccording to Citibank:
When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future.
ParticipantAccording to Citibank:
When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future.
ParticipantAccording to Citibank:
When Citibank moved to unlimited FDIC coverage in 2009, we had to reclassify many checking accounts to allow for immediate withdrawals in order to ensure all customers qualified for the additional coverage. When we moved back to standard FDIC coverage with most major banks in 2010, Citibank decided to reclassify those accounts back to make them eligible again for promotional incentives. To do so, Federal Reserve Reg D requires these accounts, called NOW accounts, to reserve the right to require a 7-day notice of withdrawal. We recently communicated this technical requirement to our customers. However, we have never exercised this right and have no plans to do so in the future.
Participant[quote=pri_dk]Sk,
I must be missing something. Doesn’t the cash end up in the seller’s checking account?
BTW, stock exchanges do not provide any way to trade one stock directly for another. That would be incredibly complicated…
Back to the interesting stuff:
By “pt” do you mean basis points (1/100 of a percent)? Imposing a 25 cent transaction fee on a $10K trade would definitely change the behavior of high frequency trading systems (this is not necessarily a bad thing.)
I’m not arguing against such a fee, I’m just making the point that liquidity is a good thing in markets. It benefits *all* participants, from the high-volume trader to the individual investor. Taxes on transactions will take some of this benefit away. But it may be a good tradeoff with the right parameters.[/quote]
You have a good point there. I didn’t really write what I was thinking. If an investor moves money from a bank account into the market by buying stock and the seller of that stock then acquired a different stock, the money supply has gone down. If the seller stays in cash, you are correct, no change to the money supply. And by trading, I meant sell Ford, buy Alcoa.
1/4 pt is .25%. $2.50 on a $1,000 trade. Serious investors will bitch, but not flinch. Specially if it’s only one side of the trade. Many day traders will flinch. But it would be like the casinos on some cruise ships, where the blackjack dealer stays on a soft 17. Some gamblers will still sit down at the table, despite the reduced odds.
-
AuthorPosts
