Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
no, there is no relation in the withdrawal stage
Sure, but you probably would want to wait until 67 in that scenario to receive your full benefit since you won't need the money.
No you'd be paid out the max benefit most likely, which is $2639 a month right now.
Yes. She might not work now but she needs just 40 quarters (10 years) of paying in over her lifetime to collect her own benefit, and/or she collects a spousal benefit which is normally about half of your benefit.
This is a "depends" questions. Not that you'll be in Depends, but it's going to depend on a number of factors including where you are getting your health insurance at retirement age. Normally people will start using Medicaid at 65 and use their primary health insurance as a supplement. Depending on the state and coverage you are under will determine what you are entitled to, what is covered by Medicaid, and what you might be responsible for. I wouldn't worry too much about this until I was five or so years from retirement since so much changes in medical care and various coverages.
If you are in a position to do so, depending ding on your medical health and needs, consider using a HSA as an investing vehicle.
Making $90,000.00 annually was percentile 85.8% in 2016. This percentile ranged from $90,000.00 to $90,005.00 a year.
Yeah but he'll be able to hire a violin player to follow him around when he complains to the proletariat how unfortunate he is. In your face other 85%!
Yeah, but it does still seem to be a bit of an odd structure for incentives/disincentives. From the government's standpoint, backing student loans makes sense because helping people get an education helps them get good paying jobs which leads to more money in the economy and more taxes being paid. But by phasing out the interest deduction on student loans, you are penalizing those people who were the best investments for the government, while protecting the deductions of those who were less successful investments, at least from a pure numbers perspective.
Well I would, if I could deduct that 2500. That's at least 50 hours of sad songing.
WTF? You need to get your insurance company involved or call them and fight that, that's ####### ridiculous - insurance wouldn't cover for my wife bc she wasn't old enough and the pregnancy was considered very low risk. We went ahead with the test anyways at 9 weeks for peace of mind, it was a Natera Panorama test and it cost a fraction of that.
I'm a Schwab shill, but I
them. Very few people in 2016 need a physical bank with a smartphone. In their ETF's for my Roth IRA, I've got a weighted average management fee of 0.06%. Completely free checking with mobile deposit and all ATM fees reimbursed. In the rare instance I have enough cash on hand that I need to put into the account, I buy a money order for less than $2.00 and mobile deposit it. In an emergency I could drive to a Schwab store front if I needed to. In terms of "the PITA of switching checking accounts," just set it up and migrate direct deposit and bill pay over slowly but surely, it's not splitting the atom. I have little to no sympathy when people complain about brick and mortar bank fees with all of the options similar to a Schwab setup out there for consumer banking.
You should be able to talk this down to around $100 - $250.
That's exactly who the bill is from. We've gone through two different providers since the date of service. Just a clusterf.
Read mine above.. give your doctor hell. These tests are all about providing/proving medical necessity to the insurance company. They should know better.
Thanks. Although, I don't think this would work since she technically has 1 employee, even though it's herself (the LLC actually generates a W-2 for her.) That link says the individual 401K is designed for a sole proprietor with no employees (which her business is not - it's an LLC with one employee).
Not sure if you saw it, but in the 2nd link I added:
Oh, no I didn't. This looks promising! It looks like she may get to skip ERISA this way.
This is not really a math question per say. Unless you have the ability to predict the future market returns there is no one right answer.
Yeah- as with all financial choices, it's not a fit for everyone, but it's a pretty sweet option for those who can use it. You can sock away a lot of money and it really isn't much more complicated than an IRA once you get it set up.
Thanks, that all makes sense. I'm thinking of going half and half; pay off the mortgage and then investing the rest instead of paying off the lower rate loan.
I like the half and half plan. You hedge a bit both ways. The loan is so small you really should be able to carry that with little worry.
So, she is 100% owner of the LLC herself. She then pays herself as the only employee, and issues herself (as the LLC) a W2 (to herself, as an individual.) She is the only only one involved.
If the LLC is taxed as an S-Corp, it would issue her a W-2, that is correct.
I was talking more of profit potential. If you faded everything LHUCKS liked you could have made a fortune.
Just saw this but NewlyRetired pretty much said everything I would have said anyway. Less than 10 years is a relatively short window - conventional wisdom would say you're going to beat 3.5% in the market over the long run, but that's not at all a certainty in the shorter term obviously. I like the idea of half and half - paying off the mortgage is a guaranteed return, plus there's some intangible value to having the house paid off I think. I wouldn't pay off the 1.5% loan, that's a great rate. It's been a while since I've paid really close attention to this kind of stuff but I'm pretty sure you can beat that with low-risk investments.
). That's the kind of thing only you can answer for yourself. 
I do. The problem is that it's not liquid so it's hard to count it. But I figure there might come a time when I sell it and cruise around in a motor home.
Most certainly, I do at least in my personal Statement of Net Assets that I do every month. I bought an apartment in May 2008, so not reflecting the approximate loss with the information available to come to a pretty close/good faith estimate of the loss I'm sitting on while I rent my residence out and avoid realizing it (I moved, worked out to where my new rent washes with the net rental of my purchased apartment) would be overstating my net assets.
Only way I would look at rebalancing this far out is if you think you have at least 75% (just a number than felt right) of the all in college cost covered.
That's been our issue. Plan A is to retire at 60, have a beach house we live in from October-April, another house in Tennessee we live in the rest the year while renting out our beach house. Plan B is to live in this house (Alabama) and keep a cabin in Tennessee. I'm almost 100% sure we'll meet plan b even if the market is flat, but plan A requires a nice return. So we stay heavily in Stock.
Like others, I agree it is extremely unlikely you are going to make the right guess here if the time till college is many many years away.
