Suggestions for the Wiki

Local Chapters, Wiki, and general Bogleheads community discussion, news, events, and announcements

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby CaliJim » Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:44 pm

Is there a WIKI page where the order and location of saving contributions is explained?

As in...

1st) 401k up to company match
2nd) Traditional IRA up to tax-deductable limit
3rd) Roth IRA up to the limit
4th) 401k - over company match - up to max allowed under the plan
5th) back-door roth
6th) taxable account with any savings left over from above
-calijim- | | For more info, click this
User avatar
CaliJim
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 pm
Location: San Fran Bay Area

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:11 pm

I think this is what you're looking for: Prioritizing investments

I put "401k up to company match" into the forum's Google search box in the upper right corner and it was the 2nd hit. It's a full site search, i.e. it covers both the forum and wiki.

Feel free to comment on anything that you think needs updating or correcting.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby sscritic » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:14 pm

LadyGeek wrote:I think this is what you're looking for: Prioritizing investments

I put "401k up to company match" into the forum's Google search box in the upper right corner and it was the 2nd hit. It's a full site search, i.e. it covers both the forum and wiki.

Maybe the wiki needs a page on how to search the wiki. :)
sscritic
 
Posts: 21863
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:36 am

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby CaliJim » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:14 pm

LadyGeek wrote:I think this is what you're looking for: Prioritizing investments

yes. thanks.
-calijim- | | For more info, click this
User avatar
CaliJim
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 pm
Location: San Fran Bay Area

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:41 pm

sscritic wrote:Maybe the wiki needs a page on how to search the wiki. :)

That's on the wiki's home page (light blue menu): Image Search this Site :wink:

Everyone sees things differently, especially with the wide variety of monitors and resolutions. What's easy for one person is difficult for another. It's no big deal as long as the information is found.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby CaliJim » Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:03 pm

sscritic wrote:
LadyGeek wrote:I think this is what you're looking for: Prioritizing investments

I put "401k up to company match" into the forum's Google search box in the upper right corner and it was the 2nd hit. It's a full site search, i.e. it covers both the forum and wiki.

Maybe the wiki needs a page on how to search the wiki. :)


Doh.... "up to company match" :oops:

I tried searching 3 times. Honestly. It's just that I didn't use the right search terms. Be easy on my ... I'm a philosophy major.
-calijim- | | For more info, click this
User avatar
CaliJim
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 pm
Location: San Fran Bay Area

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:45 pm

Jay69 wrote:I was in the portfolio section last week.

http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Lazy_Portfolios

In the lazy portolios should the international fund in the core 3 and Ricks core 4 be changed from VEU/VFWIX to VXUS/VGTSX?

Would need to verify with Rick but IIRC he now prefers VXUS/VGTSX due to the inclusion of Canada within the fund.

Jay

Somewhat delayed (from January), but the wiki's Core four portfolios section is now updated with Rick Ferri's concurrence. See: Lazy Portfolios (Core four portfolios)

There's no change in asset allocation percentages, just the replacement of Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US Index Fund with Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby velcro » Wed May 16, 2012 7:34 pm

I'd like to suggest in Paying a tax cost to switch funds that the section on The Potential Gains from Switching be clarified. I don't get the 10% rule of thumb. Specifically "the new fund gains 10% after tax, and the old fund gains 9.25% after tax, a difference of 10% of the capital-gains tax cost." I'd be happy to edit it once someone explains it to me!
velcro
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 12:37 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby grabiner » Wed May 16, 2012 8:42 pm

velcro wrote:I'd like to suggest in Paying a tax cost to switch funds that the section on The Potential Gains from Switching be clarified. I don't get the 10% rule of thumb. Specifically "the new fund gains 10% after tax, and the old fund gains 9.25% after tax, a difference of 10% of the capital-gains tax cost." I'd be happy to edit it once someone explains it to me!


In the example on that page, your basis in the old fund is half the current price. Therefore, when you sell it, your capital gain is 50% of the sales price, and the tax you pay is 7.5% of the sales price. The new fund earns 0.75% per year more than the old fund, which is 10% of the tax you will pay for switching.
David Grabiner
User avatar
grabiner
Advisory Board
 
Posts: 12937
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 12:58 am
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby af895 » Tue May 22, 2012 7:57 pm

I love the Boglehead Wiki and especially the pages on the basics.

I noticed this page: http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Boglehea ... art-up_kit

There are a number of USA-specific references. I would like to request some Canadian equivalences be amended. I've posted a bit about those here: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=96031&p=1385109

Doable?

Dan Bortolotti runs the "Canadian Couch Potato" blog and site. His strategies are very much in line with Boglehead investing.
His model portfolios are right here: http://canadiancouchpotato.com/model-portfolios/
That might be a linkable addition, as would his comparison of Canadian Index ETF versus Index Mutual fund, here: http://canadiancouchpotato.com/2010/06/ ... s-or-etfs/
af895
 
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:15 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Tue May 22, 2012 8:27 pm

Interesting idea. I'm also a member of our Canadian sister forum, Financial Webring Forum. IOW, I edit both the Bogleheads wiki and finiki, which is focused on Canadian investing.

BTW, finiki now has a tutorial for new investors, Getting Started.

There are a number of possibilities here, which are better discussed in Investing as a Canadian - Differences. It will get better attention and avoid taking this thread OT.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby starboard » Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:52 pm

A possible edit to the Wiki, under the sections Asset Allocation, Rules of thumb

"Bogle recommends "roughly your age in bonds"; for instance, if you are 45, 45%
of your portfolio should be in high-quality bonds. Recently, less conservative
rules have emerged such as (age - 10) or even (age - 20) in bonds."

This is fine, as far as it goes, however Bogle also recommends that people
capitalize their SS and Pension (especially if the Defined Benefit Pension (DBP)
is Cost of Living Adjusted (COLA)) and that they include this capitalized amount
in their bond allocation. I have read this in several of his books and it was
also in the transcript for the Steve Forbes interview (shown below).

In my opinion, if folks do not follow the capitalization rule, then they are
quoting Bogle on the "age in bonds" rule out of context.

As an aside, in my particular case, I'm 64, retired, collecting SS and a DBP
that will be COLA adjusted after I reach 65. My allocation is all over the map
depending on how my SS and DBP are counted: If I do not include cash in my
holdings (another problem of across the board comparisons) I am 41/59 Equity to
Fixed. If I add in cash these shift to 39/57/4 or 39/61 if cash is folded into
Fixed. Now, if I capitalize my SS and Pension and keep cash folded in with
Fixed, the number shifts a large amount to 21/79.

Perhaps this should be a forum thread topic, but it has been in the past and
still seems like the issue of capitalizing SS and Pension (if available) is
consistently overlooked. In some ways it does make sense to exclude capitalizing
these things for younger investors, who may have no reliable numbers for either
option -- but for folks in the 55+ vintage class, it is a serious problems of
apples to oranges comparisons.

It seems like an edit to the Wiki may be in order, so that Bogle's "Age in Bonds"
rule is shown in the context he intended.

Thanks,
stb

==========
http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/22/bogle- ... sting.html

and page 7 where the discussion starts:
Age Equals Bonds
Forbes: 80% of your portfolio is now in bonds roughly?

Bogle: Yes.

Forbes: Conforming to your rule, age should equal bonds?

Bogle: Yep.

and page 8 where the discussion turns to Portfolio Allocation:
Forbes: Now, you make a point in terms of portfolio allocation, especially as
you get on in years. Social security, you may think the system's been financed
in a junky way, but you make the point, it will be around, and therefore, you
ought to count it as part of your allocation.

continuing on page 9:
Bogle: Yeah, I think. In other words, you can't really look at your investment
program in a vacuum. The way I would express it is let's say you've been lucky
enough to accumulate, let's say $300,000 in your personal investment account,
and the capitalized value of your social security at a certain age is also going
to be $300,000.

It's a great investment, I have to admit, as long as it's great, it's going to
be great if that isn't too oxymoronic for you. But so you know, it's basically a
bond position with an inflation hedge. So it's nice to have there. So you're at
50/50 if your $300,000 of your own money is entirely in equities.

Now, we don't really run our investment portfolios, most of us, I don't think,
as a unity. So I wouldn't be that aggressive in the equity portfolio. But I also
wouldn't say that you need 80% if you have the social security in a manner
that's equivalent. You'd factor social security into your retirement income and
your retirement capital. And you should also factor any solid, of which there
don't seem to be so darned many, corporate pension funds that you have, or any
other sources of recurring retirement income.

Forbes: Now, when people turn 60 they start to think, obviously, short term. But
if you're an example of it, we're living longer. So you know, equities may have
to play a large role, 20, 25 years.

Bogle: No, equity should play a large role. And I try to use general rules as
rules of thumb. They're a place to start thinking about things. And then you
factor in your own financial position, your own wealth, your own risk tolerance,
and put it all together, and think about what it is you really want to
accomplish. What are your goals?

And it's not easy to do. You can do it yourself, you don't need any help. And
because this is an imperfect world, and you can get all the help in the world,
and do worse than you would've done on your own. It's not at all clear that an
advisor can consistently deliver 1% above the market return, that being the one
percent he charges, which is the typical charge in that business. So be careful
even there about cost.

==========
User avatar
starboard
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:44 pm
Location: New Mexico

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:09 am

Thanks. I started a forum thread on the topic: Wiki: Asset Allocation - Update "Age in Bonds?". This should be discussed on a broader basis, as the wiki represents a consensus by the forum members. Note that we don't have agreement on the role of Fixed income in a portfolio, which I think is an important point.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:34 pm

umfundi has suggested to add 3-fund portfolio equivalents: The Three Fund Portfolio

umfundi wrote:
LadyGeek wrote:The wiki has a TIAA-CREF article, but I don't see any Vanguard equivalent fund comparisons (under "Mutual funds"). If anyone thinks this would be useful info, I can enter the information (but will need help with the wording). If this takes the thread off-topic, please post in Suggestions for the Wiki.

I think a general comparison would be useful.

"How to simulate the Three-Fund Portfolio at:
Vanguard ETF
T. Rowe Price
TIAA-CREF
Fidelity
Black Rock (?)
..."

Of course, expenses should be noted. This might answer in advance what seems to be a regular question.

Keith
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Barry Barnitz » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:50 pm

We already have pages devoted to these companies (with the exception of Blackrock ishares) which supply readers with each index fund's approximate Vanguard fund.

So just provide the links to these pages in the See also section.


regards,
Image | blb | December Birthday Celebration: Ludwig van Beethoven
User avatar
Barry Barnitz
Wiki Admin
 
Posts: 2632
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:42 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Aug 11, 2012 6:12 pm

From whole life insurance, BornInCA is suggesting a series on life insurance.

BornInCA wrote:
dhodson wrote:Please search the forums

This has been discussed countless times

Bottom line run away from this agent

If you have specific questions then please post them


:idea: Just thought I'd drop a line by recommending a wiki be written up on how the various life insurance policies are structured. Term, Whole, Universal, Variable Universal Life etc. Why premiums are high? how much of it goes to actual cost of insuring a person, how much goes to commissions, how much goes to other fees, how much goes to build up cash value, etc. :idea:
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:14 pm

Upon further review, it's not possible to provide this type of overview in the wiki. See: Re: whole life insurance

The wiki article was updated: Life Insurance (note the link to a free online insurance course)
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby JustinR » Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:16 am

I think this section could be organized in a better way: http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/401%28k% ... _and_loans

The first bullet point is an incomplete thought. It tells you what hardship withdrawals include without explaining anything else about it like the consequences.

For example, the purchase of a first home is still penalized at 10%. There's a lot of misconception about withdrawing from your 401k for a home purchase.
JustinR
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Jan 05, 2013 1:40 pm

How would you reorganize the section? Your statement about misconceptions assumes that your 401(k) plan allows hardship withdrawals for a home purchase. I added a sentence that hardship withdrawals are defined in the 401(k) plan.

The IRS rules are complex which makes writing for the wiki somewhat tricky. So, you'll see material that may not go into much depth because doing so triggers additional regulations which are dependent on the reader's situation. We have to select an appropriate level of detail which provides both useful information and avoids misleading readers.

For example, a first-time home purchase is dependent on quite a few factors. From Publication 590 (2011), Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs):
IRS wrote:First home. Even if you are under age 59½, you do not have to pay the 10% additional tax on up to $10,000 of distributions you receive to buy, build, or rebuild a first home. To qualify for treatment as a first-time homebuyer distribution, the distribution must meet all the following requirements.
* It must be used to pay qualified acquisition costs (defined later) before the close of the 120th day after the day you received it.
*It must be used to pay qualified acquisition costs for the main home of a first-time homebuyer (defined later) who is any of the following.
Yourself.
Your spouse.
Your or your spouse's child.
Your or your spouse's grandchild.
Your or your spouse's parent or other ancestor.
When added to all your prior qualified first-time homebuyer distributions, if any, total qualifying distributions cannot be more than $10,000.
If both you and your spouse are first-time homebuyers (defined later), each of you can receive distributions up to $10,000 for a first home without having to pay the 10% additional tax.

Qualified acquisition costs. Qualified acquisition costs include the following items.
Costs of buying, building, or rebuilding a home.
Any usual or reasonable settlement, financing, or other closing costs.
First-time homebuyer. Generally, you are a first-time homebuyer if you had no present interest in a main home during the 2-year period ending on the date of acquisition of the home which the distribution is being used to buy, build, or rebuild. If you are married, your spouse must also meet this no-ownership requirement.

Date of acquisition. The date of acquisition is the date that:
*You enter into a binding contract to buy the main home for which the distribution is being used, or
*The building or rebuilding of the main home for which the distribution is being used begins.
If you received a distribution to buy, build, or rebuild a first home and the purchase or construction was canceled or delayed, you generally can contribute the amount of the distribution to an IRA within 120 days of the distribution. This contribution is treated as a rollover contribution to the IRA.

Did this answer your question? If not, start a new thread and we can discuss in more detail. Updates are always welcome. If my answer was incorrect, also please let me know (I'm not a tax expert).
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby CaliJim » Sat Jan 05, 2013 4:25 pm

A friend now owns Vanguard Total Bond Mkt Index for the first time.

He just received his various 4th qtr distributions and was asking me questions about what is the Dividends, Long Term Capital Gain, and Short Term Capital Gain distributions were.

I was looking for a link to a wiki page that might explain it.... and couldn't find anything that exactly fit the bill.

In "Bond Basics" - "Sources of return" we have this:

Sources of return

There are three sources of return for a bond:

Return of principal
Interest (coupon payments)
Interest-on-interest (reinvested coupon payments)


This ignores how differences between coupon and market interest rates and how this affects the market price of the bond prior to maturity.

So... nowhere could I see where we explain how owning a Bond Fund can result in ST and LT Cap Gains (and losses) due to the funds buying and selling activities.

My friend needs an "explain it to me like I'm a 5th grader" description of what to expect when owning a bond fund.
Last edited by CaliJim on Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-calijim- | | For more info, click this
User avatar
CaliJim
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 pm
Location: San Fran Bay Area

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Barry Barnitz » Sat Jan 05, 2013 4:52 pm

Hi:
Not for beginners, but Vanguard Total Bond Market Tax Distributions - Bogleheads provides long term distribution data for the fund.

regards,
Image | blb | December Birthday Celebration: Ludwig van Beethoven
User avatar
Barry Barnitz
Wiki Admin
 
Posts: 2632
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:42 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby CaliJim » Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:01 pm

Thanks. I emailed my friend a simple explanation (Bond mutual fund dividends = bond interest payments, bond fund capital gains are due to the fact that bond prices vary inversely with market interest rates). I'll send him the advanced link too in case he wants to dig deeper.
-calijim- | | For more info, click this
User avatar
CaliJim
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 pm
Location: San Fran Bay Area

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Jan 05, 2013 5:25 pm

Additionally, the definitions of long- and short-term capital gain are in the wiki: Capital gains distribution, as the term applies to both stock and bond funds.

Fidelity has some tutorials: What are mutual funds?, and Mutual fund taxes

This is a tough call, as to where do we draw the line between adding information that's commonly found everywhere and items for the wiki? Then there's the realized and unrealized gains and losses concepts. (This is difficult for new investors as well.)
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby JustinR » Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:46 pm

LadyGeek wrote:How would you reorganize the section? Your statement about misconceptions assumes that your 401(k) plan allows hardship withdrawals for a home purchase. I added a sentence that hardship withdrawals are defined in the 401(k) plan.

The IRS rules are complex which makes writing for the wiki somewhat tricky. So, you'll see material that may not go into much depth because doing so triggers additional regulations which are dependent on the reader's situation. We have to select an appropriate level of detail which provides both useful information and avoids misleading readers.

For example, a first-time home purchase is dependent on quite a few factors. From Publication 590 (2011), Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs):
IRS wrote:First home. Even if you are under age 59½, you do not have to pay the 10% additional tax on up to $10,000 of distributions you receive to buy, build, or rebuild a first home. To qualify for treatment as a first-time homebuyer distribution, the distribution must meet all the following requirements.
* It must be used to pay qualified acquisition costs (defined later) before the close of the 120th day after the day you received it.
*It must be used to pay qualified acquisition costs for the main home of a first-time homebuyer (defined later) who is any of the following.
Yourself.
Your spouse.
Your or your spouse's child.
Your or your spouse's grandchild.
Your or your spouse's parent or other ancestor.
When added to all your prior qualified first-time homebuyer distributions, if any, total qualifying distributions cannot be more than $10,000.
If both you and your spouse are first-time homebuyers (defined later), each of you can receive distributions up to $10,000 for a first home without having to pay the 10% additional tax.

Qualified acquisition costs. Qualified acquisition costs include the following items.
Costs of buying, building, or rebuilding a home.
Any usual or reasonable settlement, financing, or other closing costs.
First-time homebuyer. Generally, you are a first-time homebuyer if you had no present interest in a main home during the 2-year period ending on the date of acquisition of the home which the distribution is being used to buy, build, or rebuild. If you are married, your spouse must also meet this no-ownership requirement.

Date of acquisition. The date of acquisition is the date that:
*You enter into a binding contract to buy the main home for which the distribution is being used, or
*The building or rebuilding of the main home for which the distribution is being used begins.
If you received a distribution to buy, build, or rebuild a first home and the purchase or construction was canceled or delayed, you generally can contribute the amount of the distribution to an IRA within 120 days of the distribution. This contribution is treated as a rollover contribution to the IRA.

Did this answer your question? If not, start a new thread and we can discuss in more detail. Updates are always welcome. If my answer was incorrect, also please let me know (I'm not a tax expert).

That excerpt is about IRAs though, which does give you an exception to the 10% penalty for first time home-buyers. The 401k doesn't though. From what I've read, even if your plan allows you to withdraw from your 401k for a home purchase as a "hardship withdrawal" (which may or may not be true depending on your plan), you're still penalized for it.

Anyways, I'll definitely think about contributing to the wiki if I have some time, just thought I'd point this out for now. Thanks!
JustinR
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:09 pm

From Subject: Join the Wiki!:

runner9 wrote:Maybe not the correct place for this, but I've been curious if the "MRD Suspended for 2009" section that appears on so many pages is still relevant. It's on basically every page that talks about a vehicle with a MRD.

This section is used IRA Distribution Tables and 457-b (titles fixed to be "RMD Suspended for 2009" by new wiki editor pennstater2005). Should it be removed?

Note that "Required Minimum Distribution" and "Minimum Required Distribution" are variations of the same idea, but different intent. To me, it seems that RMD should be the section title.

Subject: Join the Wiki!

runner9 wrote:It's also wrong on the 457b page. Again, not sure a 2009 exception is relevent to anyone in 2013 except as and FYI for something that might be possible in another really down year.

The wiki needs to stick to credible sources and can't postulate about future possibilities. On that basis, I would consider removing the content.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Barry Barnitz » Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:59 pm

LadyGeek wrote:From Subject: Join the Wiki!:

runner9 wrote:Maybe not the correct place for this, but I've been curious if the "MRD Suspended for 2009" section that appears on so many pages is still relevant. It's on basically every page that talks about a vehicle with a MRD.

This section is used IRA Distribution Tables and 457-b (titles fixed to be "RMD Suspended for 2009" by new wiki editor pennstater2005). Should it be removed?

Note that "Required Minimum Distribution" and "Minimum Required Distribution" are variations of the same idea, but different intent. To me, it seems that RMD should be the section title.

Subject: Join the Wiki!

runner9 wrote:It's also wrong on the 457b page. Again, not sure a 2009 exception is relevent to anyone in 2013 except as and FYI for something that might be possible in another really down year.

The wiki needs to stick to credible sources and can't postulate about future possibilities. On that basis, I would consider removing the content.


Since the IRS audit procedures have a three year lag time, this information can still be applicable to audited taxpayers. However, the information should be moved to a footnotes section since it is now valid for this limited circumstance.

For new editors, adding a footnote is not complicated, but it is not intuitive.

Here are the steps:

First, if it does not currently exist on the page, create a subheading for the footnote section, just ahead of the references section. This is done as follows.

==Notes==

Then place the following syntax in front of the referenced RMD text:

<ref group="footnotes">

Close the referenced text with:
</ref>

If you now hit the preview button you will find an error message which will state that you do not have the proper syntax under the Notes section. The easy way to correct this is to copy the syntax text in the error message and paste it under the Notes subheading. Here is the proper text:

==Notes==
<references group="footnotes"/>

regards,
Image | blb | December Birthday Celebration: Ludwig van Beethoven
User avatar
Barry Barnitz
Wiki Admin
 
Posts: 2632
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:42 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:08 pm

We have a number of helpful pages for wiki editors; the above is summarized in Citing references. An overview is in Help:Getting started

The MRD section is also present in 403-b.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby runner9 » Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:39 pm

http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/403-b

The RMD is still MRD on this page for 2009 exceptions. Reading above it appears it also should be moved to a footnote.
User avatar
runner9
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:49 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Mar 02, 2013 6:15 pm

Thanks for the reminder. As Barry Barnitz suggested above, I moved the RMD section to footnotes for:

- 403-b
- 457-b
- IRA Distribution Tables
- Required Minimum Distribution vs Annuitization (found this one while editing the other articles)

How's it look?

The 403-b article doesn't have any content for the Distributions section. If anyone has a suggestion, please post here. (I'm not familiar with this plan.)
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Mel Lindauer » Sat Mar 02, 2013 7:13 pm

LadyGeek wrote:Thanks for the reminder. As Barry Barnitz suggested above, I moved the RMD section to footnotes for:

- 403-b
- 457-b
- IRA Distribution Tables
- Required Minimum Distribution vs Annuitization (found this one while editing the other articles)

How's it look?

The 403-b article doesn't have any content for the Distributions section. If anyone has a suggestion, please post here. (I'm not familiar with this plan.)


Thanks for posting the RMD Distribution Tables. That's good stuff! Much easier to find here than googling around.
Best Regards - Mel | | Semper Fi
User avatar
Mel Lindauer
Moderator
 
Posts: 21907
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 9:49 pm
Location: Daytona Beach Shores, Florida

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Taylor Larimore » Sat Mar 02, 2013 10:48 pm

Lady Geek:

The RMD section has this headline with details.

RMD Suspended for 2009


I think it should be eliminated as no longer applicable.

Taylor
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Advisory Board
 
Posts: 19891
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby relentless » Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:42 pm

I think there is a math error for Vanguard target fund 2040 in the wiki:
72.1+27.1+9.9 = 109.1%
http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Vanguard ... ment_Funds
relentless
 
Posts: 444
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:05 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby runner9 » Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:04 am

relentless wrote:I think there is a math error for Vanguard target fund 2040 in the wiki:
72.1+27.1+9.9 = 109.1%
http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Vanguard ... ment_Funds


Someone must have fixed it.
It's now: 62.1+27.1+9.9=99.9
User avatar
runner9
 
Posts: 1084
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:49 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sun Mar 03, 2013 10:52 am

runner9 wrote:Someone must have fixed it.
It's now: 62.1+27.1+9.9=99.9

Yes, it was. Recent changes (wiki menu, top left corner) shows what the editors are up to:

"(diff | hist) . . m Vanguard Target Retirement Funds‎; 22:24 . . (-2)‎ . . ‎Blbarnitz (Talk | contribs)‎ (→‎Detailed fund allocations: corrected 2040 TRF allocation )"

The Vanguard Target Retirement Funds page was updated by Barry Barnitz to correct the 2040 TRF allocation.

Taylor Larimore wrote:Lady Geek:

The RMD section has this headline with details.
RMD Suspended for 2009

I think it should be eliminated as no longer applicable.

Taylor

Barry Barnitz suggested leaving those headlines in as Notes, as the IRS audit procedures have a 3 year lag time. (this post)
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby steve.s » Thu Apr 04, 2013 4:54 pm

I am new and not finding any discussion on the relationship of a Rollover IRA (from the USG TSP) to the Traditional to Roth IRA conversion process.
Any pointers, or if needed, additions to the Roth conversion wiki, would be appreciated. Thanks!
steve.s
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:05 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sat Apr 06, 2013 12:06 pm

Welcome! Your question is a little unclear to me. Are you asking how to rollover from a Thrift Savings Plan account to a Traditional / Roth IRA outside of the US Government?

We have a Roth IRA conversion article, but I suspect you're looking for something more. Can you give an example of what you want to do?
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby steve.s » Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:11 pm

I understand (and have) rolled my TSP to a Rollover IRA. My question relates to the Roth Conversion (I haven't read the article yet will, but will when I complete this reply). I want to do some advance planning for a Roth Conversion, so as to not cross into the next higher tax bracket among other things. When converting a Traditional (deductible and non-deductible) IRA to a Roth, how is my Rollover counted? Is the total amount of my IRA the combination of both my Traditional and my Rollover? Thanks - now I'm off to read the referenced article :-)

Steve

P.S. OK, I've read the Roth Conversion article and a number of the linked references. All are well written but none explains whether a rollover IRA (from a 401k/TSP) is considered "traditional" for the Roth conversion process. My IRA looks like this:

Rollover (from TSP - aka 401k) 78%
Deductible 12%
Nondeductible 10%

I want to convert a bit at a time to stay within my current bracket. If my Rollover is included in the calculation (as I suspect it might be), it will take me a lot longer to convert, and, if I understand correctly, I'll still have a bit of each (rollover, deductible, and nondeductible) until I convert the last dollar. I know the IRA trustee gives you a 1099 for amounts actually converted, but I'm trying to do some advance planning before actually taking action. Thanks again
steve.s
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:05 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Duckie » Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:01 am

steve.s wrote:My IRA looks like this:

Rollover (from TSP - aka 401k) 78%
Deductible 12%
Nondeductible 10%

I want to convert a bit at a time to stay within my current bracket. If my Rollover is included in the calculation (as I suspect it might be), it will take me a lot longer to convert, and, if I understand correctly, I'll still have a bit of each (rollover, deductible, and nondeductible) until I convert the last dollar. I know the IRA trustee gives you a 1099 for amounts actually converted, but I'm trying to do some advance planning before actually taking action. Thanks again

The rollover is included. If the rollover was from a normal (non-Roth) TSP the IRS makes no differentiation between IRAs titled "Rollover IRA" or "Traditional IRA".

Since 10% of your total IRA value is from after-tax contributions, because of the pro-rata rule roughly 90% of your conversions will be taxable. Did you file IRS Form 8606 for each year that you made non-deductible contributions? If not, you'll need to file them separately to track your basis.
User avatar
Duckie
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:55 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby steve.s » Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:33 pm

That is how I thought (and expected) the rollover TSP to be treated.
Yes, I have a stack of 8606s. Thanks!
steve.s
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:05 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:56 pm

If you have any more questions about your portfolio or investing in general, just post a thread in the Investing - Help with Personal Investments forum. Use the Asking Portfolio Questions format, if needed. You'll get better attention, as only members interested in the wiki read this thread. :) (Don't worry, we'll help you no matter where you post.)

We want to be sure that the wiki presents concepts clearly to new investors. If there is anything that you do not understand, please post here and we'll see what we can do to fix that.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby windhog » Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:28 pm

I posted on a thread regarding a medical billing issue earlier today and got a nice reply from Taylor. I got to wondering if the Wiki had an article on Medical billing and found none. I understand that it might be hard to write about this without getting political, but I think it can be done and of benefit to the BH community. I am recently retired from a solo medical practice and my wife handled all the billing, so between us we have first hand knowledge and (one would hope) some insight. Let me know if this worthy of discussion.
Paul
windhog
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:08 am

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:48 pm

Here's your post: Re: Advice for Surgicenter bill for colonoscopy

Discussion is always productive. First, the wiki is intended to address investing. It also represents the forum consensus. If the members want a medical billing article, and someone is knowledgeable enough to write it, then it can be considered.

Next, the wiki follows Wikipedia's Five pillars policy. That might be a challenge, but I'm not an expert.

However, the wiki also has this article: Medicare Could you provide insight that is factual and represents a neutral point of view in Medicare? (If you see anything that should be updated, just post here.)
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby Penguin » Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:35 pm

In the wiki: http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Estate_a ... itance_tax
The section:
Year Exclusion Amount Maximum /
Top tax rate
2001 $675,000 55%
2002 $1 million 50%
2003 $1 million 49%
2004 $1.5 million 48%
2005 $1.5 million 47%
2006 $2 million 46%
2007 $2 million 45%
2008 $2 million 45%
2009 $3.5 million 45%
2010 Repealed[9] 0%
2011[10] $5 million 35%
2012 $5.12 million 35%
2013* $5 million 40%
* under ATRA

should read for 2013 $5.25 million and 40% according to: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/Uploaded ... n-ATRA.pdf
ATRA permanently extends and modifies the estate tax provisions in EGTRRA and subsequently modified by the 2010 Tax Relief Act. It retains a unified exemption for estate and gift tax purposes of $5 million, indexed for inflation after 2011 ($5.25 million for 2013) but raises the estate and gift tax rate from 35 percent to 40 percent.
Jon
Penguin
 
Posts: 417
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Sun Apr 14, 2013 11:05 am

^^^ Thank you for becoming a wiki editor and correcting the article yourself. I made a few format updates: Estate and inheritance tax
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby meowcat » Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:22 am

It would be nice to see a section in the wiki about the damaging effects of personal debt and how it can nearly destroy ones wealth building ability. It would be great to show examples of how it can effect ones portfolio over an extended period of time.
More people should learn to tell their dollars where to go instead of asking them where they went. | -Roger Babson
User avatar
meowcat
 
Posts: 201
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 6:46 am

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby grabiner » Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:12 pm

meowcat wrote:It would be nice to see a section in the wiki about the damaging effects of personal debt and how it can nearly destroy ones wealth building ability. It would be great to show examples of how it can effect ones portfolio over an extended period of time.


The closest we have is Paying down loans versus investing. It does mention that you should pay off your credit cards, and even your medium-rate loans, before you start investing (except for a guaranteed 401(k) match); paying off a credit card with 10% interest is a 10% risk-free, tax-free return.
David Grabiner
User avatar
grabiner
Advisory Board
 
Posts: 12937
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 12:58 am
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby jendoe » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:19 pm

Hello,

There's some content on the wiki that I *think* might be shuffled a little bit (a table where I suspect two cells should be flipped). I'm a beginner, so I'm still figuring this stuff out (*thank you* for all the incredible information posted here, it's a huge help!).

In the Fidelity page (http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Fidelity), there's a table that shows Spartan funds that are similar to various Vanguard funds.

Under "US Bonds" (last section)...

Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury Fund (VFITX) is shown with... Fidelity Spartan Inflation-Protected Bond Index Fund (FSIYX) and...

Vanguard Inflation Protected Securities Fund (VIPSX) is shown with... Fidelity Spartan Intermediate Treasury Bond Index Fund (FIBAX).

Thanks!
jendoe
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:20 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:35 pm

Hi,

You are correct, they were transposed. I fixed it: Fidelity

Funds can be compared by the fund's composition and its tracking benchmark. In this case,

- Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund Investor Shares (VIPSX) and Spartan® Inflation-Protected Bond Index Fund - Fidelity Advantage Class Symbol: FSIYX are composed of 99% inflation protected securities and track the Barclays US TIPS index.

- Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury Fund Investor Shares (VFITX) and Spartan® Intermediate Treasury Bond Index Fund - Fidelity Advantage Class Symbol: FIBAX are composed of Intermediate Term US Government bonds and track the Barclays US 5-10 Yr Treasury Index.

Beginner? Don't let that stop you from asking questions - it's how we learn. You'd be surprised how many "experts" miss things like this (the page has 30,000+ views...). Thanks!
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby grok87 » Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:16 pm

LadyGeek wrote:Hi,

You are correct, they were transposed. I fixed it: Fidelity

Funds can be compared by the fund's composition and its tracking benchmark. In this case,

- Vanguard Inflation-Protected Securities Fund Investor Shares (VIPSX) and Spartan® Inflation-Protected Bond Index Fund - Fidelity Advantage Class Symbol: FSIYX are composed of 99% inflation protected securities and track the Barclays US TIPS index.

- Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury Fund Investor Shares (VFITX) and Spartan® Intermediate Treasury Bond Index Fund - Fidelity Advantage Class Symbol: FIBAX are composed of Intermediate Term US Government bonds and track the Barclays US 5-10 Yr Treasury Index.

Beginner? Don't let that stop you from asking questions - it's how we learn. You'd be surprised how many "experts" miss things like this (the page has 30,000+ views...). Thanks!

Not meaning to be pedantic, but I would probably not say that the Vanguard funds track their respective indices. Both the Vanguard Int Treasury fund and the Vanguard Inflation protected securities fund are actively managed- i.e. are not index funds. So while they have benchmark indices that they compare themselves too they are not really strictly speaking trying to track that index. This is pretty apparent if you compare the funds peformance

VIPSX
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/ ... INT#tab=1a

VFITX
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/ ... INT#tab=1a

VIPSX appears to be a closet index fund. Basically tracking its index well. But VFITX's performance on a year by year basis is materially different than its index. In particular it seems to routinely target a shorter duration than its index and has underperformed as rates have dropped.
cheers,
grok, CFA | Danon delenda est
grok87
 
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:00 pm

Re: Suggestions for the Wiki

Postby LadyGeek » Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:16 pm

grok87 wrote:Not meaning to be pedantic, but I would probably not say that the Vanguard funds track their respective indices. Both the Vanguard Int Treasury fund and the Vanguard Inflation protected securities fund are actively managed- i.e. are not index funds. So while they have benchmark indices that they compare themselves too they are not really strictly speaking trying to track that index. This is pretty apparent if you compare the funds peformance

VIPSX
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/ ... INT#tab=1a

VFITX
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/ ... INT#tab=1a

VIPSX appears to be a closet index fund. Basically tracking its index well. But VFITX's performance on a year by year basis is materially different than its index. In particular it seems to routinely target a shorter duration than its index and has underperformed as rates have dropped.
cheers,

You may certainly be pedantic. Sorry, the lack of index tracking is not apparent to me. I think this comes with experience - which I don't have. IOW, where to draw the line if the difference is more than 1% or so, or perhaps it was OK one year and not the next. I'll take a closer look at your examples, thanks.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
 
Posts: 18337
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 6:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia

PreviousNext

Return to Local Chapters and Bogleheads Community

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest