southsider2k5 Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 12, 2011 -> 04:13 PM) 6 years to 100% vested. That is pretty typical, both on the 3% match, and the vesting period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 (edited) I have a problem with this 401k plan he's talking about. What do you mean you have no control over it? What are they investing it in? This is important, just as important as how much they match and how long it takes to vest. It's not usual for modern 401k's to give the individual investors no control over what it's going into... Edited January 13, 2011 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 12, 2011 -> 04:13 PM) 6 years to 100% vested. I assume its a cascading thing, right? Like 20% vested each year? Or is it zero vesting all the way to six years then 100% (which would surprise me)? Keep in mind that even if the match is a long way off from vesting, just the tax savings alone and the chance of some vesting amount is worth it. QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 12, 2011 -> 06:29 PM) I have a problem with this 401k plan he's talking about. What do you mean you have no control over it? What are they investing it in? This is important, just as important as how much they match and how long it takes to vest. It's not usual for modern 401k's to give the individual investors no control over what it's going into... I think that's a misunderstanding, I have never heard of anyone with a 401k that they couldn't control what they were investing in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 07:47 AM) I assume its a cascading thing, right? Like 20% vested each year? Or is it zero vesting all the way to six years then 100% (which would surprise me)? Keep in mind that even if the match is a long way off from vesting, just the tax savings alone and the chance of some vesting amount is worth it. Yes. After 2 years is 20%, 3 is 40%, etc... QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 07:47 AM) I think that's a misunderstanding, I have never heard of anyone with a 401k that they couldn't control what they were investing in. No misunderstanding. I literally have no control over how my money gets invested. I just give it to them and they invest it how they like. Then I get it back when I retire or leave the company (depending on my vesting status of course). That's why I'm hesitant about it. I hate to lose the 3% match though. Edited January 13, 2011 by Iwritecode Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:00 AM) No misunderstanding. I literally have no control over how my money gets invested. I just give it to them and they invest it how they like. Then I get it back when I retire or leave the company (depending on my vesting status of course). That's why I'm hesitant about it. I hate to lose the 3% match though. You're kidding. I've never heard of that. I mean, I've heard of stock purchase plans (which obviously have only one choice), and partnership shares in a single entity... but a 401k where you can't decide which funds to buy into? Did they at least tell you what they plan to put the money in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:03 AM) You're kidding. I've never heard of that. I mean, I've heard of stock purchase plans (which obviously have only one choice), and partnership shares in a single entity... but a 401k where you can't decide which funds to buy into? Did they at least tell you what they plan to put the money in? I was told stocks and bonds. I guess I could find out exact details but I can't change it. On a semi-related note: Does anyone know how they figure out how much to take out of your check for federal taxes? I found a payroll calculator online that was very accurate for me last year when trying to estimate out my checks. When I put in the numbers for 2011 it says that I should be getting about $30 more this year. They are taking more out in federal taxes but less for social security. When I checked my wife's check it says she'll actually be getting $7 less. Again they are taking less out of SS but a lot more out of federal taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:08 AM) I was told stocks and bonds. I guess I could find out exact details but I can't change it. LOL, and did you tell them, "duh!"? Did they say stock and bond FUNDS, or stocks and bonds DIRECTLY? I am starting to think you mght work for some sort of financial firm, that either provides investments already to the public or has weird restrictions on these things for employees. QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:08 AM) On a semi-related note: Does anyone know how they figure out how much to take out of your check for federal taxes? I found a payroll calculator online that was very accurate for me last year when trying to estimate out my checks. When I put in the numbers for 2011 it says that I should be getting about $30 more this year. They are taking more out in federal taxes but less for social security. When I checked my wife's check it says she'll actually be getting $7 less. Again they are taking less out of SS but a lot more out of federal taxes. Federal income taxes should stay materially the same in 2011 for nearly everyone. But, maybe your income went up? Or maybe the company realized they were under-withholding and bumped it up for 2011? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:12 AM) Federal income taxes should stay materially the same in 2011 for nearly everyone. But, maybe your income went up? Or maybe the company realized they were under-withholding and bumped it up for 2011? If you're making under about $35 k per year, you're going to pay more in taxes this year than last, and the lower the number, the more your taxes will go up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:12 AM) LOL, and did you tell them, "duh!"? Did they say stock and bond FUNDS, or stocks and bonds DIRECTLY? I am starting to think you mght work for some sort of financial firm, that either provides investments already to the public or has weird restrictions on these things for employees. I don't know. I'll have to ask. It's a little hard to explain but I work as a contract programmer. The company that actually pays me is run by a bunch of accountants. The guy that I actually deal with from the company is not one so some information may be getting lost in translation. QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:12 AM) Federal income taxes should stay materially the same in 2011 for nearly everyone. But, maybe your income went up? Or maybe the company realized they were under-withholding and bumped it up for 2011? I thought they should have stayed the same too. I'm only going by what the online calculator said. I haven't gotten an actual paycheck yet. Not til next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:08 AM) I was told stocks and bonds. I guess I could find out exact details but I can't change it. On a semi-related note: Does anyone know how they figure out how much to take out of your check for federal taxes? I found a payroll calculator online that was very accurate for me last year when trying to estimate out my checks. When I put in the numbers for 2011 it says that I should be getting about $30 more this year. They are taking more out in federal taxes but less for social security. When I checked my wife's check it says she'll actually be getting $7 less. Again they are taking less out of SS but a lot more out of federal taxes. The expiring "making work pay" tax credit in the stimulus bill was about an $800 a year credit on your total federal taxes. ($400/person) That has been replaced by a 33% cut in the payroll tax. What you should see is the amount you pay in Social Security going down by 33%, and the amount you pay in federal taxes going up by about $33 a month ($400 a year per person over 12 months). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:20 AM) If you're making under about $35 k per year, you're going to pay more in taxes this year than last, and the lower the number, the more your taxes will go up. OK, that's what happened. I make more and my wife makes less. What's the reason for that? EDIT: read your next post. Got it. Edited January 13, 2011 by Iwritecode Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:20 AM) If you're making under about $35 k per year, you're going to pay more in taxes this year than last, and the lower the number, the more your taxes will go up. Really? That's odd, I thought the lowest brackets remained the same. I must have misunderstood. QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:21 AM) I don't know. I'll have to ask. It's a little hard to explain but I work as a contract programmer. The company that actually pays me is run by a bunch of accountants. The guy that I actually deal with from the company is not one so some information may be getting lost in translation. I thought they should have stayed the same too. I'm only going by what the online calculator said. I haven't gotten an actual paycheck yet. Not til next week. On the taxes I really don't know... but my one piece of advice for you on both the taxes and the 401k, is to go get a lot more information before making decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:23 AM) OK, that's what happened. I make more and my wife makes less. What's the reason for that? It's probably in the "Total amount you earn". The Republicans agreed to this tax cut, so the less you make, the more you're paying in taxes. If your making $50k per year, your taxes should go marginally downwards, while if your wife is making $25 k a year, her taxes should go marginally upwards. When you file a joint return, that will somehow even itself out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:25 AM) It's probably in the "Total amount you earn". The Republicans agreed to this tax cut, so the less you make, the more you're paying in taxes. If your making $50k per year, your taxes should go marginally downwards, while if your wife is making $25 k a year, her taxes should go marginally upwards. When you file a joint return, that will somehow even itself out. That's what I figure. We have 3 kids and claim 0 so we get a lot back anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 08:03 AM) You're kidding. I've never heard of that. I mean, I've heard of stock purchase plans (which obviously have only one choice), and partnership shares in a single entity... but a 401k where you can't decide which funds to buy into? Did they at least tell you what they plan to put the money in? What do you mean you've never heard of that? It's almost exactly what Enron/Worldcom did, only they invested all the 401k money into their own stocks to pump up it's price. I don't like this idea at all. Give us your money and trust us? How about f*** you. You will tell me exactly what you're investing in or you won't be doing it with my money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:30 AM) What do you mean you've never heard of that? It's almost exactly what Enron/Worldcom did, only they invested all the 401k money into their own stocks to pump up it's price. I don't like this idea at all. Give us your money and trust us? How about f*** you. You will tell me exactly what you're investing in or you won't be doing it with my money. Enron did something very different. They had a traditional 401k with choices, but they required employees to sit down with a rep to discuss their "options". They were then encouraged to buy a whole bunch of Enron stock with their 401k's, which is just stupid and incredibly inappropriate. In this case, he is saying he doesn't get any choice at all. And I agree, I wouldn't like it either, that seems very sketchy to me. Why would a company even want to control that? Seems fishy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:35 AM) Enron did something very different. They had a traditional 401k with choices, but they required employees to sit down with a rep to discuss their "options". They were then encouraged to buy a whole bunch of Enron stock with their 401k's, which is just stupid and incredibly inappropriate. In this case, he is saying he doesn't get any choice at all. And I agree, I wouldn't like it either, that seems very sketchy to me. Why would a company even want to control that? Seems fishy. Probably sold a plan by an investment firm with high management fees, would be my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:35 AM) Enron did something very different. They had a traditional 401k with choices, but they required employees to sit down with a rep to discuss their "options". They were then encouraged to buy a whole bunch of Enron stock with their 401k's, which is just stupid and incredibly inappropriate. In this case, he is saying he doesn't get any choice at all. And I agree, I wouldn't like it either, that seems very sketchy to me. Why would a company even want to control that? Seems fishy. For all we know, they're on the level...but I don't like it because its very non-standard. I've never heard of a 401k that doesn't give the end user a choice of a few different funds/indexes, in which they can choose to be risky or very conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 13, 2011 Share Posted January 13, 2011 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:38 AM) Probably sold a plan by an investment firm with high management fees, would be my guess. A possibility, but still... QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:39 AM) For all we know, they're on the level...but I don't like it because its very non-standard. I've never heard of a 401k that doesn't give the end user a choice of a few different funds/indexes, in which they can choose to be risky or very conservative. I haven't heard of it either. And even if SS is right in his hypothesis, those investment management firms will usually work WITH the clients in that case to make their decisions, thus the higher fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 09:28 AM) That's what I figure. We have 3 kids and claim 0 so we get a lot back anyway. you don't claim any kids on your taxes? Why? That's just basically giving away money to the IRS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Programmer- Also watch out for how they give you the match. My wife works for a company that, when match time comes (which they do just once a year, in January, at a variable rate based on company performance), they give the match in company stock. If you don't go in and re-allocate, suddenly, as much as half of your 401k is in one company's stock (which is of course a bad idea). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 14, 2011 -> 07:37 AM) you don't claim any kids on your taxes? Why? That's just basically giving away money to the IRS. If I understand what he means, I think he's saying he claims zero on the withholding so that the IRS pulls more out during the year and he gets a larger return when he files. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 14, 2011 -> 08:08 AM) If I understand what he means, I think he's saying he claims zero on the withholding so that the IRS pulls more out during the year and he gets a larger return when he files. That's exactly it. I understand that it's essentially a "free loan" to the government but we are really bad at saving money. This way it's outta sight outta mind. If we put it into a savings account or something we'd be way too tempted to spend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 14, 2011 -> 09:22 AM) That's exactly it. I understand that it's essentially a "free loan" to the government but we are really bad at saving money. This way it's outta sight outta mind. If we put it into a savings account or something we'd be way too tempted to spend it. Well, and really, if it's in a savings account, you're talking a few cents a month. Maybe a buck a year in interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 14, 2011 -> 06:37 AM) you don't claim any kids on your taxes? Why? That's just basically giving away money to the IRS. I think he is referring to his paycheck deductions, not his actual filing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts