FINANCIAL HINTS FOR A CARELESS FUTURE

The tax collectors office are able to help you with a deductible fiscal supplementary pension, but there are other possibilities to optimize your saved capital:

Let the tax collectors office pay for your supplementary pension
Through individual pension savings you can collect money for your pension on a friendly fiscal manner. In 2006 is an amount of 800 Euro savings (yearly indexed) fiscal deductible. That’s a profit of 240 to 320 Euro, dependent from your taxable wage and family situation. If you invest each year 800 Euro in a pension fund, you will receive around 90.000 Euro gross after 35 years.

Let your company pay for your pension
If your company pays the premiums for your retirement and old age pension insurance, the savings will be kept out your taxable wage and notional amount for your social cost.

Try to get the best out of your company
The money that stays in the company can on a friendly fiscal mode different directions out. A part can be used for current service pension. During several years you will have build up a nice capacity of money in your company.

Gain in clearness from an expert
Private secretaries: some of them are working totally independent and just offering objective advice, but they sell no financial products. There fee is a stable.
Specialized insurance brokers: There fees are commissions on premiums or an expendable fee for a financial plan.
Banks: Sometimes they figure out a financial plan for “good” customers, even completely free.

Visit your notary
A visit to you notary can produce highly decreases for yourself and the descendants. Is your marriage contract tuned to your professional situation? What happens when you or your partner dies? ...

Nowadays a legal pension wouldn’t suffice to guarantee a careless future. It’s obvious that we choose for a systematic current service pension.


Jan

http://www.tijd.be/geld_beleggen/vermogensbeheer/artikel.asp?Id=2188144

Plan the perfect party

You have to make sure that your party is THE party, everyone’s talking about. Host it in grand style and at a great price with following tips from pros.

You want to have a big blowout, and make sure that the party is truly memorable, the type where everyone has fun and guests are still talking about the details for weeks to come. You aren’t sure whether you know the right little touches that will take the event from ordinary to extraordinary without spending a small fortune for it.

· Choose the right place, it’s a key consideration, count 4 to 5 square feet for each person. Cost and convenience are also factors. But always remember: easy doesn’t come cheap! To keep the price down you can ask the manager if you can bring in your own wine and spirits.

· Hire help, a planner can be an ideal solution if you’re too busy to deal with all the party details. You can find him by asking advices from friends or contact the International Special Events Society’s online directory at www.ises.com. Waiters, catering, entertainers… can also be hired.

· Know where to splurge… But never skimp on food, people remember what they ate a lot more than fireworks or a hot-air balloon.

· …and know where to save. The surest way to cut the expense of throwing a big bash is to cut the guest list. Nor is there any need to go high-end on printed party material and other froufrou. And in terms of flowers and other decorations, simply almost always wins out over elaborate.

· Party like it’s $ 19,99: ° go back to school

° limit the libations

° don’t do dinner

I chose this article, because I think it’s interesting knowing how to throw a party, which costs are avoiable and how you can evoid them. It also shows where you can find party planners and other interesting things that I didn’t know. Many people would love to throw a part, but just don’t know where to start and how to do it in the right way. So most of the time, they underestimate expenses or just look over certain details, but these details can make a big change in appreciation for the guests.

Laura

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/19/pf/party_party.moneymag/index.htm?postversion=2007101911

Is marriage a dumb move?

Falling in love afters years of building wealth can make life complicated. Marrying can sometimes make it worse.

Michele Mann had launched a successful interior design business. And she had nearly paid off her condo.
Then Mann, met Charles Wally. And love changed the game plan.
Not getting married never crossed their minds. But had they simply opted to live together, they would not have had to deal with sorting out the ownership of two homes, deciding on a succession plan for Mann's business or protecting the inheritance for Wally's kids.
No wonder that over the past decade the number of unmarried partners over the age of 65 has increased by 70 percent.

be sure to ask yourself these questions first.

Will marrying lower your income?
if you are collecting alimony from your ex, you will give that up when you remarry. Remarry before age 60 and you will lose any Social Security income you are entitled to from a previous marriage.

Will marrying raise your taxes?
You can inherit all your spouse's assets tax-free, but an unmarried partner must pay federal estate taxes on any amount over $2 million through 2009.

Will marriage increase your liabilities?
As a married couple, you will pay lower auto insurance premiums. You may also do better by joining your new spouse's health insurance plan. But being married can obligate you to shoulder some big expenses, such as your spouse's loan payments or credit-card debts.

Will it disinherit your kids?
Adult children can pose a problem, because marriage would give your spouse first dibs on your estate. You will need to draft a new will to keep your kids' inheritance intact.

This only becomes a problem when you are already a bit older. Because, when you are still younger, you do not have so much wealth. I think this article gives you something to think about, because not everybody knows all of this.

Kathleen

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/24/pf/marriage.moneymag/index.htm?postversion=2007102506

Britons lending their friends £510m a year

Britons are handing more than £510 million a year to their friends and family. The average amount that is given is £116. Before you do this, you must concern all problems you can face. Almost 3.5 people have said that their friendship ended because of money. Those amounts don’t need to be this high. 29% says that is was an amount below £100.
Several reasons are revealed to declare this situation. The first one is that people just borrow the money to help their friends until pay day. So people don’t have to lend money at the bank and so they don’t have to pay rents. The second reason is to pay off personal debts, like holidays, home improvements… Also helping set up a business, buying presents and medical expenses are reasons to lend money from friends. Of course is the best thing to do when you need a large amount of money, to go to the bank. Yes, indeed, you must pay the rent, but isn’t that more worth than your friendship with other people? It’s a well-know fact that people split up for money and that friendships and for money. But I think that people ignore the fact that they can lose their friends, however it’s something very common.

Els

source: http://www.myfinances.co.uk/insurance/news/loans/unsecured-loan/britons-lending-their-friends-510m-year-$477180.htm

EIGHT MISTAKES OF FINANCIERS TO AVOID

Choose the strongest climber
Most of the financiers choose for popular, high stocks. You have to look up and study the losers of the past years. The losers has to prove them, but the combination between risk and gain is a lot advantageous.

Unknown investments
You have to choose two studies that consider to sell a stock and two with a positive advice. It’s possible to estimate the dis- and advantages.

Afraid to sell with loss
You can keep a stock when you know it very well and you’re abreast of the fact that the bad news is only expendable. But you better sell your stock immediate when the news is very bad. Example: An important product that catches a serious delay.

Sell the winners to fast
You have to make a difference between stable and secure values (ex: Unilever) and speculative and risky stocks (ex: Option). You can’t hesitate to carry in the profit when it’s 50% on speculative and risky stocks, because they are to dynamic.

Bet on one horse
It’s recommended to have ten, preferably twenty, different stocks in one portfolio from several sectors and to diversify between small, large and medium-sized concerns.

Search confirmation for your own opinion
You have to search elements that contradict your studies and investigations. The best investments were made by thinking in the opposite direction.

Unknown investments capacity
You have to make a decision that has a substantial influence on your investments portfolio, namely: how long would and could you miss your money?

to under-appreciate dividends
The half of the total benefit of stock investments on a long term comes from dividends. The importance of exchange profit is reducing as your investments term becomes longer.

Investments gain more and more importance. It’s possible to gain a lot of money but also to lose. It’s necessary to know useful, profitable things about the investments market. Investments are a very complex matter, it’s not enough to be the smartest.

Jan

http://www.trends.be/nl/moneytalk/acht-te-vermijden-beleggersfouten/site72-section83-article8498.html#articleContainer

You have to cover many bases when preparing a will

There are many practical issues that you should deal with to ensure that your affairs are in order. The first thing you should have is a valid will. Next, ask yourself if you are still happy with the beneficiaries you have named. Also consider whether your will is properly witnessed.

There are a number of things you should consider:

How you are married
If you are married in community of property, you and your spouse own all your assets and your debts. When you die, half of the joint estate will be that of your spouse.
If you are married out of community of property, you and your spouse each retain separate estates.

Appointing an executor
After you die, somebody needs to make sure your debts are paid and your assets transferred to the right people in terms of your will. That “somebody” is referred to as the executor of your estate.

Reducing executor fees
If you appoint anyone other than your spouse or a family member as the executor of your estate, your estate will have to pay the executor the fees set out by law. The maximum fee is 3.5 percent of the assets in your estate.

Cash for surviving spouse
Your surviving spouse will need cash to live on after they die while the estate is being wound up. once your bank gets wind of the fact that you are dead it will freeze your account. For this purpose, the spouse should have his or her own bank account.

Choosing your beneficiaries
If you belong to a retirement fund, you may nominate your spouse or children as beneficiaries of the fund.

Final wishes
Don’t forget to leave some instructions to your family about funeral arrangements after you die

I think that when you are a bit older and already have a familly, you should do this even when you don't think about dieing at all. You never know what could happen.

Kathleen Aps

Source : http://www.persfin.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=706&fArticleId=4070426

Why $5 million is the new $1 million

Who wants to be a millionaire? A lot of people I guess, but nowadays it isn’t longer a synonym for being rich. With the rising costs of living and with the long retirements, financial experts say that that the new benchmark is $5 million. Financial advisers say that the multimillionaire clients are the fastest-growing segment. Though we must ask our-selves the question why we need more money to survive. The answer is easily. Because we live longer, we spend longer money. Of course, as we see in the article isn’t money as much worth in one part of America as in the other part.
Most of the multimillionaires today made their wealth in three ways. The first one, the real estate market created an enormous wealth. The baby boomers have gained a lot of money with it. The next one is the business buyouts. The third one, the technology boom has created a lot of wealth, but it has left also a lot of millionaires in its wake.
But the latest trend with millionaires is that they use their money to try to effect the global change. They put also money in social causes, but they want a social return on investment for it.
Being a millionaire is a dream for many of us, but I think you may not underestimate the social pressure. People expect a lot of the wealthy people, but it’s indeed a fact, that they also must secure their future. As we see in the article, you can’t stop working after winning the big lot. So being a millionaire is nowadays not a security of a nice and wealthy life.

Els

source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20586948/

First boomer applies for Social Security

The retired teacher from New Jersey is the first of her generation to seek benefits. People call it ‘the Silver Tsunami’ and it is an appropriate name because the Social Security trust fund is projected to go broke in 2041. President Bush had proposed changes to create private accounts, but it went nowhere in Congress. Bush’s budget director calls this a ‘fiscal train wreck’. The three entitlement programs make up nearly half of all federal spending, a share that is expected to grow.
A combination of benefit cuts and tax increases will need to be considered to permanently fix the Social Security shortfall.

In my opinion they had to take actions sooner. It wasn’t a secret that one day these baby-boomers, as they are called, would apply for Social Security. I think it’s an interesting and serious problem, certainly because this phenomenon occurs in several countries, even ours. I don’t understand why they didn’t take actions sooner since then, the problem has grown to an unseen climax. The fact that they want to raise the taxes is a negative thing, in my opinion, they don’t do nothing but adding to the problem.

Laura

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/16/pf/retirement/bc.apfn.boomersocialsecu.ap/index.htm?postversion=2007101610

Podcast 1

http://rapidshare.com/files/62208876/Podcast.wav.html

Els, Jan, Laura & Kathleen

RUSSIAN MOB CRACKED BELGIAN INTERNET BANKING

Fifteen Belgians with an internet account at Argenta, Dexia and KBC reported that their bank account was cleared. Someone has gained access to their internet account. The amounts and which technique the hackers used is kept secret by the direction of financial criminality.

The central system of the banks wasn’t cracked by the mob. The hackers have acquired the personal access code of the customers on their personal computer. It’s a new technique for the investigators because they are more conversant with “phishing technique”: the website of a bank is copied so well that customers are willing to trust their personal information to it.

The Russian mob has the ability to crack personal computers, bank systems, etc. Early 2007 hundreds of customers of Nordea (Swedish bank) were the victim of computer fraud through e-mails. Nordea blames the customers because they hadn’t installed the necessary anti-virus software.

The affected customers in the Belgian case are already repaid by their banks. In the mean time they have forced up the security to their sites and there weren’t any new reports.

In the Belgian case it’s the fault of the banks that some customers are hacked on their internet account. They have to anticipate to the highest security level so they don’t violate the faith of the customers. It’s not normal that they can force up their security after they were hacked. You give computer criminals the opportunity and time to crack your system. Banks have to recruit people who are specialized in internet security and they are obliged to follow the newest innovations.

Jan


http://www.standaard.be/Artikel/Detail.aspx?artikelid=B19545972071006

Debtors pay millions in illegal fees

Some debt administrators are profiteering from debtors' repayments by charging fees that far exceed the legal limits.

Low-income earners who are unable to keep up their debt repayments seek the help of debt administrators to reschedule their repayments to affordable levels. But a lawyer has found that most of these administrators are exploiting the people they are supposed to be helping and trapping them further in debt. Administrators are charging fees of about 23 percent to 50 percent of the amounts they collect, while they may legally take a maximum fee of 12,5 percent.

lawyer Eduan Matthee, who has been taking on debt administrators that are over-charging, started his own debt administration company. He says debtors often do not see these liquidation accounts. Thus they have no idea where they are in the cycle of repaying their debts.

Five years ago, the Banking Council commissioned independent auditors to research 20 large debt administration companies. The Banking Council's 2002 report said at that time some 650 000 people were under debt administration, and between 100 000 and 120 000 people were being placed under administration each year.

Matthee says all he has succeeded in doing by taking to court administrators who charge more than 12,5 percent of the amounts they collect is removing a single client from that administrator. The administrator is free to continue charging its other clients more than 12,5 percent, although found unfit to be an administrator in one case, is appointed soon after as an administrator in another case, Matthee says.

I think the government should do more to help those debtors. They already have many problems and keep getting more.

Kathleen

How to borrow from those you know and not ruin the relationship

As the mortgage market melted down this summer and the credit markets became chaotic, the stockbrokers noticed a new evolution. Although they thought that the lenders would reschedule their buyings, they just moved on. The reason of this is that the lenders had found a new way to get a mortgage. It’s not uncommon or new that people lend from their family or their friends, but often it’s associated with family problems and irresolvable arguing. The term that people use for this phenomenon is “circle lending”.

It’s not uncommon or new that people lend from their family or their friends, but often it’s associated with family problems and irresolvable arguing. The term that people use for this phenomenon is “circle lending”.

Personal I wouldn’t even consider this type of lending. Money often creates problems among people. And I don’t think it’s worth “to lose” your family over it. As a matter of fact they should forbid it. Of course you can use the argument that everything can be written down, but we all know that people count on each other. And if you propose that document, people would ask if you do not trust them. Future lenders must also look at the future, what if something happens and they can’t pay back everything, or maybe something happens with your loaners, what to do than?

Els

source:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20834718/

The death of the chequebook

There has been a 40% decline in cheque payments since 1990. The crucial reason for the disappearing is that it’s a far less convenient, more time-consuming method of payment. Nowadays everything is about high speed (f.i. credit cards) so the chequebook dates from the past, when commerce was less speed conscious. There’s also the notion of increased tisk of fraud compared to credit cards and other methods of payments. Cheques are also not eco-conscious and we should be moving towards no-paper methods of payment. The process of completely phasing them out will probably a slow one, the objection will likely to be around 2025.

I think that the chequebook is indeed an outdated method of payment. Nowadays there are excellent and more effective ways to pay for something. The argument for the provisional survival of the cheque is that elderly people wouldn’t be able to comprehend the modern mode of operation of f.i. credit cards and others… But I think that they have underestimated them, it isn’t as difficult to learn it as they want us to believe. I honestly believe that the cheques days are counted, and his existence will soon be over.

Laura

Source: http://www.myfinances.co.uk/associate-article/popular-stories/the-death-chequebook-$477632.htm

FLEMING IS VERY GENEROUS FOR THE GOOD CAUSE.

Eighty per cent of the families gives money to a good cause. The amount has increased noticeable after the tsunami of 2004. Every year collects the Flemish league against cancer more and more money because most of the people know someone in their environment with cancer. Every Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) sees his account rising but there are different ways to reach that goal:

Some non-profit organizations like Child focus, Unicef, 11.11.11, Vredeseilanden, Oxfam Solidariteit,… are making an appeal to DDF (Direct Dialogue Fundraising). It’s a concern with professional fundraisers who are specialized in professional recruitment of donaters and members of non-governmental and charitable organizations. The donater has to pay monthly a small amount (5 €) in stead of one large amount (60€).

Another way to collect money is based on single persons without direct family. If you leave your savings for example to your neighbour, he has to pay 45 till 65 per cent death duties. But you can also leave your savings to the Red Cross. This organization pays only 8,8 per cent death duties. It’s possible to agree with the Red Cross that they have to pay the death duty and further the neighbour. The difference between the death duties of the neighbour and the limited percentage of the Red Cross may the organization keep for themselves. Everybody wins except the tax authorities.

The existence of Non-Governmental Organizations is necessary because otherwise some Third World countries wouldn’t survive without our support, medication,… Everyone has the right to enjoy the common good and prosperity. The fiscal deduction for donations from 30 euro is a good initiative of the government. It’s persuading a lot of firms,… to donate money for the good cause.


Jan

Source: http://www.standaard.be/Artikel/Detail.aspx?artikelId=GS1HN9J6&kanaalid=3

Do Student Loans Affect a Mortgage Application?

Will a students-loan hurt the chances of getting a mortgage? This column replies and gives answers on this problem. At first, lenders do not only look at what you owe, but also at your income. On the basis of your income they determine how much you can loan. Of course they do not only look at your repayment of the mortgage, but also at the taxes and other debts. So you won’t have too many money problems.
Another important factor: the more money you can put down, the bigger your chance will become you will get a mortgage. That’s because the lenders don’t want to take too many risks. Also important is your credit score, and in this part the student loan could be a problem, but not necessarily. And that is because a student loan is more favourably than a credit-card debt.

Owing a lot of money in instalment debt isn't going to hurt your credit score as much as maxing out your credit cards. And now we arrive at the important part of the column. “Young people get often problems, because they blow off their student loans” !!!! And that while you have more support by the government when you have a student loan than when you owe a current mortgage.

To help out the students with their loan-problems they can also do this:
-if you can’t find an income, ask your lender to spread the repayment.
-if you have an income, but it is too low, you can ask too the lender to repay the loan by proportion of your income.

It’s nice to know that there are several options to lend money or get a mortgage for young families. Often are these aids not well-known and aren’t there a lot of people who can use it. That’s I think also a problem in Belgium. The reason of this silence is to make sure that the mortgage companies and banks, won’t lose to much money.

Els

source:http://www.kiplinger.com/columns/drt/archive/2007/dt070926.html

Mortgage meltdown : vulture investors

Real estate investors find a good lure in depressed markets, they think that the markets are ready to bounce back.
Many housing markets in Florida are looking at double-digits drops in housing prices.

Vulture investors are putting their money in this targets, they buy cheap in the hope that prices will rebound. More specific: local housing markets that have fallen far, but still have potential to recover soon.
They believe in the long-term viability of the real estate market in Florida, but they are buying on rental economics. In former times people had purchased on condo economics, but nowadays these numbers no longer apply.
Demand for rental housing has grown, due to the mortgage meltdown mess and vulture investors react to this fact. They are looking for discounts off previous condo prices to make their purchases viable, then they convert the apartments back into rental units.

In first instance I think it’s good that they are doing something to the whole housing problem in America. Many Americans live above their standards, and this phenomenon also appears on their housing lifestyle. People look at their houses as if they were symbols of status. Nowadays home ownership has reduced and the demand for rental housing has grown, this should provide a price-safety net.
But vulture investors don’t buy houses because it’s a solution to Americas problem. They do it for the return of it. People don’t call them “vultures” for nothing. As a fact they contribute to the matter, in short term it’s a good thing for the citizens. They receive a nice amount of money, but they don’t own a house anymore. At long term, they have to pay more and still don’t own a place of their own.
In my opinion, the government should be the first to react to the matter. The vulture investors look to areas with job growth and low unemployment, but what about the other zones, who struggle even more with debts?!?

Laura

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/24/real_estate/vultures_circling/index.htm?postversion=2007092718

Solar finally pays off

Solar panels catch enough rays to power your home and sell electricity back to the utility. Some people already have solar panels and they say that it gives them immense satisfaction, there is no easier way to make money than to sit out there and enjoy the sunshine.

Research shows that most Americans would be very interested in having a solar system, but do not realize solar can power a house economically.
Another thing most people do not realize is that the economics for solar do not depend solely on how many hours the sun shines, but whether your state offers a financial encouragement.

You can also sell power back to the utility, this makes them into power banks. If you feed more power in than you take out, you store up credits for future use.
Another benefit of solar panels is the insurance against rising energy prices.

As the price of generating conventional power has risen, the costs associated with solar power have fallen dramatically. Solar panels now cost 80% less than they did in the early 1980s.

Of course, solar power is not all about economics. There is a certain set of the population who will pay a substantial sum to do the right thing.

I think solar panels are a very good investment. You can save money with it and it helps the environment. I can imagine some people do not like the way your house will look with solar panels on your roof, but to me that is not important.

Kathleen

Source: http://www.kiplinger.com/magazine/archives/2007/10/solar2.html?kipad_id=2