I recently received a written reminder from one of my IRA custodians that they apparently mailed all their clients. (I think it came from Oakmark.) The abandonment laws vary by state.
Their advice was to either (1) phone them once a year or (2) login to your account online once a year. Since I login to all my accounts at least once a year, I let it go at that. I think it’s a good practice to change passwords once or twice a year. And doing so ought to satisfy anyone looking on that you’re still alive.

As I recall, you're in Michigan. I don't know whether all states follow this rule, but in Michigan, its three year clock doesn't begin running until you're 70.5:

An IRA (Individual Retirement Account) account, Keogh plan, or 401K plan becomes distributable under the terms of the account or plan [i.e. RMDs for the IRA]. If the plan or account requires a distribution at a certain point in time, then the three-year dormancy period begins at that point.

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/2013i_2598_7.pdf
I don't know any state that has law that property escheats in less than three years, though some financial institutions may be obnoxious and freeze your account after a year of inactivity. (I made an old post somewhere about WF doing this, and making a lot of errors along the way.) So it's still a good idea to check in yearly.

Thanks Ol’Skeet and others.
As of their June 30 report, Dodge & Cox was “trimming” financials just a bit after being hot on them for several years. Their reasoning is that relative valuations have now moved up. They also referenced becoming slightly overweight energy. I’d caution that these guys are deep value investors. Their ideas don’t always pan out. And the ones that do work usually take months or years to materialize.
https://www.dodgeandcox.com/pdf/shareholder_reports/dc_stock_semi_annual_report.pdf
Caveats:
- - A 3 months old report may not belong on this thread.
- - However, neither interest rates nor energy prices have changed much in those 3 months.
- - D&C (domestically) is having an uncharacteristically poor year.
Personally, I’m not seeing anything that looks attractive relative to risk / reward. I remain invested, but at the high end of my allowable cash position. I watch, read and listen a lot. Many managers appear “positive” on equities only because they are comparatively better priced than bonds. If I should uncover any opportunities to turn a dollar without undue risk I’ll (1) invest in it first and than (2) note that on the board.
Regards

Everything is relative. In my situation, I feel like I'm sitting on a pile of cash waiting for a shoe to drop. But...since I was 90% equity about 5 years ago, the harvesting of profits and allocations to a bucket 1 for several years of spending money have taken my portfolio to about 60% equity. So I guess the moral of the story is that I don't need to have 90% to have a foot in the market.

FYI: (The Video Clip turned out to be the actual episode. I think someone at WealthTrack goofed.)
Regards,
Ted
October 12, 2017
Dear WEALTHTRACK Subscriber,
WEALTHTRACK has been promoting the benefits of global investing since our launch in 2005. The reasons are pretty obvious. More than 95% percent of the world’s population lives outside of the United States. 76% percent of the world’s goods and services are produced in other countries.
Yes, the U.S. economy is the largest contributor to global GDP, accounting for nearly 25% of the world’s $74 trillion economy, but others are moving up. China accounts for about 15% of global GDP, having eclipsed Japan as the world’s second largest economy several years ago. Japan’s GDP footprint is now lagging at around 6%.
As far as future drivers of world growth, the U.S. is still a major force but other countries are growing faster. Estimates are that China will generate 35% of the world’s real economic growth, that’s excluding the effects of inflation, during the next three years. The U.S. is projected to contribute about 18% of additional growth, followed by India’s nearly 9%, the Eurozone’s 8% and surprisingly, Indonesia, the world’s fourth most populous country, is predicted to be the fifth largest driver, followed quickly by South Korea, Australia, Canada, the UK, Japan and Brazil.
These are estimates, but you get the point. There is substantial additional economic power coming from other countries. Given these global realities should U.S. investors with their well-known and understandable home bias increase their foreign exposure? If so when and where?
This week’s WEALTHTRACK guests are both successful global investors with a specialty in international markets. We’ll be joined by Rupal Bhansali, Chief Investment Officer of International and Global Equities for Ariel Investments. She is also Portfolio Manager of two top rated funds which she launched there in 2011. The 5-star rated Ariel International Fund is ranked in the top 10% of its Morningstar Foreign Large Value category with its over 9% annualized returns over the last five years. The 4-star rated Ariel Global Fund is in the top third of its World Large Stock category with 11% annualized returns during the same period.
We’ll also hear from Andrew Foster, Founder, Chief Investment Officer and Lead Portfolio Manager of Seafarer Capital Partners, which he started in 2011. In 2012 he launched his flagship Seafarer Overseas Growth and Income Fund which is focused on foreign markets, especially in the developing world. It carries a Morningstar silver medalist ranking and a 4-star rating for its performance and shareholder friendly management. It is in the top 20% of its Diversified Emerging Market category with nearly seven percent annualized returns over the five- year period. Before launching Seafarer, Foster spent several years as a Portfolio Manager and Director of Research at Asia mutual fund pioneer Matthews Asia.
I began the conversation with the question: how compelling are the investment opportunities overseas?
As always, if you miss the show on Public Television, you can watch it at your convenience on our website. You’ll also find my weekly Action Points there, plus our guests’ “One Investment” ideas. Also, you’ll find our web exclusive EXTRA interviews with Bhansali and Foster there.
If you would like to take WEALTHTRACK with you on your commute or travels, you can now find the WEALTHTRACK podcast on TuneIn, Stitcher, and SoundCloud, as well as iTunes. Find out more on the WEALTHTRACK Podcast page.
Thank you for watching. Have a great weekend and make the week ahead a profitable and a productive one!
Best Regards,
Consuelo

M* Snapshot AINTX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/AINTX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot AINTX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/aintx
AINTX Is Unranked In The (FLCV) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/foreign-large-value/ariel-international-fund/aintx
M* Snapshot AGLOX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/AGLOX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot AGLOX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/aglox
AGLOX Is Unranked In The (WS) Fund Category By U. S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/world-stock/ariel-global-fund/aglox
M* Snapshot SFGIX:
http://www.morningstar.com/funds/XNAS/SFGIX/quote.html
Lipper Snapshot SFGIX:
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/fund/sfgix
SFGIX Is Unranked In The (DEM ) Fund Category By U.S. News & World Report:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/mutual-funds/diversified-emerging-mkts/seafarer-overseas-growth-and-income-fund/sfgix

Much like they say don't but a new car in first year of production. I bought a Dodge Stratus in 1st year of production in 1995 and ran the wheels off of it over in England for 6 years.
I have been DCA into PRGTX - TRP Global Technology since it was a new fund and the price has doubled since then. Hopefully the fund continues to run wild much like PRMTX Media & Telecommunication has over the past few years.

Receive.............Deposit or Transfer
$200 .................$50,000 to $99,999
$300 .................$100,000 to $249,999
$600 .................$250,000 to $499,999
$1,000..............$500,000 to $999,999
$2,500..............$1,000,000+
Personally, those incentives (restated above) wouldn’t be enough to induce me to leave a competent manager who’s taken good care of me over the past 25+ years. I trust him. I understand his policies and procedures. He treats me well. And, I’m intimately familiar with many of his in-house funds.
Just $300 for tor transferring $200,000?
A 1% gain on that $200,000 would be worth $2,000. So you’re looking at the equivalent of something like an 0.15% profit for moving a significant sum of money. I’d think you could easily miss a 1% gain on that money during the time the transfer is in progress. And, if you presently have a manager who allows you to play a little fast & lose (with exchanges), it isn’t hard to grab a quick profit (far in excess of that meager payout) by trading in and out when opportunity arises.
Just MHO

Hi guys!
LA port traffic has seen record imports.....July, August and now September.....with 40% of imports coming through LA. This looks good for Christmas. Also, where or at what price would you start to think about GE? Just pondering a bit....
Also, a Fidelity update:
Quarterly market update: fourth quarter 2017
93% who voted found this helpful
Key takeaways
The global economy is experiencing a relatively steady, synchronized expansion amid low inflation, with low risk of recession.
U.S. fiscal policy is supportive of growth, and hopes for tax-cut legislation represent a potential upside for corporate earnings.
A shift toward tighter global monetary policy may boost market volatility, underscoring the importance of diversification.
Each quarter, Fidelity's Asset Allocation Research Team (AART) compiles a comprehensive quarterly market update. Here is a summary of their outlook, plus key investor takeaways for the third quarter of 2017. For a deep dive into each, read the Quarterly market update: fourth quarter 2017 (PDF) or the interactive PDF.
First, let's look at how the markets did in Q3.
Market summary: Goldilocks backdrop persisted, widespread gains across asset markets
The synchronized expansion in global economic activity—along with low inflation and accommodative monetary policies—continued to provide a steady backdrop for asset markets in the third quarter of 2017. Non-U.S. equities spearheaded a global stock market rally for the third quarter in a row, bolstered by a weaker dollar and a strengthened economic backdrop. Credit spreads tightened further amid the "risk-on" tone, allowing emerging-market and high-yield corporate bonds to add to their solid year-to-date gains. Steady interest rates kept high-quality bonds in the black, and all asset categories posted positive returns.
Since equity markets hit a near-term bottom in early 2016, global assets have posted exceptional returns while experiencing remarkably low levels of volatility. Compared to historical averages, price fluctuations of riskier assets were extremely subdued, even as they registered big gains. More defensive assets such as investment-grade bonds posted smaller gains, but also experienced unusually low volatility.
Economy/macro backdrop: Synchronized global economic upturn, but markets may be tested by monetary policy shift
The global economy is experiencing a relatively steady, synchronized expansion. Broadly speaking, most developed economies are in more mature (mid-to-late) stages of the business cycle, with the eurozone not as far along as the United States. Recession risks remain low globally, although less accommodative policy in several countries, including China, may constrain the upside to growth going forward.
A rebound in global trade continued to bolster the global economy. The global expansion has been underpinned by a turnaround in export-oriented sectors and manufacturing activity. China's rising import demand over the past year has helped push the percentage of major countries with expanding new export orders to more than 90%. China’s economy remains in expansion, however, policymakers' tighter stance is beginning to show an impact, and peaking activity suggests that upside to China's cyclical trajectory is limited.
Elsewhere, the eurozone is on a cyclical upswing, enjoying a reasonably synchronized mid-cycle expansion across both its core and its periphery. The U.K., however, is confronting late-cycle pressures, as consumers’ expectations deteriorate alongside rising inflation and faltering real income growth.
The U.S. economy remains in expansion, between the mid- and late-cycle phases. Tight labor markets are supporting wage growth and the U.S. consumer, keeping recession risk low. So far, low inflation has been the key to a prolonged mid-to-late cycle transition in the United States. U.S. inflation is likely to remain range-bound due to multiple factors: Tight labor markets, rising wages, and increasing food costs have been supportive, while slowing shelter costs and other transitory factors have served to dampen inflation. Historically, rising wages pressure profit margins and cause the Federal Reserve (Fed) to tighten monetary policy; this in turn has caused a flattening of the yield curve and raised debt-servicing costs for businesses. While many of these indicators remain relatively healthy, they have all deteriorated and are indicative of a maturing U.S. business cycle.
U.S. fiscal policy is supportive of growth, and hopes for tax-cut legislation represent a potential upside for corporate earnings. However, tax cuts may do more to boost inflation than growth, as rate cuts tend to have a bigger impact on growth when there is a large amount of economic slack and monetary policy is easing (unlike today). Meanwhile, escalating tensions in the Korean peninsula represent a potential catalyst for meaningful market risk, as the U.S. and China are the world's 2 economies that are most central to global trade.
Firming U.S. inflation and global growth have given the Fed confidence to continue gradually hiking its short-term policy rate; other central banks may also recognize the need to begin moving away from extraordinary easing. The Fed's unwinding of its balance sheet, and the ECB's likely tapering of asset purchases next year, could pose a liquidity challenge to markets. Overall, the global economy is in a synchronized expansion amid low inflation, with low risk of recession. Going forward, a shift toward global monetary policy normalization may boost market volatility.
Asset markets: Non-U.S. valuations still most attractive, higher market volatility may be on the way
The third quarter was another strong quarter for U.S. and global equity markets. Growth stocks and emerging-market categories were the strongest performers, boosted by their exposure to big gains in the information technology sector. Credit categories continued to lead gains in the bond market, and year-to-date returns were almost universally positive across major asset categories and sectors.
Turning to fundamental factors, international corporate earnings growth has accelerated for several quarters and surpassed U.S. corporate profit growth. Earnings revisions have also stabilized for the first time in years, although lofty forward earnings growth expectations may provide a tougher hurdle to clear in the year ahead, particularly in emerging markets.
Generally speaking, stock valuations are mixed using one-year-trailing earnings; U.S. price-to-earnings ratios are above average, developed markets are below average, and emerging markets are roughly average. Forward estimates for all markets look more reasonable. Using 5-year peak inflation-adjusted earnings, P/E ratios for foreign developed and emerging equity markets remain lower than those in the United States. Despite dollar weakness in 2017, the value of most currencies also remains in the lower half of historical ranges versus the U.S. dollar. Meanwhile, yields and credit spreads across bond sectors remained low relative to history.
With the U.S. exhibiting the mid- and late-cycle phase dynamics, it's worth looking at the historical playbook. Historically, the mid-cycle phase of the U.S. business cycle tends to favor riskier asset classes, while late cycles have the most mixed performance of any business-cycle phase. The late-cycle phase has often featured more limited overall upside and less confidence in equity performance, though stocks have typically outperformed bonds. Inflation-resistant assets, such as commodities, energy stocks, short-duration bonds, and TIPS, have performed relatively well, as have non-U.S. equities.
From an asset allocation standpoint, given the maturing U.S. business cycle, the likelihood of less reliable relative asset performance patterns and increased volatility as a result of the risks in the global monetary policy, smaller cyclical tilts may be warranted. The possibility of higher volatility underscores the importance of diversification.
Long-term themes
Slowing labor force growth and aging demographics are expected to tamp down global growth over the next 2 decades. We expect GDP growth of emerging countries to outpace that of developed markets over the long term, providing a relatively favorable secular backdrop for emerging-market equity returns. Over long periods of time, GDP growth has a tight positive relationship with long-term government bond yields (yields generally have averaged the same rate as nominal growth). We expect interest rates will rise over the long term to an average that is closer to our 3.6% nominal GDP forecast, but this implies they would settle at a significantly lower level than their historical averages.
Next steps to consider
Research investments
Get industry-leading investment analysis.
Analyze your portfolio
Find investing ideas to match your goals.
Invest using the cycle
See how the cycle has impacted performance.
God bless
the Pudd

It was certainly legal for your wife to elect to take a lump sum distribution. It's her company forcing that distribution on her (i.e. without obtaining her consent) that does not appear to have been legal.
You're going to take quite a tax hit on a mid six figure conversion if you do it in one year. You might want to spread it out over a few years (recharacterizing part of it to a traditional IRA). Though that could bump Medicare premiums (IRMAA) or make SS checks taxable, or other bad stuff.
Converting quickly, keeping within tax brackets, watching out for other tax impacts - it's not an easy needle to thread.

From the article: Despite nearly nine years of gains in U.S. stock markets, investors are flocking to bonds. ... U.S. based bond funds have brought in more than $2 for every $1 gathered by equity funds this year ... BlackRock alone reported nearly $60 billion in bond fund inflows and another $20 billion in “cash management” products that also invest in debt during the third quarter, compared to $12 billion for equity funds.
That explains Fink’s concerns looking out a year or two. Interesting conundrum. On one hand, investors are seeking shelter from what they perceive as expensive equity markets. On the other hand, they’re avoiding cash and the short end of the curve because they yield next to nothing. As a consequence, longer bonds are pulling in money. If that continues long enough it could drive down long term rates to levels below what shorter paper yields. That’s rate inversion. Yes, it is often a precursor of recession.
What I think is different here is that usually the inversion is brought about by central banks raising rates at the short end to choke off an overheating expansion. But in the case Fink outlines, it would be a result of investors piling into the longer end of the curve in search of yield. But investors aren’t that dumb - are they?

After 20 years, I'm guessing that your wife had at least $5K in the 401(k).
"Generally, if your account balance exceeds $5,000, the plan administrator must obtain your consent before making a distribution." IRS 401k guide.
While what's done is done, forcing your wife to take the money was likely illegal.
You have the option of recharacterizing the Roth conversion into a traditional IRA and not owe any taxes. You could then move the money back into the 401k (pre-tax) if that's where you really want it. However, you can't try to undo everything in one step by having the 401(k) take back the money (pre-tax) straight from the Roth IRA.

How can I recharacterize an amount rolled over to a Roth IRA from an employer-sponsored retirement plan?
You can only recharacterize amounts rolled into a Roth IRA from an employer-sponsored retirement plan by transferring them to a new or existing traditional IRA, and not back into the plan from which they were distributed.

IRS: IRA FAQs.
If you want the money back in the 401(k) as a Roth 401(k) (and if the plan offers this and allows the transfer), then you could move the money back via a trustee-to-trustee transfer.
Note: After having converted to a Roth IRA, you can withdraw the amount converted (but not subsequent earnings) without owning tax on that money (since you just paid that tax). But so long as your wife under 59.5, there will be an early distribtution penalty of 10% for the first five years after conversion.
Fairmark: Distributions After a Roth IRA Conversion

I'm not a tax guy so please double check my understanding. It sounded like the transfer has already happened from the 401K at your wife's employer to her Roth IRA at a mutual fund company. If that's true I'm not sure how easy it is to undo it because I think it would be considered a withdrawal from a Roth without waiting what I believe is the required 5 years and that would probably incur a penalty. If the transfer isn't done yet and you still have the option to change your mind, one advantage of transferring to a rollover IRA rather than the Roth IRA is that you don't pay any tax. Depending on your situation and what you believe/want to bet on about Trump's tax plans, you might potentially pay lower tax on a Roth conversion if you waited until a new tax code is in place.
As an addition to Bill's comments, I believe once you wait the required 5 years after converting to a Roth IRA, you're able to withdraw what you "contributed", or in other words what you've paid tax on, at any time without penalty. It's only the gains on what you contributed that you're not allowed to withdraw until retirement age without penalty.

I'd keep it as an IRA, not 401k. There are more investment choices available to you.
The only reasons to put it back in 401k are:
1) if you want early retirement, you can get at the funds without penalty a couple of years earlier.
2) if the 401k plan has access to some particular funds that you otherwise can't invest in.
Bill

Wife worked for a large box store till May 1, 2017 and was involved in a layoff. They would not hold her 20 years of 401k investments and were required to make a distribution - so we directed the funds to in her ROTH IRA at another MF investment company with plans of paying the required taxes end of this year. Does anyone see any problems with doing this! Also the first of September she has went back to work at the same company but at a different location. Was wondering about the possibility of having the 401K funds in her ROTH IRA - plus gains transferred back to the same 401K fund administrator for the company.
Any response or ideas would be appreciated.
Thanks
Gary

The good news, if you can call it that, it that they're not ignoring a 50 year customer. As far as they know, you've only been with them 25 years - their records only go back to the 90s.
This came up in a conversation I had with Fidelity today - the rep explained that she says "thank you for being a customer since at least 199x", because they can't tell if you've been with them longer than that.
Wait until Fidelity has another cash promotion and then do a partial transfer back from ML. They charge $50 for a full transfer, but nothing for a partial.
https://www.merrilledge.com/pricing

Great find @Ted.
I’m always interested in what T Rowe Price is doing. Interesting that they had a Retirement Income Fund for many years, but decided about 5 years ago to rename it Retirement Balanced.
Now a new Retirement Income fund? Modeling its performance expectations on their current 2020 Target date fund would make it somewhat more aggressive than their previous Retirement income fund (TRRIX). In hindsight, rebranding the old fund must have been Price’s way of “clearing the deck” for this new one. Brings to mind, “What’s in a name ...”. When a company reaches the point where there are no longer enough names to go around due to their offering so many funds, what does that say? :)
Still reading this story. Not entirely clear whether there’s a glide slope with this one - but probably not.
(Actually, their website says there is a glide slope). I don’t understand where the firm is going with the launch of so many new funds in recent years. This one is a real puzzle (unless their goal is just to attract more and more assets). Dodge & Cox seems to do just fine with only 5 or 6 funds.
One thing that would steer me clear of this one - In order for it to work as intended, an investor would seem to have to entrust his/her entire retirement nest egg to this fund. Diversifying into several other funds would appear to thwart the fund’s intended goal.

I've had the same experience with E*TRADE. I've rolled over or transferred 401Ks and IRAs several times over the last 5 or 6 years and every time I've asked they've offered me cash that matches the scale Maurice mentioned. IIRC there was one time they were advertising a promotion but the other cases I've just asked.

The SIM philosophy was very popular on the board several years ago. I never practiced it. But I think it was to some extent a self-fulfilling prophecy. For a few years, anyway, the market appeared to sell off around that time of year.
What I observed happening over several years, however, was that those who practiced the belief began to sell a bit earlier every year to get “out in front of the crowd”. Instead of waiting for the market to tank on May 1, why not play it safe and sell on April 15? Than, some thought they could gain an even better edge by selling on April 1, etc. etc.
Is there seasonality to markets? Probably yes. Tax deadlines may play a part. How to profit from the seasonality? That’s where it gets dicey.
We all have different approaches. To each his own. If doing something a certain way has worked for you over time (per Ol’Skeet) I’d be the last to say change it. Whatever floats your boat!

Yes.
Didn't Mr. Gross talk about the new normal several years ago?
Memory is such a magnificent sense to loose.

Kind of remarkable that this is still considered news. It was news maybe thirty years and trillions of dollars in index funds/ETFs ago.

Hi Guys,
Winning in the investment universe can be a daunting task. Yesterday's superior active fund managers often fail to repeat their successes in today's marketplace. The data is overwhelming in the negative direction. Only a little over 10% of these super-pickers retain their outstanding performance in the next measurement period. Persistent outperformance is a challenge and identifying that small, elite group in advance is an even more formidable challenge.
These are not new findings. Vanguard has been making that point for a long time now. Here is a Link to yet another Vanguard study that demonstrates the futility of various candidate signal parameters to reliably project future performance:
https://personal.vanguard.com/pdf/s338.pdf
This report is relatively recent and is well documented. Please give it a read. Here is a nice summary paragraph that I lifted from the reference:
"The current level of a blend of valuation metrics contributes to Vanguard’s generally positive outlook for the stock market over the next ten years (2012–2022). But the fact that even P/Es—the strongest of the indicators we examined—leave a large portion of returns unexplained underscores our belief that expected stock returns are best stated in a probabilistic framework, not as a “point forecast,” and should not be forecast over short horizons."
In an uncertain world, probability based analyses are useful when projecting the range of likely investment outcomes. Keeping an accessible reserve that permits you to survive a two or three year equity market downturn is a prudent strategy. Note that Vanguard trusts long term projections more than short horizon guesstimates. So do I.
Best Wishes