Thanks, Ted. The yield curve inverted in early 2006, 18 months before the topping process began in the market. Historically, it's a leading indicator. I'm not sure why Blackrock is sounding the warning of a possible inverted yield curve.

How are these "cash" rewards accounted; as to tax. Does one receive a 1099 or other relative IRS form?
Thank you.

Hi Catch. The best I ever did was $100 once for opening a free checking account at a bank. And I remember that I did have to pay taxes on that. Suspect these offers from brokerages are treated similarly.
“Many banking customers who opened a new bank or credit card account with a sign-up bonus offer will realize that they received Form 1099-INT for that amount of that bonus. If you jumped on the $100 cash bonus for opening a Chase checking account or the Discover More Card $100 cash back bonus, the bonuses are considered taxable interest income. If your bank has a referral program (e.g., Ally Bank) that pays you for completed referral sign-ups, the referral commission is also reported on Form 1099-INT.”
https://www.mybanktracker.com/news/taxes-reporting-income-interest

Give PR a break?
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-11/come-on-bondholders-give-puerto-rico-a-break

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

@msf,
>> Wait until Fidelity has another cash promotion
have not seen such; they have had?
All the $50 xfer fees were reimbursed by ML. Our 'benefit' total will be $1150 all told, plus the zero commissions thing for all ML trading, although I seldom do that.
Somewhere I have Fido paperwork from 1971 account, which I kept to show a rep at a center once, not that long ago. (Yawn, another geezer passing through.)
Yeah, I've wondered how the thou will be logged. I am a little more tax-sensitive in semiretirement than I used to be, since I've been following the Optimal Retirement Planner guru's deep looks at withdrawal strategies and taxes. Man, does Welch keep up. He may not be Kitces or Thomas, but what a free service he provides; unbelievable.

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

catch 22

How are these "cash" rewards accounted; as to tax. Does one receive a 1099 or other relative IRS form?
Thank you.

I've never received any 1099 or relative IRS form for these cash rewards. Perhaps others can contribute.

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

How are these "cash" rewards accounted; as to tax. Does one receive a 1099 or other relative IRS form?
Thank you.

FYI: BlackRock Inc Chief Executive Larry Fink on Wednesday warned that strong demand for investments such as long-dated government bonds could push their prices to a risky point.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.reuters.com/article/blackrock-results-ceo/update-1-blackrocks-fink-warns-of-risk-of-inverted-bond-yield-curve-idUSL2N1MM189

No, actually its this guy:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/10/bitcoin-heading-over-10000-in-six-to-10-months-former-fortress-hedge-fund-manager-says.html
This guy doesn't spend his time on an investment board... He knows how to make money and how to spot a long-term trend...
But the banks are developing their own blockchain/digital currencies. Laugh all you want. -- Like I said, its like 1994, most of us (myself included) cannot see the "big picture" on this opportunity. By the time most of us do, the 'easy money' will have already been made. the thing is to get in front of the wave, not to paddle in AFTER the wave of money has hit the shore. -- Then, vacate the shore before the riptide pulls you out to sea...

I've no investment in crypto-currency, though I think dabbling in it -- as a trade -- could prove very profitable. I think we are in the early, EARLY innings of this trend. IF its a bubble, I think it has a lot of room to run. It kinda feels like the internet 'bubble' circa 1994. -- speculate with a SMALL amount of capital, make a lot of money. Exit.
At this point, I have not identified any public investments in the blockchain 'ecosphere' which strike me as meritorious.
I would be interested in hearing any investment/trade ideas anyone has in this space...
Anyone?

FYI:
Today Charles Schwab is launching its first ETF since it rolled out its fundamentally weighted lineup in August 2013. Despite having a fairly small lineup of a little more than 20 ETFs, the firm is the fifth-largest issuer in the U.S., with some $89 billion in assets under management.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.etf.com/sections/daily-etf-watch/schwab-debuts-large-cap-etf

FYI: Ask most people about the bitcoin bubble, and they’ll probably have the same reaction: It’s interesting, but it won’t affect me. After all, they’ll figure, they aren’t investing in bitcoin, so if there is a bubble, and it does burst, they’ll be just fine.
Well, maybe they should start worrying.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-bitcoins-bubble-matters-1507515361

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.

AQR Core Plus Bond Fund
AQR High Yield Bond Fund
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1444822/000119312517306006/d368916d485apos.htm

I can confirm that just calling and asking can reap benefits/rewards. My primary account has always been with Fidelity. I also had a smaller account at Scottrade (<$50K) that I didn't want to have merged with TD Ameritrade. I got 100 free trades ($495) for moving the funds to Fidelity after speaking with a Fidelity rep.

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month
http://www.nationalbreastcancer.org/breast-cancer-awareness-month
I guess all these millions of people walking and raising money every year are wrong and wasting their time. Kick them to the curb, when they start soliciting money from you. Or maybe, just maybe, it is NIH and HHS that needs to become aware, and stop telling people that preventative testing is excessive and unnecessary.

Honestly, I'm not sure what you're getting at in the first part. Of course more women should be aware of the preventive services like mammograms that are already available to them. If the government is going to cut back on things like informing people about what the ACA provides, it's up to others to carry that message. Why would we kick the messengers to the floor?

The results of the survey suggest a need for health literacy, with 68 percent of women being unaware that coverage of mammograms is mandated by the federal Affordable Care Act, which states the screening be given without a co-pay or deductible, Phyllis Greenberger, president and CEO of SWHR, told FoxNews.com.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/10/30/more-than-half-women-dont-get-mammograms-study-finds.html
As to NIH and HHS telling people that preventive testing is excessive and unnecessary, my guess is that you wouldn't go advising healthy 18 year old women to get mammograms every six months, just in case. We probably agree that at some point preventive testing does become excessive and unnecessary. It's a question of where one draws the line, not whether preventive testing could possibly be excessive.
The ACA generally bases what preventive services be covered at zero cost on USPSTF's guidelines (which say that mammograms offer substantial or moderate benefit starting at age 50, but just small net benefit between 40 and 49). So a specific exception was written into the ACA to include mammograms for women 40 and above.
http://www.factcheck.org/2013/10/aca-doesnt-restrict-mammograms/
I believe it's because of the way the law was written that this exception was going to expire. But for whatever reason, the Health Resources and Services Admin (part of HHS) recently updated its guidelines so that the ACA would continue covering mammograms at age 40.
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/preventive-services-for-women-covered-by-private-health-plans-under-the-affordable-care-act/
In addition, USPSTF points out that its "'C' [small net benefit] recommendation ... is often misinterpreted as a recommendation against mammography screening or coverage. In the linkage to coverage established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the USPSTF's role is limited to evaluating the science to determine the net benefit of a clinical preventive service. [USPSTF's] review of the scientific evidence may be only one of the inputs to determining insurance coverage; often it is the floor to determining minimal coverage, not the ceiling."
https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/convergence-and-divergence-around-breast-cancer-screening/breast-cancer-screening1
It is in that gray area of small net benefit (over the whole population) where conversations between patient and doctor may be most productive. Different people place different emphasis on possible outcomes, so what might make sense for one person won't make sense for another.
Here's the Susan G. Komen page on Weighing the Benefits and Risks of Mammography including sections on overdiagnosis and overtreatment.
As noted in a lengthy Mother Jones column: "With so much rhetoric flying back and forth, it can be difficult for women to make truly informed decisions." That makes talking with doctors about the real risks and benefits even more important.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/10/faulty-research-behind-mammograms-breast-cancer/