Interesting.
I did one “in-kind” today (TMSRX). The others today were of the short-term bond variety. Just liquidated them and will see what Fidelity’s funds look like. IRAs necessitated signing and mailing paperwork (which they prepared). The non-retirement money seemed to go through online.
All made easier by the good folks here at mfo …

Appreciate the notes @mef / @MikeM,
“D&C funds are transaction fee funds, but once you have positions in the funds at Fidelity (via transfer in kind), it may be possible to add more shares for a $5 fee and sell with no fees.”
- Just out of curiosity (being pretty much in the dark) when doing a TIK (transfer in kind) I assume there’s no charge? Or … is the charge waived only for NTIF funds?
- Re PRWCX … Since I have it now in a traditional IRA, may I assume (1) I can do a TIK to fidelity and (2) my ability to buy and sell shares will continue (as long as I don’t close the account) ?
-
This will be a gradual process.
The recent issue involved their ignoring the Michigan W-4P (withholding opt-out form) which I have faithfully completed and mailed to them every January 1 for about a decade (ever since Michigan began mandatory withholding) along with a typewritten letter and list of funds affected.
For whatever reason, yesterday they withheld Michigan tax from one of the two distributions. My transaction was a pretty routine process. Simply exchanging from 2 IRA funds into a single non-retirement money market fund. There’s a check-off box to decline federal w/h - but not for state. According to their phone rep this morning having a W-4P on file is no longer adequate. The distribution request must also be presented to them in a phone call or by letter for the W-4P to be honored. “Why-Oh-Why just the one fund?” (I asked). Why was the second distribution not hit with the same withholding! Answer: “That was a one-time occurrence” (ie: an accident).
At this point I’m holding my breath hoping they don’t go back and pull tax out of the unafflicted fund.
Ahhh …

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1843841/000158064221002475/dgi497s.htm
(DGTIX, DGINX, DGIBX)
497 1 dgi497s.htm 497
SUPPLEMENT DATED MAY 24, 2021
TO THE PROSPECTUS
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DATED MAY 21, 2021
OF DGI BALANCED FUND (the “Fund”)
(a series of the DGI Investment Trust)
Effective May 24, 2021, the Fund will be closed to new investors and, except as discussed below, will be closed to new sales until further notice. Existing investors who had a pre-existing periodic investment plan through their individual retirement account (“IRA”) or who submitted a rollover request on or before May 17, 2021 may continue to invest in accordance with that plan or rollover request. Also, existing investors who hold their shares in the Fund through an IRA will continue to have their dividends and other distributions reinvested in the Fund. The Fund may restrict, reject or cancel any purchase order and reserves the right to modify this policy at any time.
Please Retain This Supplement For Future Reference.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.dgifund.com/

Hank, yes; I noted about mis-pricing during some time periods for muni bonds vs taxable bonds. I considered several years ago an investment in NHMRX, but other sector investments were performing nicely and the transaction didn't happen. All of my accounts are either T or Roth IRA's, and the online buy (muni fund) wouldn't have been processed.
Below, is the current message returned when attempting to buy a muni fund for a T or Roth IRA at Fidelity. All online buys require a "preview the trade" before being processed. As @msf noted, the message doesn't prevent the transaction in total, but not via electronic channels.
----- (010386) The security you are attempting to trade is a tax-free mutual fund. Retirement accounts are prevented from buying or exchanging into tax-free mutual funds through the electronic channels. For more information, contact a Fidelity representative at 800-544-6666. -----
@Crash. It is not stated in this thread that you can not have a muni investment in an IRA; but that you can not process the transaction electronically.

“ISTR that Fidelity doesn't allow the purchase of municipal bond funds in traditional or roth iras. In fact, my purchase of FSTFX for both my ira accounts was just denied by Fidelity !”

Don’t like the sound of that last sentence (though I practice denial all the time). :)
“TOD” (Transfer on Death) is the code TRP uses for non-retirement accounts. I wondered about that myself years ago when I began making deposits from my bank account into one of their cash equivalent funds. Some of the money in the TOD account more recently came from RMD money that wasn’t needed at the time. I like PRIHX (despite rather low ratings) and have been building the balance in that TOD account as an adjunct to other retirement savings.

I am glad to hear of the TRP issues as I was thinking of moving some of their funds I own at Fidelity to TRP directly.
I have had accounts at Schwab, Fidelity and Vanguard for years and can offer the following
Vanguard is clunky, irritating and putting up more and more restrictions on nonV funds. Major advantage is only place I know of to get Admiral funds. Best used for only Vanguard funds. No dedicated personal rep, rather now a "team", unless you pay for advisor. Occasionally there are funds here I can't get anywhere else. Still have my wife's money in mutual fund account, rather than brokerage. Lot's of complaints in Vanguard Advisor news letter about back office service, mistakes in accounting etc.
Schwab has good list of most funds, lots of Load funds without load, but $25 more expensive as noted than Fido for fees. Good customer service, can get a single rep if you want who will call you occasionally to see if he/she "can help". Web site not as easy to navigate as FIDO
Fido has better graphs and data on positions and an easiest website. Very easy transfers from other brokerages, all done electronically. Have never used their personal reps, although they pester us all the time to "sign up".
I don't like to have all my assets in one basket, but if I had to pick one would go with Fido, with Schwab close second.
I was always a little leery about having to use a private firm ( Fidelity) that did not have to report their finances to the public. I am not sure if this is still a big issue, as Fido has massive amounts of retirement accounts and these folks probably watch things pretty carefully. However, you will not be told if there are problems, if you do not participate in a massive 401k ( My wife got stuck in a busted 401k years ago). Vanguard is just as opaque, as their mantra of " the fund investors own the firm" is window dressing only as fund investors do not get to elect the board or vote on salaries etc.

Check out this open source SS strategy calculator that take all these various permutations into account: https://opensocialsecurity.com/

I was thinking 65 or 66....
------------
The strategy that maximizes the total dollars you can be expected to receive over your lifetime is as follows:
You file for your retirement benefit to begin 1/2029, at age 69 and 3 months.

>> Absent COLA adjustments, the real value of waiting would be substantially less,
?
8% annually has appeal in an absolute sense, inflation and CoLA aside, most suggest.
Is there literature on claiming early because of inflation calculations?
(CoLA history is here: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/colaseries.html)
Fido lays out the usual scenarios:
https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/retirement/social-security-at-62
including (obviously)
... your annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is based on your benefit. So if you begin claiming Social Security at 62 and start with reduced benefits, your COLA-adjusted benefit will be lower too.
As for
>> While it may seem that inflation is outstripping COLA, it's worth taking a close look at everything, ...
yup,
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services. Indexes are available for the U.S. and various geographic areas. Average price data for select utility, automotive fuel, and food items are also available.

while my cohort, and not only at spring town meetings (for an expensive town), always includes property taxes in any discussion.
This might interest those who want to get deep in the grass and weeds.
http://www.thebillionpricesproject.com/

“Fidelity Investments Inc. plans to open the door to a new generation of investors who will be able to trade stocks even before they learn how to drive or head to college. Fidelity said Tuesday it will issue debit cards and offer investing and savings accounts to 13- to 17-year-olds whose parents or guardians also invest with the firm. The accounts will let teens buy and sell U.S. stocks, Fidelity mutual funds and many exchange-traded funds. Similar to how it works for adults, the service won’t charge account fees or commissions for online trading.
“The offering marks Fidelity’s latest move to position itself as a lifelong financial adviser to millions of Americans. Once known for the stock-picking mutual funds it sold through other brokers, the firm has spent the past few decades building direct connections to individual investors. Today, Fidelity runs one of the world’s biggest brokerages and the nation’s largest servicer of 401(k) plans and other retirement accounts offered by employers.
“Fidelity and other major wealth managers slashed their stock-trading commissions to zero in recent years. Eliminating those costs had set the stage for the industry’s banner 2020, when many individual investors rediscovered the allure of trading stocks. Many brokerage and wealth-management firms reported a surge in enthusiasm and new accounts, especially among younger participants. Fidelity is among them. In the first three months of 2021, the company added 1.6 million accounts from investors 35 years old or younger—more than triple the number of new accounts from that demographic a year earlier, Fidelity said.”
The Wall Street Journal - May 19, 2021

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793769/000119312521166201/d168244d497.htm
 
111 South Wacker Drive, 34th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606-4302
harborfunds.com
Supplement to Statement of Additional Information dated March 1, 2021
May 19, 2021
Harbor Mid Cap Growth Fund
The Board of Trustees of Harbor Funds (the “Board”) has approved a change in Harbor Mid Cap Growth Fund’s (the “Fund”) name and principal investment strategy, together with certain related changes. Effective on or about September 1, 2021 (the “Effective Date”), the Fund will be renamed the Harbor Disruptive Innovation Fund and will no longer have a policy to invest, under normal market conditions, at least 80% of its net assets, plus borrowings for investment purposes, in securities of mid cap companies. As of the Effective Date, the Fund will seek to invest in what it believes to be disruptive and innovative companies of any market capitalization. The Fund’s benchmark index will change from Russell Midcap® Growth Index to the S&P 500 Index and the Russell 3000® Growth Index. There will be no change in the Fund’s investment objective.
In connection with the changes noted above, Wellington Management Company LLP will no longer serve as the Fund’s suabadviser as of the Effective Date. Instead, the Fund will employ a multi-manager approach to seek to achieve its investment objective, whereby Harbor Capital Advisors, Inc. (the “Adviser”), the Fund’s investment adviser, will manage the Fund’s assets based upon model portfolios provided by multiple non-discretionary subadvisers. The Board has appointed 4BIO Partners LLP (pending approval of its registration as an investment adviser with the Securities and Exchange Commission), NZS Capital, LLC, Sands Capital Management, LLC, Tekne Capital Management, LLC and Westfield Capital Management Company, L.P. to serve as subadvisers to the Fund as of the Effective Date.
The Adviser will, starting on the Effective Date, reposition the Fund’s portfolio in accordance with the new investment strategy for the Fund. In connection therewith, the Fund expects to experience portfolio turnover, which will result in higher than normal transaction costs to shareholders and may also result in the realization and/or distribution of higher capital gains than might generally be expected under normal circumstances.
In connection with the changes described above, the rate of advisory fees payable by the Fund to the Adviser will be reduced as of the Effective Date from 0.75% to 0.70% annually as a percentage of the Fund’s average net assets. In addition, as of the Effective Date, the Adviser has contractually agreed to limit the Fund’s operating expenses, excluding interest expense (if any), to 0.50%, 0.58%, 0.83%, and 0.94% for the Retirement Class, Institutional Class, Administrative Class, and Investor Class, respectively, through August 31, 2022.
An amended and restated Statement of Additional Information will be available for the Fund on the Effective Date.
Harbor Global Leaders Fund
Effective immediately the following information replaces the corresponding information on page 52 of the Statement of Additional Information.
Harbor Global Leaders Fund. The Fund is subadvised by Sands Capital Management, LLC (“Sands Capital”). Sands Capital is an independent investment management firm, ultimately controlled by Frank M. Sands, Sands Capital’s CEO and CIO. Frank M. Sands controls Sands Capital by virtue of his position as, among other things, trustee, manager, or officer, respectively, of various intermediate holding entities and trusts through which voting or management rights with respect to Sands Capital are held and/or exercised.
Investors Should Retain This Supplement For Future Reference
S0521.SAI

As with Vanguard, the question may be moot. AFAIK, one can't open a fund position directly in either family.
Sample prospectus boilerplate:

If you do not currently have a Fidelity ® brokerage account or a Fidelity ® mutual fund account and would like to invest in a fund, you may need to complete an application. For more information about a Fidelity ® brokerage account or a Fidelity ® mutual fund account, please visit Fidelity's web site at www.fidelity.com, call 1-800-FIDELITY, or visit a Fidelity Investor Center (call 1-800-544-9797 for the center nearest you).

But all one finds on Fidelity.com is this list of "accounts for investing":
Brokerage Accounts, Cash Management Accounts, HSA Accounts, and 529 College Savings Plans.
No mutual fund accounts.
https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/investing
Under Forms, if one checks "open an account" one sees a plethora of account forms, but the only two forms presented to open a vanilla, individual taxable account are a CMA (brokerage) application and a "Non-Retirement Brokerage Account for Individuals, Joint" application.
https://www.fidelity.com/customer-service/forms-applications/all-forms
Decades ago, Fidelity nudged all investors off of their mutual fund platform onto their brokerage platform. (Who remembers T-account numbers?) Vanguard is in the middle of that process now.

What kind of minimum balance are we looking at in a brokerage cash account? Am I incorrect about that requirement? Perhaps it only applies in non retirement accounts?

Here’s a list of the 50 largest houses. Some are load-based. Any stand out as worthy of consideration? The number on the right references total number of distinct fund offerings.
SOURCE
Retail Net Assets # of distinct funds
1 Fidelity Investments $984,173,589,258 315
2 Vanguard Group $962,331,327,507 148
3 American Funds $956,584,547,987 42
4 Franklin Templeton Investments $377,385,331,414 122
5 T. Rowe Price & Co. $345,725,591,811 110
6 Columbia Management $167,493,529,444 140
7 Dodge & Cox $126,826,526,974 5
8 OppenheimerFunds $125,473,946,434 72
9 John Hancock Funds $119,789,419,458 225
10 Pacific Investment Management Co. $118,411,876,036 73
11 Invesco Ltd. $95,323,126,745 92
12 BlackRock Inc. $90,785,119,662 116
13 Janus Capital Group $84,717,855,431 48
14 American Century Investments $71,948,919,961 86
15 MFS Investment Management $71,059,542,832 74
16 Lord Abbett & Co. $66,647,971,069 42
17 ING Retirement $58,294,891,374 150
18 Wells Fargo Advantage Funds $48,938,991,118 101
19 Putnam Investments $48,697,487,901 79
20 AllianceBernstein Inc. $48,012,344,847 74
21 Eaton Vance Corp. $45,749,419,375 91
22 DWS Investments $43,664,723,778 67
23 JPMorgan Funds $43,495,216,232 108
24 USAA $41,901,152,367 41
25 Legg Mason Inc. $40,997,886,898 87
26 Hartford Mutual Funds $39,801,202,624 81
27 Dreyfus Funds $35,223,057,365 105
28 Ivy Funds $34,953,774,009 30
29 First Eagle Funds $34,849,628,600 5
30 Northern Funds $34,626,707,067 51
31 Schwab Funds $34,218,636,841 47
32 Principal Funds $33,220,356,251 63
33 Prudential Investments $32,560,310,174 44
34 Thornburg Investment Management $30,706,861,162 16
35 Royce Funds $30,583,106,754 30
36 Russell Investments $29,943,773,637 39
37 Artisan Funds $28,990,199,955 12
38 Federated Investors $27,512,268,214 66
39 Goldman Sachs Asset Management $26,350,742,126 72
40 Pioneer Investments $24,616,061,833 37
41 Davis Funds $24,203,544,825 8
42 Natixis Funds $22,552,861,400 28
43 Oakmark Funds $22,312,816,162 7
44 Waddell & Reed Inc. $21,894,219,733 22
45 VALIC $20,406,552,997 45
46 TIAA-CREF $20,067,405,527 50
47 Nuveen Investments $19,271,984,888 106
48 Delaware Investments $18,747,941,089 64
49 Vantagepoint Funds $18,216,359,065 29
50 MainStay Funds $18,123,576,513 43
Source: Morningstar

How can this BE?
CBC news article.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/td-bank-accused-of-losing-customers-rsps-again-1.6029875

Thanks for your figures. Now I can be more specific to your particular "what if". Since I'm still making estimates, feel free to adjust the calculations as needed.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that your SS benefits are 50% taxable. (It could be as high as 85%.) Let's also assume that you're working part time until age 70 so that we don't have too many different intervals to compute.
Finally, let's assume a fed marginal tax rate of 22% and a state marginal rate of 6% for a combined 28% rate. We have to pick some figure to work with to make this concrete.
I gather from your followup that you need an extra $20K/year (after tax) over and above your part time income for your expenses until you fully retire (assumed age 70). The fact that you'd be drawing from your IRA for this money suggests no money in taxable accounts - since that's what conventional wisdom says to deplete first.
So if you defer benefits, you'll need to draw $27,778/year from the IRA. (72% of this gives $20K post tax).
OTOH, if you take benefits at age 67, you'll get to "bank" $14,028/year, assuming you bank it in that same deductible T-IRA:
$35K pre-tax SS benefits = $20K for expenses + $14,028 to IRA + $972 taxes
[ net taxes = tax on SS benefits - tax savings on deductible IRA contribution
$972 = (28% x 1/2 x $35K) - (28% x $14,028) = $4,900 - $3,928]
So from age 67 to age 70, you're either reducing your IRA by $27,778/year or growing it by $14,028. That's a difference of $41,806/year for three years. In pretax dollars. In post-tax dollars (72%), that's $30.1K.
I already explained how to account for the growth of this amount in an earlier post in this thread. So I'll just give the results here:
Expected value of $30.1K (post-tax) difference/year over three years: $104K (portfolio visualizer), $93K in real (inflation adjusted) dollars.
After age 70, if you've deferred SS, you'll be receiving 132%/108% x $35K, roughly $42.8K/year.
Compared with the $35K you'd get by starting at age 67, that's a $7.8K/year difference pre-tax, real dollars. Post tax, the difference is $7.8K - (28% x $7.8K x 1/2) = $6.7K/year.
The extra savings and growth ($93K real dollars to age 70) that you get by taking SS at age 67 can on average be expected to cover this $6.7K shortfall through age 87 (portfolio visualizer).
That's a tad under what the new RMD table1 (single life) gives as the expected lifetime (88.2) for someone now age 67.
The comment "by the way your dead at the end anyway" suggests that you're not giving much weight to the risk of loss once you're dead, since, well, you're dead anyway. OTOH, the risk of having less money while you're alive is going to matter. A risk averse person who values these two risks (dying before "breaking even", and living "too long") differently will tend to make the choice that reduces the more important risk.
In addition, the estimate that by deferring benefits one will begin pulling ahead around age 87 is a result subject to wide variations. Maybe the market will not produce 7%/year (the figure I used as input), maybe it will swoon early in your drawdown period. Maybe you'll do much better, maybe you'll do much worse.
In contrast, SS is a steady (inflation adjusted) income stream. All else being equal, the risk averse person will take the sure thing.
A final note on the numbers. The calculations above incorporate the effect of taxes and account for investment growth. Your potential shortfall by taking benefits at age 67 and living to 100 still comes out to nearly triple magnitude you hypothesized: ""$10k, 20k, 30k maybe?" Or maybe $87K (13 x $6.7K, post tax, in real dollars).

From an email I just received from GP:
May 17, 2021
Dear Fellow Shareholders,
With the continued strength of global markets and the performance of the Grandeur Peak Funds, we find it necessary to announce the following fund closures effective as of market close on Friday, May 28, 2021.
Moving to Hard Closure[1]:
*Grandeur Peak Emerging Markets Opportunities Fund (GPEOX/GPEIX)
Moving to Soft Closure[2]:
*Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund (GPROX/GPRIX)
As you know, we carefully review capacity at both the strategy and firm level. We are committed to keeping our investment strategies nimble to fully pursue their investment objectives without being encumbered by their individual asset base or the firm’s collective assets. Achieving performance for our clients remains our paramount objective as always.
As of June 1st, the Grandeur Peak Funds that remain open to all investors include:
*Grandeur Peak Global Stalwarts Fund (GGSOX/GGSYX)
*Grandeur Peak Global Contrarian Fund (GPGCX)
*Grandeur Peak US Stalwarts Fund (GUSYX)
To check the current open/closed status of all Grandeur Peak Funds at any time, please visit our website.
Thank you for your continued trust. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to me or a member of our Client Relations Team.
Best Regards,
Eric
[1]"Hard Closure": means that these Funds will no longer accept purchases, from new or existing investors, through financial intermediaries unless the purchase is part of: (1) a retirement plan which held the Fund prior to this closure, (2) an automatic reinvestment of a distribution made by the Fund, or (3) a de minimis annual rebalancing approved by a member of the Grandeur Peak client team. The Funds will remain open to purchases from existing investors, and to new investors who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds. The Funds retain the right to make exceptions to any Fund closure or limitation on purchases.
[2] "Soft Closure" means that the Fund will close to new investors seeking to purchase shares of the Fund through third-party intermediaries subject to certain exceptions for financial advisors with an established position in the Fund and participants in certain qualified retirement plans with an existing position in the Fund. The Fund will remain open to purchases from existing investors, and to new investors who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds. The Funds retain the right to make exceptions to any Fund closure or limitation on purchases.
PDF from GP:
https://www.grandeurpeakglobal.com/documents/grandeurpeakglobal-pr-20210517.pdf

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834421010939/fp0065552_497.htm
497 1 fp0065552_497.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST: GRANDEUR PEAK FUNDS
GRANDEUR PEAK EMERGING MARKETS OPPORTUNITIES FUND
GRANDEUR PEAK GLOBAL REACH FUND
(Each, a “Fund,” and together, the “Funds”)
SUPPLEMENT DATED MAY 17, 2021 TO THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND
PROSPECTUS OF THE FUNDS DATED AUGUST 31, 2020,
AS SUPPLEMENTED FROM TIME TO TIME
Effective as of the close of business on May 28, 2021, the Grandeur Peak Emerging Markets Opportunities Fund will no longer accept purchases, from new or existing investors, through financial intermediaries unless the purchase is part of:
● a retirement plan which held the Fund prior to this closure,
● an automatic reinvestment of a distribution made by the Fund, or
● a de minimis annual rebalancing approved by a member of the Grandeur Peak client team.
Also, effective as of the close of business on May 28, 2021, the Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund will close to new investors seeking to purchase shares of the Fund through third party intermediaries subject to certain exceptions for financial advisors with an established position in the Fund and participants in certain qualified retirement plans with an existing position in the Fund.
The Funds remain open to purchases directly from Grandeur Peak Funds by existing investors and by new investors.
The Funds retain the right to make exceptions to any Fund closure or limitation on purchases.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

I thought the original topic worth airing. Appreciate all the great input from members. Lots of great ideas on this and associated investment subjects.
Bottom line for me (from the experience related above) is that none of the four fund families I deal with any longer appear to require the medallion for transfers under 50K or 100K (depending on institution). With my retirement distributions consistently coming out of TRP, I can continue to “feed the goose that lays the golden egg” as necessary without the added hassle. Amen. :)