Ok, everyone, time to go Treasury-only MMFs

[Libertarian666]

Are one or two of your accounts much larger than the rest? If so, just do those.
And I believe there's an auction of 1, 2 and 3 month bills every week.
At least that's the way it looks on the Fidelity site.

You may again be the catalyst for me to do something tomorrow! And, if I get started I will do them ALL. Once the inertia is overcome I go all out. The binary personality. All or none.

Vinny

Sounds good!

The distance of your power reach is at least as many miles as it is between Massachusetts and Texas! You can tell us if you have had success at a greater distance in influencing others whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Vinny

Thanks. I'm not sure exactly how far my influence has reached. I do know that I've helped at least a few people on bogleheads.org get their money into Treasury MMFs, but I don't know where they live.

Then lacking that specific information I'll take it, for now, that I am your record for your longest distance assistance!

Vinny

According to available information, that's right.

[KevinW]

I feel like someone should point out that if you keep each asset "pure of heart" at all times, you don't have to make these kinds of adjustments in the midst of market turmoil.

I advocate keeping cash in T-bills or T-bill money market funds at all times.

[yankees60]

I feel like someone should point out that if you keep each asset "pure of heart" at all times, you don't have to make these kinds of adjustments in the midst of market turmoil.

I advocate keeping cash in T-bills or T-bill money market funds at all times.

I've not yet become classic Permanent Portfolio so I'm not at the point to be "pure of heart". When I get there I will.

The initial goal was to have it all figured out and then be doing a rapid step-by-step implementation.

But I'm now seeing that I am slowly easing into it. And, I also realized today that I don't need to have it all figured out for what I should get done tomorrow -- collapsing my eight different retirement accounts into as few as possible - putting like tax treatment ones together - Roth, Traditional, and other.

That I had not done that caused major problems on Monday when I was trying to leave all my Prime and Federal money market funds and go to the Treasury money market fund.

First of all, I had to do it nine times (retirement account plus one non-retirement account) and because the each account had its own money market account my total cash is all split up among all those accounts and in several of them I could not meet the $50,000 minimum for Treasury and had to settle for Federal. Finally, in spite of checking all three times and documenting all twice I did not realize until today that the last exchange from Prime I put it into Federal when I should have been putting it in Treasury.

If I get to collapsing all my accounts tomorrow I may be able to correct that. But maybe not if funds are getting shifted between accounts.

There are many changes I need to be made and some of them need to be made in certain sequences. First one day and then the next day or a few days later.

Like I either shift this Federal to Treasury and then later collapse the accounts. Or, tomorrow I collapse all the accounts and then Friday shirt Federal to Treasury. I don't think it will work to do all the same day.

Vinny

[Smith1776]

Hey, guys, look. It's almost as if having 25% of your portfolio in cash is a good idea.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/19/fund-ma ... virus.html

Who would have thought?

[Libertarian666]

Hey, guys, look. It's almost as if having 25% of your portfolio in cash is a good idea.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/19/fund-ma ... virus.html

Who would have thought?

That's crazy talk! After all, you can't eat it!

[pmward]

The Fed announced yesterday they are backstopping the money market funds, just like they started doing after the "breaking the buck" fiasco back in 08.

Meanwhile, the USD was over $101 today! This is seriously like a replay of 08 all over again.

[Libertarian666]

The Fed announced yesterday they are backstopping the money market funds, just like they started doing after the "breaking the buck" fiasco back in 08.

Meanwhile, the USD was over $101 today! This is seriously like a replay of 08 all over again.

The dollar is over $100? Wow, that is real deflation!

[Maddy]

Getting back to the initial premise of moving money market money into short-term bonds, please expand on your thinking. Is it specifically the Federal Money Market (default sweep) fund that concerns you, or money market funds in general? Pros and cons of opting for a treasury money market fund in lieu of, or in combination with, ST bonds?

[yankees60]

Getting back to the initial premise of moving money market money into short-term bonds, please expand on your thinking. Is it specifically the Federal Money Market (default sweep) fund that concerns you, or money market funds in general? Pros and cons of opting for a treasury money market fund in lieu of, or in combination with, ST bonds?

If you are at Vanguard, Federal money market not as safe as Treasury money market which is not as safe as directly owning T-Bills.

I have a barbell in my investing. Still heavily invested $-wise in equities. I'm taking plenty of risk there. Therefore, I want NO principal risk on the fixed end and have converted to the fullest extent possible to either Federal or Treasury, depending upon if an account meets the $50,000 Treasury minimum.

After that phone call with the Vanguard brokerage person this morning I can well see later this week converting all in both Federal and Treasury money market funds to direct ownership of T-Bills. You will actually get back less than your principal - negative returns currently between 0.12 and 0.15% -- but as Tortoise pointed out earlier we have always been willing to settle for lower yields compared to say the Prime money market account in return for the additional safety. I'd be looking at the negative return as simply a tiny insurance premium. Plus, I'd be saving on the Expense Ratio charges.

Vinny

[KevinW]

Like I either shift this Federal to Treasury and then later collapse the accounts. Or, tomorrow I collapse all the accounts and then Friday shirt Federal to Treasury. I don't think it will work to do all the same day.

Slow and steady wins the race. Usually when I'm rebalancing or doing account maintenance I only have one transaction per account "in the air" at a time, I fire one thing off, then a few business days do the next thing, etc. Under the PP ethos none of these things are really ever "urgent" so it's fine.

collapsing my eight different retirement accounts into as few as possible - putting like tax treatment ones together - Roth, Traditional, and other

+1, I think it's wise to hold the fewest accounts possible. For most people that's 1) employer, 2) Roth IRA, 3) traditional IRA if applicable, 4) taxable if applicable. It simplifies a lot of things and helps with the account-minimum thresholds you were talking about.

[yankees60]

Like I either shift this Federal to Treasury and then later collapse the accounts. Or, tomorrow I collapse all the accounts and then Friday shirt Federal to Treasury. I don't think it will work to do all the same day.

Slow and steady wins the race. Usually when I'm rebalancing or doing account maintenance I only have one transaction per account "in the air" at a time, I fire one thing off, then a few business days do the next thing, etc. Under the PP ethos none of these things are really ever "urgent" so it's fine.

collapsing my eight different retirement accounts into as few as possible - putting like tax treatment ones together - Roth, Traditional, and other

+1, I think it's wise to hold the fewest accounts possible. For most people that's 1) employer, 2) Roth IRA, 3) traditional IRA if applicable, 4) taxable if applicable. It simplifies a lot of things and helps with the account-minimum thresholds you were talking about.

In addition to being an employee I've also been self-employed. So, according to how much self-employment income I had in a given year I opened various retirement vehicles - Keough plan, SEP-IRA, SIMPLE IRA, Solo 401(k) - for whichever one would allow me the maximum contribution that year.

Thus, already having ALL the four you named, I have all of those on top of those. Hence, nine separate accounts. Until now It's now really been an issue.

Vinny

[Xan]

I'm pretty sure if you're not making further contributions, you can merge SEP and SIMPLE into your traditional IRA. The tax treatment is the same, after all. Your brokerage should be able to do this for you.

[yankees60]

I'm pretty sure if you're not making further contributions, you can merge SEP and SIMPLE into your traditional IRA. The tax treatment is the same, after all. Your brokerage should be able to do this for you.

Definitely NOT with the SIMPLE IRA as self-employed.

Massachusetts has income taxes and it does NOT recognize SIMPLE IRA for the self-employed. Therefore, I'd NEVER want to commingle that SIMPLE IRA with a traditional IRA where I did get Massachusetts tax advantages. For the same reason I need to go back to the years I did my SEP contributions and see how I treated the contributions on my Massachusetts tax returns.

I am going to review past Massachusetts tax returns for all my retirement accounts to fully make certain the tax treatment of each so that when I start combining retirement accounts I'm combining like tax treatment with like tax treatment.

Vinny

[Xan]

I'm pretty sure if you're not making further contributions, you can merge SEP and SIMPLE into your traditional IRA. The tax treatment is the same, after all. Your brokerage should be able to do this for you.

Definitely NOT with the SIMPLE IRA as self-employed.

Massachusetts has income taxes and it does NOT recognize SIMPLE IRA for the self-employed. Therefore, I'd NEVER want to commingle that SIMPLE IRA with a traditional IRA where I did get Massachusetts tax advantages. For the same reason I need to go back to the years I did my SEP contributions and see how I treated the contributions on my Massachusetts tax returns.

I am going to review past Massachusetts tax returns for all my retirement accounts to fully make certain the tax treatment of each so that when I start combining retirement accounts I'm combining like tax treatment with like tax treatment.

Vinny

Wow, gross. Sorry, I'm not used to having to deal with state income taxes.

[dualstow]

Time for Vinny's Massachusetts IRA thread?

[yankees60]

I'm pretty sure if you're not making further contributions, you can merge SEP and SIMPLE into your traditional IRA. The tax treatment is the same, after all. Your brokerage should be able to do this for you.

Definitely NOT with the SIMPLE IRA as self-employed.

Massachusetts has income taxes and it does NOT recognize SIMPLE IRA for the self-employed. Therefore, I'd NEVER want to commingle that SIMPLE IRA with a traditional IRA where I did get Massachusetts tax advantages. For the same reason I need to go back to the years I did my SEP contributions and see how I treated the contributions on my Massachusetts tax returns.

I am going to review past Massachusetts tax returns for all my retirement accounts to fully make certain the tax treatment of each so that when I start combining retirement accounts I'm combining like tax treatment with like tax treatment.

Vinny

Wow, gross. Sorry, I'm not used to having to deal with state income taxes.

No one who I've ever talked to at Vanguard nor my friend who is a CPA in Rhode Island (neighboring state) was ever aware of this specific Massachusetts tax treatment. Their response is uniformly, "I didn't know that!"

Once I'm involved in something I thoroughly research all the both Federal and Massachusetts tax rules governing it and document it in the Taxes spreadsheet I maintain.

Vinny

[jhogue]

Vinny,
Please see my comments regarding your situation over at the bond buying tutorial thread.

[dualstow]

Vinny,
Please see my comments regarding your situation over at the bond buying tutorial thread.

Yeah, read jhogue’s post, Vinny. It’s excellent advice.

[yankees60]

Vinny,
Please see my comments regarding your situation over at the bond buying tutorial thread.

Yeah, read jhogue’s post, Vinny. It’s excellent advice.

I've responded. Need to be able to fit it all in with all the rest of my life and the other demands that need to get done.

Vinny

[mathjak107]

Fidelity closed fdlxx to new investors on March 30th .....

[Libertarian666]

Fidelity closed fdlxx to new investors on March 30th .....

Anyone who listened to me when I posted this got in under the wire.
I got my mother's cash balance into that fund before it was closed.

[Libertarian666]

Fidelity closed fdlxx to new investors on March 30th .....

Because there aren't enough Tbills to go around?

Probably not. It's because with 0 yields, it costs Fidelity money to maintain those accounts because they won't charge the customers for expenses.

[mathjak107]

Fidelity closed fdlxx to new investors on March 30th .....

Anyone who listened to me when I posted this got in under the wire.
I got my mother's cash balance into that fund before it was closed.

yes , you planted the seeds in my head and i moved 1 million dollars awaiting investment in to fdlxx so i thank you for that idea .

one of the positions i had a lot of money in was fidelity conservative bond fund fconx so i decided to move it after that started to get some crazy hits ... that thing never moved more than a penny or two and that crazy week for bonds it moved 10 cents .

[Libertarian666]

Fidelity closed fdlxx to new investors on March 30th .....

Anyone who listened to me when I posted this got in under the wire.
I got my mother's cash balance into that fund before it was closed.

yes , you planted the seeds in my head and i moved 1 million dollars awaiting investment in to fdlxx so i thank you for that idea .

one of the positions i had a lot of money in was fidelity conservative bond fund fconx so i decided to move it after that started to get some crazy hits ... that thing never moved more than a penny or two and that crazy week for bonds it moved 10 cents .

You're quite welcome!

[jhogue]

Fidelity closed fdlxx to new investors on March 30th .....

Because there aren't enough Tbills to go around?

Probably not. It's because with 0 yields, it costs Fidelity money to maintain those accounts because they won't charge the customers for expenses.

Investors who have recently joined the rush into FDLXX, Fidelity’s Treasury Only Market Fund, might want to read the firm’s note, “Money Market Mutual Funds and Market Conditions, March 26, 2020,” a list of FAQs.
https://www.fidelity.com/bin-public/060 ... itions.pdf

This note preceded the fund’s closure to new investor at the end of the first quarter of 2020, just five days after this note. Fidelity will likely not explicitly say so, but I am fairly certain that the answer to why they closed the fund can be found in two FDLXX charts:

1. Net Shareholder Flows (Daily) chart of FDLXX:
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutua ... /31617H300

This chart shows the massive rush into the fund that took place in March; a classic flight-to-safety scenario of market participants buying up T-bills as the stock market crashed.


2. Daily Market value chart of FDLXX:
https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutua ... /31617H300

Note the spike in the price of the fund as market liquidity evaporated. Can’t operate a money market fund without liquidity; hence the need to slam the door shut. The expense ratio that the fund charges is set independently of the overall yield of the T-bills in its portfolio.