Return to Article: TSP to restrict interfund transfers
-
42727
Don't you think it might be a good idea if the TSP had some kind of a transaction history so at least you would be able to know if you exceeded the maximum transactions allowed. Right now "MY MOST RECENT TRANSACTIONS" shows a contribution and a catchup contribution and that is it. Get into at leasts the twentieth century with your transaction history before you impose restrictions.
-
42007
I think it is a good idea. The "cost" of frequent interfund transfers goes well beyond TSP operating costs. Having witnessed some of this activity among coworkers in the past I suspect much of this aggressive TSP "day trading" is being done during working hours by these 3,000 participants. In order to trade this frequently with any hope of success you must study and watch the markets constantly. Most people cannot do this and perform their Federal employment duties concurrently without a serious impact to job performance. Once again a few people abuse the system and we all pay the price.
-
42006
Ususally when an fund drops down it comes right back up. By moving your money too much you might lose money as it takes a few days to process and in that time your fund may go up. Right now with ony the 'F' and 'G' fund in the black it's best to stay out of the rest until the maket stabilizes.
-
39922
I think it is wrong for the board to limit our ability to make our retirements grow. If they proceed with the proosed plan many, many , many people will opt out of the TSP program, there are to many more viable options out there.
-
39081
This from Business week,: Maybe it is time to change, Appears someone has a better plan than TSP
this is a http address finance.yahoo.com/focus-retirement/article/103980/Redrawing-the-Route-to-Retirement?mod=retirement-401k
Super 401K they need to read this
-
38752
The big picture is that a small percent 3,000 people are driving the cost higher and to stop that they are limiting the trade to 2 per month. They are not looking to charge these individuals because the cost of reprogramming the system maybe in the millions or even billions of dollars which will be incurred by all participants. The main reason why it will probably pass is the ideal behind the TSP is to invest in the long tem and not the short term; the only problem right now is that the current market is so volatile. Limiting Trade is a bad ideal for the few but it will save money for the whole.
-
38692
My brokerage account does not allow me to day trade unless I have a margin account. My decision to IFT in my TSP account has to be before 12 ET and it is based on analysis of market data, charts, Fed speak, etc. If you do NOT want to be active in you retirement account that is fine, but do not restrict me in maximizing my return or at least trying to. Other alternative are available we just need to persuade the FRTIB and ETAC. Market impact and Fair Valuation are the underlying problems cause by the contractual requirement of BGI to settle our trade by the end of the day even though they take up to 3 days to settle trades. Large moves when the market if volatile causes BGI to delay complete payment of those large trades diluting the fund return also, so it is not JUST frequent trading of the I fund, but the shell game that BGI has to play by buying futures contracts because the contractual requirements to settle IFT daily even thought they are restricted to a 3 day settlement wait. Visit tspshareholder.org for more information.
-
38553
Certainly our TSP Board members could have come up with something substantially more equitable for all investors,I think they forgot who they work for! Time to contact Congressional leaders!
-
38547
Based on their tone, I'm supposed to apologize for trading and taking full advantage of the rules that I did not make up! I will hang their pathetic/looser letter on the wall and say I made a difference.
I'm not sorry and I would do it again, it's the American way, remember:
Think quick. Think positive. Never show any sign of weakness. Always go for the throat. Buy Low. Sell High. Fear, that's the other guys problem.
-
38546
DON'T FORGET TO KEEP CHECKING THE FEDERAL REGISTER FOR THE PROPOSED CHANGE AND SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS! I plan to print out this column with all the comments and submit it when the comment period opens for this proposed change.
-
38536
It's nice to know there are so many government workers trading stocks on the taxpayers' time/dime. No wonder the public holds us in such low esteem.
-
38531
I agree with the limits. TSP is for long term investment towards retirement. I do not wish to absorb the trading costs for a few who must "change lanes" every time there is a fractional drop. That is the problem with pooling. Most private mutual fund companies limit trades to 2 or 5 a month to limit transaction fees for everyone. As I did not agree also to allowing people to use the TSP for loans (it is not a Christmas club, since it allows people to put their retirement funds in jeopardy. Limiting transactions is 'smart' management for the majority of investors.
-
38521
So, like Enron employees, we are to sit and watch our retirements dwindle, hands completely tied, because we made two trades already in a month. How dare anyone tell an investor how to manage their accounts. Charge a fee for pete's sake! I'd rather pay a small fee than helplessly stand by and lose thousands each day. Many of us are getting ready to retire and not having that FREEDOM is ludicrous! We need board members who care about the TSP investors.
-
38516
It is bad enough waiting two days to have your funds moved from one account to another. I would not be apposed to paying a fee like most trading companies with a tax break allowed for trades. You can trade for as little as $7.00 a transaction with several companies. I have lost on some late moves with TSP; on the other hand I have made some great moves. When considering that my percentage increase yearly is much better than leaving it in one account that would possibly lose for the month. As these funds are the investors and additional restriction should not be placed on them. It is hard enough to try and predict the markets two days in advance. It would be better to move in a shorter period (minute trades) to increase the amount of the funds, rather than to try and hope for lucky moves when TSP decides to move the funds based on the closing numbers. Technology is great, maybe it should be used a little more. Maybe this is one that should be out sourced because if you have 3000 people moving funds 300 times a year (which isn't likely) that is 90,000 moves, divide that by $15,000,000 that cost is $167 a trade. Not cost effective for TSP when it should cost about $560,000. I think it time to find a new broker with an up to date system.
-
38504
I'm also opposed to the current proposal to limit the amount of "interfund transfers" per month. I like the flexibility to move my money in and out of funds based on the market at any given time. I'm not a day trader, but I still do not want my hands tied when it comes to managing MY money. I'm in favor of a set amount of free transfers (say 6) per month and any amount over that amount would be subject to a fee.
-
38501
fedworker, Alright, your on - handwritten letter's to both my Congressman and Senator. Come on folks, fedworker's right, a little time and a few stamps is all we have to lose. Write the letters on your lunch break!
-
38491
Restriction rationale is Pure GARBAGE! And the 3000 of 3.6M? That's a LIE. This is aimed at older Feds, investing o'seas smartly, but dodging bullets as FOMC rains money to cover subslime mortgage fiascos and emerging markets ebb & soar. Costs to manage funds? HOGWASH! a computer driven button push. 1 IRA annuity company allows unlimited transfers to 50 funds cost free and guarentees 6% a year win lose or draw. All 59 1/2+ should move their TSP to those programs. Consider retirement and get these idiots hands out of our pocket.
-
38450
I strongly disagree with putting a limit on the number of times we can transfer "our" funds! An email comes to me daily so I can see what is going on with "my" money. Are people limited at the stock exchange with how many times they can change? The idea is to invest where you will gain, not lose. With the roller coaster effect right now of the stock exchange, it needs to be reviewed daily and make wise choices. No one wants to sit back and watch "their" money disappear because someone else has the control. Why invest if you can't have full control of your own money? Maybe everyone should pull their investment from the TSP. Then what?
-
38434
I find the following statement so telling in regards to what is currently happening all around the government. Too many people trying to spend my money without giving me a say so or allowing me to have what I've rightfully worked for. I think it's about time the Government as a whole went on a diet. "Legislative Director Thomas Trabucco said TSP is working with lawmakers to determine the indirect tax implications of the automatic enrollment proposal. Legislators have expressed concern that higher employee contributions would mean an increase in tax-deferred money, thus resulting in less money in the tax base, he said."
-
38433
Here's the thing. Ordinary folks are paying the costs of the few who are engaging in frequent trading. In the long term, TSP might be able to 'charge' individuals for the cost of frequent trades, but they are such a small part of the population, it might not be worth the re-programing.
-
38429
You can write your congressmen, but I doubt that will do much good. The better strategy is for CSRS employess to stop contribution to TSP, and for FERS employees to limit their contributions to 5% of salary, to max the government match. Next, maximize your contribution to your Roth IRA. Next, maximize your contribution to a taxable account. Keep your IRA and taxable accounts at a discount broker like Charles Schwab where you'll have practically endless investment alternatives including cash interest earnings close to those of the G fund. Funds invested outside the TSP will be under your control so that at age 70.5 you don't have to take distributions to your tax return which might reduce any Social Security you might receive when the almost inevitable income-testing comes to Social Security. Restricting investment options for the peasants is happening elsewhere. Folks with 503(b) accounts used to be able to swith them to discount brokers like Charles Schwab under IRS Revenue Ruling 90-24- the IRS essentially closed this option last September. As soon as possible, move funds from TSP. If the TSP Board can restrict transfers, they can reduce other investment options, and a future Congress could restrict your abilility to, or the terms of, moving your money from TSP.
-
38409
I'm not advocating "day trading" at all, merely saying that there are times when even those who don't try to "time" the markets still need the flexibility to make more than 2 trades per month. As others have rightly pointed out, the real issue doesn't appear to be stopping 3000 or so "day traders", since day trading implies that money can be moved between the TSP funds intra-day, which it cannot. Likely, there are other motives behind the Board decision other than the supposed transaction costs, else they would have published hard numbers backing up their claims.
At present, the TSP really doesn't give anyone the flexibility to react to daily market fluctuations. But, a "buy and hold" approach won't generate the returns a FERS employee needs to retire comfortably, either. An average FERS employee contributing 5% of pay probably needs an average 12-15% yearly TSP return in order to retire with an undiminished standard of living. None of the 10 current TSP funds will generate this type of return without the ability to capture intermediate-term gains and avoid big losses.
I don't reallocate funds daily, but I DO try to monitor intermediate trends in the markets and take action to protect my TSP account accordingly. Often, it can take several days for a change in market trend to play out, and the wisest course of action may be to gradually move a portion of one's account as events unfold. I often let several months go by without touching my TSP allocation at all. But, near intermediate-term market tops or bottoms, I may wind up reallocating funds incrementally several times within a few weeks. Why not move the whole account balance at once? Well, ironically, it's because nobody can precisely time the markets to the day! The very thing that the Board is screaming about is really a case for allowing MORE flexibility, not less.
If restricted to just 2 transactions per month, I'd be more inclined to move my whole account all at once, not less (to protect against losses in the more volatile C, S, or I funds). So, which approach causes more transaction costs for the TSP? Reallocating a portion of your account a few times per month, or moving the entire balance twice? The TSP Board should answer these questions before placing arbitrary restrictions on the number of transactions we can make.
-
38402
Class-action lawsuit sounds fine to me!
-
38385
To Cracked & Wired:
This is NOT a "done deal," there's a lot we can do to prevent it. Yes, FRTIB has "decided" to limit transactions, however, this decision will require a change to Title 5 of the CFR in order to be LEGALLY implemented. Which is why it's not being implemented until March/April of next year, this proposed change has to go throught the public review and comment process. Watch for the posting of the proposed change in the Federal Register, and COMMENT. FLOOD them with comments. Congress also participates in TSP, so, WRITE and email your Congressmen, ALL of them. A handwritten letter in a stamped envelope is worth 100 emails and gets more attention. I can't imagine they will be happy with limited transfers. FAX and CALL the TSP, the numbers are on the website. In short, don't give up. IT'S NOT OVER! -
38382
According to the TSP website, they rebalance (reallocate) the mix of C, S, I F, and G funds comprising the Lifecycle funds every single trading day. So, it's ok for them to do daily transactions but not individual investors?
Secondly, account transaction have been automated and computers perform all of the adjustments on individual accounts, so where are these large transaction costs actually coming from?
-
38377
I agree that there shouldn't be a limit on the amount of exchanging we can do. It's our money, and our risk.
-
38376
Hey Norman, MSA made many other excellent points. How can you with any honesty ignore the majority of MSA's post... you have no credibility and reveal yourself as either a shill for the TSP Board or a nincompoop, perhaps both.
-
38375
Who the hell are these people to tell me how I manage my retirement account??? This should be investigated by Congress. I average 8 to 10 interfund transfers per month. Apparently, it's been to my benefit. My YTD return has been over 18.5%, well above the average for any single fund. Maximize gains, try to avoid loses. Everyone knows that. Except the TSP Board apparently. I would like the right to remove my portion of my TSP and place in a fund where I can actively manage it. The government matching can stay in TSP and draw the G penny for 4 more years until I retire.
-
38366
MSA Posted November 27, 2007 6:31 PM wrote: ...it's essential to have the ability to reallocate funds more than twice per month--mainly in order to protect our retirement funds from catastrophic losses in times of market volatility.
But the story reported:...additional transfers would be allowed only into the government securities (G) fund.
P.S. - Don't day trade!
-
38308
In responce to the person who suggested the FRTIB "ELIMINATE MAILING out the changes participant makes" to reduce costs. This has already been the case for some time. Simply input your email address on the Interfund Transfer Request page and a confirmation email will be sent to you instead of a costly snail mail.
-
38306
This decision by the TSP Board is nothing short of SCANDALOUS. But, unfortunately, this is the sort of "management" that results when the people making the rules are not held accountable to the TSP participants.
While I agree that the TSP is probably not an appropriate vehicle for "day trading" the markets, there will be times when it's essential to have the ability to reallocate funds more than twice per month--mainly in order to protect our retirement funds from catastrophic losses in times of market volatility. If the TSP Board is going to arbitrarily limit the number of fund reallocations that can be made, then they need to present solid evidence (preferably through an independent auditor) of the costs incurred when each participant moves funds a given number of times each month, and how these costs compare to the daily L-fund reallocations. Any decision to limit us to a set number of transactions on the grounds that the costs are "prohibitive" needs to be backed up with solid evidence.
Arbitrary decisions of this sort would not be tolerated from the managers of privately-run 401k plans; Long and the entire TSP Board should go. I suggest these methods of ratcheting up the pressure for their removal: 1. Leave your comments on the TSP website. 2. Contact your own elected representatives. 3. Contact the office of Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD); he represents a district with a large population of Federal employees and has long been an advocate for Federal workforce issues. He is also now the House Majority Leader, making him #2 in the leadership behind the Speaker. 3. If all else fails, we should consider a class action lawsuit.
-
38271
In lieu of restricting changes, the only thing.....or at least the first thing that they should do is ELIMINATE MAILING out the changes participant makes. THIS IN ITSELF will reduces COSTS especially since participants who make the changes can print out their own change when they make it. Mailing out the change is a total waste; those of us who make changes have wondered why there's been this duplication & if we'd been asked, we'd have told the "EXPERTS" on the BOARD to eliminate the mailing LONG AGO!!!!
KEEP the unlimited changes for 6 months & ELIMINATE the mailings & then do a review of costs!!!!
-
38262
I think there are advantages to, both, "buy and hold" and "day trade". To be fair to all, a reasonable fee should be charged for each fund transfer. This way the TSP operating fees should remain low for the "buy and hold" participants, while giving the freedom to the "day traders" to move in and out of the funds as they see fit. Since the "L" funds frequently adjust (trade) it's portfolios to meet its target date, does it incur higher operating cost than other funds? If so, this added trading cost should be paid for by the "L" funds participants.
-
38252
I wouldn't mind paying a fund transfer fee provided the transfer was completed by EOB that day not the next day or week depending on the transfer request date. This would be a service fee, but in order to charge for a service you have to provide it then not when you can get around to it.
-
38239
I'm not an active trader. I suspect that very few active traders are really making the returns they brag about in these comments. They are like the folks who tell you they win every time they go to Las Vegas. That does not mean, however, that we should give up our ability to manage our retirement funds as we see fit. We are already limited to a minimal set of investment options that are available through the TSP. No REITS, no Roths, no funds targeting specific market sectors. Now they want to limit how often we can make transfers between investments. If the government wants to eliminate their risk under a defined benefit program (CSRS), that's fine. But don't transfer the risk to me through a defined contribution program (FERS), and then tie my hands with an extremely limited system (TSP). The cost for these additional trades is so minimal, it's ridiculous for them to even suggest that this is the reason for the proposed rule changes. Whether you measure by volume or amount, these trades amount to a miniscule fraction of the daily activity... And please don't tell me to take my money elsewhere if I don't like the TSP system. I can't until I retire, which is many years away. If the government would match my 5% contribution to a private fund like Vanguard or Fidelity, I would drop the TSP tomorrow.
-
38237
I thought the whole idea of the TSP was to allow us to manage our furture? When we see the volitile S&P one should be prudent and protect their assets. If they buy high and sell low, they lose. If on the other hand they play the market like the Dow Jones Plays the market maybe they can retire early with a large nest egg. Or is that the problem? 3000 smart investors are doing more with their money than everyone else so why the group spanking?
-
38236
The TSP Board has it all wrong.
First, the costs we are talking about is $4 PER YEAR PER SHAREHOLDER.
That's it. $4 per YEAR.
Second, the reason is not trading, it is because of the "Fair Value" differnences between the time of the order, and the time of execution. TSP sets the share price BEFORE the trade is actually made, meaning if they guess wrong, it is the shareholders who pay.
Simply set the price at 7 am. the next morning, instead of 7 pm that night, and you eliminate this $25 million pricetag.
FREEDOM FOR TRADERS. ITS MY MONEY.
-
38233
p.s. second post... People need to stop thinking this is a "Day Trading" problem - Day Traders make trades within minutes & hours every day. TSP already prevents this by limiting the transaction order execution to the end of each day. This is purely an issue of do we (as participants) have the right to move money when and how we see fit & if we should bear the cost of our respective actions. This should include participation in the "L" funds which trade shares every day to keep balanced...Our participation in a "L" fund should bear the costs of this management within each respective fund - not spread across all funds available to us. In fact - I would guess that the costs of that management makes a larger negative impact than excessive traders do on each and every participant. Notice - the article failed to present any analysis/information of what the cost would be if the added costs were approtioned on a per switch basis.
BTW - in the real world trades are assessed as either a fixed fee or a combination of fixed fee and percentage of the amount traded (either in dollars or in the number of stocks switched) - if you trade large dollars over many trades - then you pay large dollars. A simple method would be "x" number free switches a month (say 2), followed by an increasing fee structure. That would be fair and reasonable and would allow each participant to manage as they see fit. Transaction costs per switch could be re-evaluated yearly based upon a set formula and actual costs.
-
38232
Contact your UNIONS!! Get the word out. Contact your representatives in Congress!!
oh so much for attracting people to government service. I am thinking about leaving so I can manage my retirement funds flexibly and control my own destiny. Can you say ROLLOVER.
-
38231
This Article does not add up - just look at the relationship (or rather lack of relationship) between the numbers. The facts in the story (& I fault the writer for this) - are incomplete and that dis-service to us also serves to misslead many people into drawing the incorrect conclusion that this draconian measure is necessary to protect our interests. There is a huge jump in the assumptions made between the costs associated with people who trade 8 or more times a month and the vast majority of people. This is solution looking for a problem, and this article contributes to the problem by not completely filling in the facts, like: how much are the costs which are associated with the reballancing of "L" Funds? How much costs are associated with the people who make 2-8 trades a month (i.e. what facts supports the restriction level to be set at 2 trades?). What would be the costs reduction at various levels of limits? Not just in gross dollars but in percentages? What has been the trend increase in the cost of the basic service (excluding the high levels of trading) over the last several years (in terms of percent of portfolio, and dollers per participant per year? And - Taking a "corrective" action based upon an anlysis of only one fund over a period of only 2 months??? What kind of rational thought is this? BOTTOM LINE - I expect a more complete analysis and presentation of the costs and driving factors, along with the options considered - this article fails to do so & the author fails to point us to a more complete document for the "facts". SHAME...
BTW - I am NOT an active trader by any stretch of the imagination - yet a few times a year, I do switch my funds more than twice in one month. I would not mind paying for the priveledge to switch when I think it necessary - no matter how many time I had already switched. This money is too important to our futures NOT to take this threat to our money management capability seriously.
I recommend everyone contact every member of the House oversight committee - go to the web site oversight.house.gov and pursue what appears to be our only recourse.
-
38226
Bottom-line is the TSP board should not have the right to restrict inter-fund transactions period. Just charge a transaction fee and shut up! Don't tell me that I cannot move my money, particularly if a crisis develops, that warrants the protection of my retirement assets.
The TSP board has taken some rather bold steps lately that in my opinion make me very distrustful of them. First they change all our account access without providing the new access information. Now they are going to tell us, the customer, that we can only make two inter-fund transactions a month. This is going backwards from where we once were.
As a TSP customer, of 3 million plus, I say that we, the TSP customers, vote on these decisions and demand that the appointed TSP board members back off from making these type radical decisions that could dramatically affect our future retirement funds.
-
38225
I agree with many of the posts:
1. Don't trade but about 4 times a year.
2. Believe maximum flexibility should be worked towards.
3. Think costs should be assessed individually for excessive trading.
But... To myself, the biggest issue seems to be client participation; or in other words, TSP participants should have input into the choice processes.
As many have pointed out, two classes of expenses are being treated differently and we (the clients) are not aware of why. Perhaps it is the contract. Perhaps we are locked in for a period of time. Perhaps we are locked in for costs.
Perhaps we should change... something. But we don't have the information. Please note I did not say knowledge. Regardless, even armed with knowledge, like transaction fees, we can not express how we wish our fund to operate.
Once more, I ask for a Feedback button under the transactions page to restrict access to members, which actually solicits input and influences policy.
-
38224
I agree with many of the posts:
1. Don't trade but about 4 times a year.
2. Believe maximum flexibility should be worked towards.
3. Think costs should be assessed individually for excessive trading.
But... To myself, the biggest issue seems to be client participation; or in other words, TSP participants should have input into the choice processes.
As many have pointed out, two classes of expenses are being treated differently and we (the clients) are not aware of why. Perhaps it is the contract. Perhaps we are locked in for a period of time. Perhaps we are locked in for costs.
Perhaps we should change... something. But we don't have the information. Please note I did not say knowledge. Regardless, even armed with knowledge, like transaction fees, we can not express how we wish our fund to operate.
Once more, I ask for a Feedback button under the transactions page to restrict access to members, which actually solicits input and influences policy.
-
38223
The buying and selling of stocks and bonds costs money. I believe trading once a month or once a quarter is reasonable. Above that, let the individual who wishes to jump around pay for the privilege. I don't want to pay for these people. Let the money managers do your work, join the Life funds for the expected year of retirement.
-
38217
The fund managers are trying to keep the administrative costs low, which I applaud. I suggest that those gallitos who run hither and yon, shuffling their funds around, would be far less likely to do so if they paid a transaction fee commensurate with the costs incurred. However, I DON'T believe it would be appropriate to restrict their capability to do so. They should just pay a transaction fee, instead of spreading their costs to the rest of us, who are -- basically -- dollar cost averaging.
-
38216
I agree 100% with you Garth. Unfortunately, the Govt is probably filling the TSP with the same IOU's that are in Social Security. Thank God i will be one of the first large groups to roll over my TSP into a 401(K) as soon as i retire.
-
38215
I thought they should have done this all along. Its what the private sector does the fund is not for Day trading.
-
38211
Whiners and cry babies! There are always a few who expect to be treated differently, the same ones who always want higher pay. It is the old problem of what is best for "the few" or what is best for "the masses." I don't know beans about "investment strategies" and don't care to find out. As far as I am concerned, the board can limit transfers to once a month or once every six months. If you don't like stocks, just put your money into the G-Fund and relax. Some people are just greedy!
-
38209
So how tough is it to manage an indexed fund?? And how costly?? Given the conservative financial nature of most TSP investors, and the fairly predictable cash flow and the size of the funds, the operating costs should be minimal. I hear the contentions about costs - can the board quantify those contentions? As a prior-career civilian, I had a 401K with Fidelity. My wife had one with Principal. Neither had high costs or limits on transfers... A 2 trade limit per month is unaccetable...
-
38205
I think Mr. Long is doing the right thing. TSP is called a Thrift Savings Plan not the Thrift Switch Plan. If people want to play broker and treat it like the stock market, they should take thier money and manage it themselves. Leave the TSP managers do what they do, afterall considering the fact that by itself, the TSP has earned quite a bit the past several years. If people who need to trade so frequently to maximize thier money and subsequently raise the costs of managing the rest of our monies, then maybe they should look at how poorly they once managed their money to begin with. I fully support restricted trading. Continue to keep our transactions fees at the minimum. It's bad enough TSP has to take these steps, but like anything, when people abuse it, then government is force to take action.
-
38197
Boy did I miss the mark... I was really glib & all that but I zipped right by the point - THIS ONE HAS ALREADY FLOATED!
It's a done deal folks, the decider has decided & all that remains is to set the date. We can talk/post all we want but it won't change a thing, it's a done deal.
I will now do what I hesitated to do in my really cleaver earlier post and give a little tip. Limit your TSP participation to 5% so as to capture the government match & save all you can in after tax dollars in an account you have control over! Then vote with you feet... take a max TSP loan in cash and fund/bulk up your privately held stock portfolio.
On a final note, the more I think about the why, the more I start to believe this may be a move to protect Uncle Sam from being exposed as playing a TSP shell game like he does with Social Security.
-
38190
Shame on the TSP Managers for not acting on Market trends. These 3000 people mentioned are just trying to maintain their principal. Why should I sit back and put $500 in per pay check only to see it disappear never to return the very next day. I am truly saddened that only 3000 participants care that they are losing money the day after it goes in or they are happy with slow moving funds like the G and L funds. I pay a fixed fee with Merrill Lynch per year in 3 accounts well in excess of 6 figures. I can move around and trade as much as I need to do to maximize my return. Trades and transfers are done instantly, not even an hour need be waited out. No penalty is present either. I can make one adjustment a day or 50, No penalty is imposed. I am allowed to move from any fund to another and trade individual share of stock. 5 shares or 50,000. I still pay one fee per year. Why should the investor pay a price for poor fund management. We are right now. We are forced to take the hit due to our so-called fund managers moving too slow based on market trends and news to make subtle changes in share quantities within the funds to protect my money. Two things need to happen here. Get real fund management in place @ TSP that can make attempts to protect us and our money or Maybe 100% of TSP participants need to get out of the TSP and roll their monies over into a private 401K style plans like Merrill Lynch offers.
-
38174
Dear Mr. Long
Do you realize all the daily IFT transfers you need to do for all the L 2040,30,20,10 L income funds of the half million participants on the L fund ? They the ones who are causing excesive und management and increasing the cost of everyone, please do not blame the "3000" who are transfering to the I-Fund allowed by law. If you want to change our benefits to your convinience and thread us to band our rights to do IFTs without legal approvals... you sure are asking for legal confrontations as well.
-
38172
I don't have a problem with paying a fee to move my money daily or even hourly, but if such fees or implemented to make transfer of funds within the TSP, I would expect a transfer to take place immediately on the "hour" and not 24 hours later. If the TSP thinks that restricting participants to move their funds freely among the few options that we have at present will work they must be crazy. As more FERS Federal Employee reach retirement in the next few years they will move "all" their funds entirely out of the TSP into a free market retirement fund with no restriction if the government does not get their act together they can take this "L plan" and keep it. I plan on writing my Congressman about this.
-
38161
Boo hoo. All these people who want to move their money around as much as possible are free to invest elsewhere. Watch how much your fees will be to move your money around in a mutual fund or directly on the stock market. I don't care to foot the bill of the people who insist on moving their money around all the time.
-
38158
Instead of limiting transactions, why not charge a fee for excessive transactions? This would seem to make more sense. It would be like the banks that allow a certain number of free transactions per month, but charge for each transaction over that amount. If those 3000 or so really think the number of moves they are making are financially beneificial, then they should not have a problem paying the fees.
-
38141
Somewhere some government fat cat contractor must be losing money.
-
38128
I reviewed historic records. They showed a high positive bias that markets increased 2 days prior to Thanksgiving until the day after Thankdsgiving. I followed that model with my retirement funds and gained 2,16% while DOW and S&P dropped.
-
38118
Whose money is this? Limiting trading to 2x a month is limiting the custom's ability to react to market changes.
Suggest limiting transactions to once a week.
-
38117
Apparently our TSP gurus did not take management 101. "You don't create a rule for a few individuals." It would have made more sense to restrict the handful of individuals who are causing the problem.
-
38116
Apparently our TSP gurus did not take management 101. "You don't create a rule for a few individuals." It would have made more sense to restrict the handful of individuals who are causing the problem.
-
38110
I guess this means that the L funds are going away too, since they move all their money every day. The following is straight from the TSP site "TSP will automatically rebalance each L Fund daily" This must cost a fortune. I like to have the ability to move my money. Being in FIRS requires me to invest more of my take home pay than CSRS employees to have a descent retirement. Now I'm being told that I do not have the ability to move my money when I like. I have no problem with being charged a transaction fee, but to limit us to 2 trades a month is ridicules.
Why some people think this is funny is beyond me. They are taking another benefit away, because a contractor is not able to milk the contract. This has absolutely nothing to do with what it costs you and I to transfer money, It is a about profit for the TSP contractor.
-
38103
So, let me get this right, for a 'small group of people' who, in fact, are taking active care of their investment, I will get punished along with them because TSP decides such activity is above their 'administrative costs' that they already charge for. That's as bad as the insurance carriers: everytime an area of the country incurs a disaster and obvious claims are made, they raise the rates on everyone. Ridiculous. Besides, Give me a break, how much would it cost if divided by all of the investors?
-
38102
Just because you can't "time the market" doesn't mean that a "buy and hold" strategy applied to a diversified portfolio should be the only other option.
These 2000 participants who bought the I Fund on 10/19 and sold three days later are simply following a paid/premium service. Considering they collectively made $20M - an average of $10000 a piece - on this three day trade, I'd say the $15 a month they're are paying for the service was well spent that month.
The TSP stock funds are down 8% this month. Are you in the markets or out? If you had paid just a little bit of attention to your TSP retirement investment - you may have saved yourself some money this month.
-
38086
What? Of the hundred's of million's of extra dollar's this computer cost us particpant's a few year's back and not one board member went to jail over, this computer should be able to create intelligent life let alone handle a few extra thousand interfund trade's a day. Show us the added cost of these interfunds. If you ask me someone should subpoena the phone record's of the I Fund board and the TSP board member's. Some thing smell's rotten here.
-
38083
The numbers provided by the Board seem not to add up.
That aside, one move per pay period -- 26 per year -- would allow us to redistribute our contributions as they occur.
Allowing unused IFT's to accumulate in the manner of annual leave would give us flexibility.
-
38082
Buy and hold doesn't work. Period. If you want to impose a transaction cost on frequent interfund transfers, so be it. Don't restrict us from moving our money in a manner in which we see fit. We earned it, we get to spend/invest it. I am doing significantly better than the "buy and hold" crowd since I started technical analysis investing. I LIKE making better returns on my investments.
-
38074
Say what you will but apparently some government employees know when and how to move their funds around in the TSP to make more than the market. I have made over 30 percent this year alone with just a few simple moves to get in when it's good and get out when it's bad. What's wrong with that? Now I'm going to be penalized for making money? What a joke. You can't believe everything the TSP board is saying here, for instance they have not told us how much it's costing for the L funds to adjust their funds daily. Somethings rotten and if you accept it you're nuts.
-
38073
I thought the whole point of the TSP upgrade a few years back was to allow the TSP members to move their money with the flexibility they wanted and if I remember correctly there was an additional expense for the computer upgrade/transformation to give the TSP members access to these transacations when needed (customer choice). Trying to establish controls in how we invest our money is not the right solution. Im sure the system is not being overburdened by these daily transactions and if it is maybe we need to have someone review (audit) what we are paying for.
-
38070
Let's see:
It works out that the costs cited amount to a total of less than $4 PER PERSON PER YEAR for each of the 3 million TSP particpants.
With the freedom to move whenever I felt necessary, I gained, in four years of trading:
30% in 2004
16% in 2005,
40% in 2006, and
19% year to date in 2007.Compare THAT to the S&P 500 buy and hold!
True, I trade about 35 to 45 times per year.
If the $4 per person is bothering those who don't make trades, I'll gladly pay $4 EACH TRADE to be able to manange MY MONEY.
Thrift Board, this is wrong, and we - THE PEOPLE - should not allow these draconian restrictions to move forward.
-
38069
Gee, how do I get a job as one of those people that keep changing the rules? Who's money is it anyway and who is regulating the TSP?
-
38060
This plan that the TSP has actually makes perfect sense. Look at it from this perspective; The fund which has the most $$$ is the I fund, and those traders whom are switching their $$$ are trading from the I to other funds sometimes 1 day after the other. If there is $24,000,000,000 in the I fund and say the Stock market has a major nose dive of Depression Era proportions, then there exists the potential for all that $$$ to disappear. In a sense they are protecting us from ourselves, no? Or is it possible that they see the writing on the wall and that a major Stock Market collapse is on the horizon...mmmmmm
-
38050
Charge me for the trades I make. That's ok by me. If others would rather buy and hold that's their choice too and they shouldn't have to take on the extra costs of the frequent traders. Figure out what these extra costs are and apply them accordingly. Some of us traders even pay for investment advice and why shouldn't we have these options? At the same time though, I and the other traders should not be expected to have to settle for average, sometimes below average returns when we certainly can and have done better on our own. It is MY money and My decisions to invest it where I want when I want within the plans rules. The FRTIB should stay focused on ways to improve this plan. Not try to limit our options or steer us towards any one fund. That should always remain OUR choice. Besides, the L Funds rebalance (buy/sell) daily so why can't we? How much additional costs can be attributed to this? I have personally written and called each one of my Congressman and Senator about this. Hopefully the rest of us 3.8 million will do the same.
-
38049
If you don't like it, move your money elsewhere. What a bunch of cry babies.
-
38048
Let's see if we have this straight ... the 3000 "frequent traders" are destructing the TSP as evidenced by trades in and out of the I Fund (63% of the $224 million avg daily trade). According to the July 2007 TSP Highlights newsletter, the L Funds have over half a million participants (and over $21 BILLION) that are rebalanced DAILY. Yet the 0.30% administrative fees are spread out evenly among all fund options. This really doesn't pass the smell test ... I'm not opposed to paying an appropriate fee for transfers, but I'd really be surprised if the buy-and-hold types would enjoy enough of an admin fee decrease to notice.
-
38045
The costs associated with administrating the TSP are low and, therefore, TSP has been a good value for federal employees. However, the fund/investment choices of the TSP are very limited as compared to other 401(k)-type plans. The Government successfully shifted the cost and responsibility of retirement planning onto employees through the creation of FERS and made the TSP the most important aspect of the retirement package. The nature of investing has changed whereby more people are more actively involved in managing their portfolios, including their 401(k), through receipt of professional investment advice. The FERS retirement package already places the federal government at a disadvantage in recruiting and retaining employees when compared to other private and public employers that offer more variety and flexibility to manage retirement portfolios. So, while the need to keep administrative costs down is valid, restricting trades is at cross-purposes with the philosophy that employees are responsible for managing their own retirement package. It appears federal employees may need to shift a portion of their salaries to other investment vehicles.
-
38044
Trading in and out creates transaction costs which include trader commissions and TSP staffing. This is ESPECIALLY true in the international stock funds since many foreign exchanges are less efficient and have lower sales volume than the major US exchanges. Why should the majority of TSP participants who "buy and hold" and only occasionally move in and out of funds have to pay higher index costs to support frequent traders? After all one of the many attractions of TSP is the low fund management costs.
-
38034
After reading everyone elses comments, I've changed my mind... 2 transactions a month AREN'T alright! If all you other people don't feel like managing your own funds... Good for you!! Some people want to decide when and how they want to move their money around, if you don't, don't penalize anyone that does.
I very rarely move money around, but have been doing a lot (6 or 8 times in the last 2 months). Why should I get cut off after 2 transactions? That's BUNK! Especially, when I haven't made a transaction in MONTHS!
As some have already said, the L funds get adjusted EVERY DAY! What's the cost for that? It can't be any different then someone doing it themselves. It's all automated anyway. I think they don't want us moving OUR money around so they can "borrow" it more easily!
-
38033
This is disgusting. Follow the money here. It is not the fund losing. There is someone in TSP or the Gov't who is inconvenienced or having to work a little harder because some TSP members are exercising their rights to adjust their accounts once a day. They are not day trading. They are adjusting their money ONCE a day. This is for a total of like twenty possible moves a month IF they decide to move every day.
Let me guess - the two trades each month will probably go into effect on the date and time of the month the TSP wants it to. Whose interests will they serve then?
This whole thing is disgusting.
I can't wait to get some negative letter about how I am a bad guy for following rules made by the TSP.
They should grandfather in all current TSP members under the current rules for the duration of their accounts. New G employees can be subject to the new restrictions.
-
38032
I have to laugh at the comments where people are professing to have gotten high gains by moving their money around constantly. Maybe, now and then you get lucky, but you'd have to be Nostradamus to ALWAYS be better than the market and not pay the price for moving money around. God knows that most financial managers can't do it, so why a mild mannered government worker?
These are the same people that tell me it only takes them 15 minutes to drive from the Pentagon to Woodbridge, VA. during rush hour. It's a defense mechanism of some sort.
-
38031
I'm amazed at the people that are saying that they move their money around according to market conditions. If I had moved my money around everytime I thought the market was going up or down, I'd have about half as much as I do now. Plus, I don't have the time throughout the trading day to watch the market. I've never had that luxury in my goverment jobs.
I do agree that it is foolish for the TSP Board to impose a trade limit on everyone. I should have the capability to move money around if I want as much as I want, although I'm in it for the long haul. They should have come up with a better solution that caused frequent traders to foot the bill.
One thing I strongly advocate is that new retirees immediately roll over their TSP to an IRA at one of the mutual fund companies. This way, you'll never have to worry about across-the-board non-sensical restrictions like this and you'll have a greater wealth of choices to invest your money. You'll, of course, pay more for your trading without having others foot the bill.
-
38026
Why not charge a surcharge to cover the administrative cost for those that want to exceed the 2 transaction minimum? Employees retain control of their investment and those that want to update more frequently can do so, at a nominal charge per additional transaction to offset additional expenses incurred.
-
38024
This restriction is totally absurd. Take a look at the average return of some of these TSP advisor services since their inception. In some cases the results are 3 and 4 times what your making in the G fund alone. Having this ability to move your money around is the only way these returns will be possible. With the woes of the Social Security Admin. projections for the future we need to be in control of our TSP dollars and have the ability to move money around at will. Like others, I'd like to see the costs of these transactions and if as substantial as claimed then maybe a fee would be necessary. The two transactions a month will handicap a TSP investors ability to be in control of their own destiny.
-
38015
I had a feeling this was going to come down the pipeline. Last time I checked, managing funds is what "fund managers" got paid to do. Moreover, they have one full day to respond to the request. If we were truley "day trading," the fund managers would have to respond to our requests that day. By limiting our interfund transfers to only 2 per month, we have officially lost control over where we want our money allocated to. Should have known the government would take away the one thing they had right. Shame on you TSP board. Shame on you! If you are going to control our funds than you need to increase our Pensions!
-
38013
Good for the TSP. Two transfers per month is plenty. Imagine the tax returns those 3000 employess would have to file if they made multiple transfers per month in taxable accounts. And why should the TSP saver have to pay additional expenses that benefit the TSP speculator?
-
37987
After reading everyone's posts it seems we have forgotten one component. Participating in TSP is VOLUNTARY. If you don't like what they are doing, don't participate. Take your money and put it somewhere else.
-
37970
Joe--I'm all for your right to move your retirement money around as often as youthey want, but I'm not interested in footing the bill. As you say, 99+% of folks in TSP don't move their funds often, so why should they foot the bill for those individuals who believe it's wise to transfer funds every other day. As I see it, TSP had two choices to keep the fund working well for the 99% of us who AREN'T changing our portfolio every other day: charge fees for excessive transfers or restrict the number of transfers. I think they made the right choice.
-
37964
Appears we need a new TSP Management Team. I'm sure their profits have increased proportional to the funds growth. Can I see some figures on management contract fees and their net profits over the last several years? How will this restriction increase their net profits? What exactly are we paying for? It's my money and I have the right to manage it. CC Congress.
-
37963
All participants should not have to bear the burden of additional fund management and transaction expenses incurred by the few. I agree with a limit on the number of transactions per month but allow additional transactions at the expense of the individual. There are other invesment agencies available to those who have the time to play the market.
-
37958
Yes I am one of those 3000 people, an yes it is my money to move where I please.It's funny,I do not recall a problem before and now the board just comes out an votes to restrict my interfund transfers.Who are those board members,I need to speak to them?
-
37956
People who trade are only trying to secure a decent retirement and to restrict their trading without giving them a voice is unjust. If it is cost that's an issue by all means come up with a reasonable fee for those transactions but don't take away our ability to secure our future. My retirement at 30% looks very, very bleak unless I can enhance the performance of the money I have invested in the TSP. I question the boards concern for participant's futures; do they even care about our quality of life after retirement? It seems to me that they don't, it's some other bottom line that they're worried about.
-
37953
Sorry to hear of this change to TSP trading. One of the reasons that I was able to retire earlier than some people was that thru paying attention to the market, as well as taking risks, I was able to make between 80,000 and 100,000 per year. Had I not been able to make these moves, I would not be in the good financial position that I am currently in.
-
37952
I'll bet it costs more to modify TSP to reduce current flexibilities than it does to keep the current system. I'll also bet we never see a real cost comparison. First the paternalistic TSP board limits federal employee investment options to 5 index funds because they're "safer"- no specific stocks, ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds), or mutual funds. Then the paternalistic TSP Board decides that it will deny federal employess a Roth 401K option because it "knows" that only a "few" federal employees would avail themselves of this benefit available to private sector employees. Then the paternalistic TSP Board decides that it will deny federal employees specific sector investment options such as real estate because they involve "too much risk". Now the paternalistic TSP Board decides to limit trades for federal employees to 2 per month because current flexibilites only benefit a "few" federal employees. I believe the real issue is that providing federal employees with even a few of the investing flexibilities available to their private sector counterparts will inevitably result in some federal employees losing money and going into retirement with essentially zero TSP funds. With the minimal FERS annuity and soon to be income tested Social Security, this would result in public criticism of FERS and, by extension, the Bush administration's much touted privitization of Social Security. Remember, Bush was touting the TSP plan as a good example of how to privitize Social Security, so we don't want to let the peasants see the real risk of stock market investing for the average Joe and Jane. Further, letting federal employees become independently wealthy is not desirable, as they could then afford to fund legal defenses to abominations such as NSPS. How ironic that the TSP chooses to limit TSP fund transfers at the very time that the best private sector investment commentators are advising that "buy and hold" doesn't work - that in a volatile market the only way to increase or preserve wealth is to actively trade. Watch and see, 2 years from now the C fund, after much up and down, will be about where it is now. Note that the I fund hasn't gained much of anything since last July. Limiting TSP investing flexibilities isn't the way to attract and retain young federal employees.
-
37951
There are alot of ignorant people posting on here. The real problem isn't transaction costs or difficulty managing assets, it is that the market timers in the I Fund are taking profits directly out of the pockets of long-term holders. At least that's what the smart ones are doing, some may just be gambling. It is somewhat complicated but just review any of the studies released about the mutual fund market timing "scandal" of 2002-2003. The TSP should have closed the market timing loop hole 5 years ago when the SEC did so with public mutual funds. The day traders should just be happy they got a free ride for 5 years. I guess the party's over. By the way, I regulated the mutual funds at the SEC when the market timing scandal broke.
-
37950
Oh I get it... you want me to pay you to manage my plan versus me taking the initiative to manage it myself. This makes sense how? I manage my own account and do move money around according to trends. My returns continue to more than double that of your top performing "L" fund. Why was that I should pay you again? If anything, only those that choose to have you manage their accounts in the "L" Funds should be paying for this service. I believe that the TSP Board wants as many participants in this fund as possible to justify the expenditures required to run it, a cost which none of know of course. How is it with the current trend to manage one's own financial portfolio, the Board did not foresee that a miniscule number of participants (.083%) managing their own accounts would have an affect on operating expenses? That's just scary but why should I worry, it's only my retirement after all. I would love to pay you to give me mediocre returns from now on. It won't kill me to work a couple extra years......I hope.
-
37949
Per usual the few expect the majority to pick up their costs. Maybe TSP should just charge a flat fee for any transfers, like brokers everywhere else, for the few that want to "play the stock market". This is a retirement plan. TSP is able to give incredible returns because they are conservative in their fees. Let's keep it that way for everyone. Overall, I doubt all this transfering around has made much of a difference except run up the associated costs. For those of you that want to play the stock market, put your money there and stop penalizing the rest of us. And I am sure the loudest complaints will be from the abusive few.
-
37936
I am in complete agreement with those expressing deep concern about this restriction of our ability to move OUR money around as WE see fit, WHEN we see fit to do so. While I am not in the habit of making numerous moves each month, this smacks of an attempt to shore up a hopelessly broken U.S. stock market/economy by using an artificial, bureaucratic tourniquet to slow the loss of blood (capital) to foreign markets. Indeed, since votes no longer seem to make any difference, the last remaining power ordinary people in this country have is the power of their pocketbooks. Shame on the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.
-
37934
Right. .08% of the population trading .0014% of the plan value can not have a significant impact. Sure transactions cost money but it will be nothing compared to the lawsuit they get when we can not move OUR money in a rapidly decreasing market.
-
37931
It's bad enough that we have to make a transfer decision before 1200 each day. Now they want to restrict our ability to move funds to 2 times per month? It's amazing that brokers allow you to trade 24 hours per day, at little or no cost. TSP is in the stone age. I say to the TSP board... NO! Let us, the shareholders vote on this.
-
37930
My husband and I are two USG employees who thoroughly disagree with this change in policy. It is the ability to manage a nimble and flexible retirement savings plan that makes the TSP an attractive program. The fact that a few people are actively trading should not mean that the majority of us should be penalized. The amount of money being moved around is miniscule when one considers how many employees are in the program, and how much our investments in the program are constantly growing.
-
37924
The TSP Board should be careful to impose program changes on participants. Although this change sounds innocent and well meaning, it simply extends a precedent that was set when the board recommended and received approval for restricting the use of loans by program participants. What is happening is a slow erosion of the benefits offered to program participants when the program was initiated. Perhaps all TSP program changes need to be ratified by a majority of the active participants. It would be a shame to see the TSP evolve from a participant-friendly program into an unfairly restricted program that resembles the government-wide credit card travel management program, which also started out as a good program but has since turned into a beaueucratic joke.
-
37923
After giving 30 years of my life to government service, I can look forward to receiving a whooping 30% retirement. With luck, I will also receive a few scraps from Social Security, if anything is left. To enable me to keep the pet food purchases to a minimum, I have attempted to build up my TSP account. However, that will now be greatly reduced due to the pending restrictions. With the fluctuating markets, one can greatly improved their return, or at least reduce their loss, by timely moving between the funds. If these transactions truly create a burdensome cost, then TSP should asset the cost to the persons involved. A reasonable charge, not the inflated numbers mentioned in the article, could be added to all transitions over 2 per month. This would protect those that infrequently transfer their funds, while enabling the others to fully realize a financially secure retirement.
-
37921
Please remember the downfalls of market timing. If one is staying with funds that are increasing in value to protect your money in the short-term - I'm assuming that your biweekly contributions are going into that fund too - then you are advocating buying high and selling low. Not a winning strategy.
-
37920
If 8 and 12 trades a month are indicative of excessive trading, how did 2 trades become the solution? Why not 4 or 6 trades per month. If the I Fund is the poster child for excessive inter-fund transfers, why not restrict transactions in and out of that fund alone? According to the "plan" an investor could trade into the G Fund without restriction. That, if you recall, is the fund so despised by the TSP administrators that they want it replaced as the "default" fund for the indecisive. Yet if an investor wanted to diversify out of the G Fund into the 4 other options, it would take transfers in 2 calendar months to couple the 4 necessary transfers. Of course, there's always the L Funds...
-
37919
This sounds like the actions of ignorant parent. How about treating us like we adults? Trading with fee's is a viable solution. Stop being lazy, and actually do something that resembles work.
-
37918
I have no problem in either limiting or assessing a penalty for excessive trading.
The reason the TSP is so attractive is the low overhead costs. Excessive trading drives up those costs. My wife (private company 401(k), can only make a trade once every 90 days or she gets penalized, so this is not something new here.
The TSP is not the stock market - its a long term retirement plan. This is not to say you should not manage your money over time, but that does not mean day-trading.
If you want to play the stock market, go get a broker, but don't cause my TSP costs to go up.
-
37915
You know what? I really believe the TSP is just a big "slush fund" for the government to be able to borrow from (G fund)when the opportunity arises.
Also as we used to say in the military, when they want to keep us "out of the picture", just treat us like mushrooms, feed us "crap" and keep us in the dark. I think that is what the "board" is doint by complaining about the .001% of people who try to be smart with their money.
-
37914
Let me see if my math is correct? The board is concerned about the actions of about 3000 people of the 3,600,000 TSP members. That is just about .0008%, or less than 1/100th of a percent of the total population.
Surely there is a deeper story that what has been said. I'm also confused, whey a few years ago did they give us the "right" to do transactions on a daily basis? Or did they really mean we could make the changes during the month as opposed to "end of the month" dealings. I'm confused. For those of us who are retired, and we have the opportunity to watch the market more closely, why should we sit back and let the market take us down a losing path, when we can move in and out of it to our advantage.
I do agree the L fund concept is great for those who are many years from retirement, but for those close or are currently retired we "need" to manage our accounts (without penalty). Otherwise, bring back the old MONTHLY fund transfers, and I'll move my account to an IRA, or equivilant. You have to realize that "retirees" who have stayed with the TSP program eventually have to make a decision to "bring it closer to home" as we get older.
Bottom line here is about the reasons, they smell like three day old fish.
-
37909
Each individual bears the responsibility and risk for their own retirement funds within TSP. Reducing the flexibility of participants to control their own accounts is a step backwards. These people are taking an active interest in their retirement accounts as they should be. Whether you agree with the method or not is irrelevent. Personally, I worry more for the people to stick their money in the G-Fund and let it sit. I also wonder how just 3,000 people can pose a risk to the system. Using the figures above this amounts to just 0.08% of TSP participants. Is the system so fragile? Are these people just the scapegoat? I think there is more at play here.
There are other options available than unilaterally restricting all participants. Make no mistake, this affects EVERY PARTICIPANT and their ability to actively manage THEIR OWN MONEY.
-
37908
Folks wake up and smell the cofee. This move will limit our ability to maximize our profit and minimize our loses. For example, Yesterday, I had zero funds in the S & C Fund. My money was between the I fund and the G fund. The market went down more than 200 pts. The Hang Sen and Nikkei went up 1.3% and European markets were in positive territory too. Today, I switched 25% to the S Fund and guess what? It went down 100pts. This is a perfect example of taking risks and managing your portfolio with some degree of moderation. Why should I be penalized and my ability to make ADJUSTMENTS be limited. This is what I suggest to all the folks who are outraged with this proposed change, I am going to diversify my portfolio between the G and I Fund and forget about Wall Street for now. The dollar is losing ground by the minute and our financial markets are in a turmoil. The housing market is in a dive. It is time to focus on the Euro and Asian markets and leave some assets in the G Fund to have cash flow in order to purchase cheap stocks in the S and C funds.
-
37901
The TSP Board should be applauded for keeping down costs by restricting the number of transfers. If anything, the Board should have gone further: 2 transfers per month, or 24 per year, should not be necessary in a long-term retirement account; four transfers per year should be more than enough.
Alternatively, the Board should reconsider the idea of passing on the cost of transfers (much as it does in the case of TSP loans), and charge for anything above four transfers per year. The charge would not be designed as a penalty, but to cover the transaction costs generated by excessive trading.
-
37900
Restriction may prvent individual due to many circumstances will be prevented to preserve the capital gain and retirement asset.
Suggestions:
1) Allow 4 Interfund transfer per month. Any additiona transfer may subject to fee and additional number of transfer to be limited to prevent like Day trading.
2) A pseron have not made transfer in months then he has credit build up for not using the transfer. He should allow to use this credit against additional IFT cost for extra trasfer he has don. e.g. MR. BB has not used IFT for 3 moths - he has 3x4 = 12 crdits, in 5th & 6 months he has to use additional 3 IFT transfer. Since he has 12 credit then he should not be charged any IFT transfer fee.
3) Charge flat fee per moth for persons who use frequent transfer or who intent to use it.
Freedom of protecting asset for everyone should have and discourage Day Trading type of transaction. Then they have to pay Fee. Fee can be charged on escalation scale.
1) First 4 additional trade per month $X
2) Any addioinal 4 trade 1.5 time $X
-
37895
For the ones who have posted about dollar cost averaging. The number of shares mean nothing, its all about % gains. They tricked you when they started posting share numbers. They have a hidden agenda. Oh and by the way for u buy and holders, I was up 30% for the yr including my contributions until I got caught this past month and lost approx 6%. How much is the C fund up this yr? tsptalk.com
-
37892
A lot of postings are right on the money. I agree with both, the so called "day traders" and the "long term investors". It is true you can't time the market, but you can look at "indicators" and increase the odds of "buying low" and "selling high" which is a basic principle to generate more profit.
One thing to keep in mind is what is the cost of the few frequent traders and does it outweight taking away the flexibility to the 3.6 million participants. Don't just assume that what you are being told is the truth. After all, Mr. Long failed to provide any hard facts to sustantiate his assertion that "...a small group of people...destructing the ability to manage the fund and creating expenses." We are entitled to more information wheather you care about this issue or not. Otherwise, we are opening the door to more changes that sooner or later are going to affect us one way or the other.
-
37891
A lot of postings are right on the money. I agree with both, the so called "day traders" and the "long term investors". It is true you can't time the market, but you can look at "indicators" and increase the odds of "buying low" and "selling high" which is a basic principle to generate more profit.
One thing to keep in mind is what is the cost of the few frequent traders and does it outweight taking away the flexibility to the 3.6 million participants. Don't just assume that what you are being told is the truth. After all, Mr. Long failed to provide any hard facts to sustantiate his assertion that "...a small group of people...destructing the ability to manage the fund and creating expenses." We are entitled to more information wheather you care about this issue or not. Otherwise, we are opening the door to more changes that sooner or later are going to affect us one way or the other.
-
37889
I dont see how this could be legal. Didnt we wait years for the ability to move our funds on a daily basis?
I pay for a service, and move my funds based on solid financial advice.
Participants could lose thousands by not being able to move funds.
I think every TSP participant should contact their Congressional representatives
-
37888
This is still a democracy. They have my address and yours. Lets vote on this.
-
37887
This has got to be the most ignorant thing the board has come up with yet. If anything we should be allowed to move our money more frequently. Notify your respresentatives about this stupidity. If this is our money and we choose to manage our own investments, with the limitations for investing that we are provided, we should be allowed to. What the board should be doing is allowing us to move our money intraday. Go ahead and charge us a nominal fee if necessary. We want to maximize our investments and the board does not want us to. Makes you wonder what is really going on.
-
37883
This is like going backwards! It takes moments to do an electronic request and with the volitile market we need to be able to move our stuff swiftly. It is hard enough working for DOD in Hawaii when the cost of living is not adequately offset for civilians plus social security not applied for cola's so our only advantage is to move our TSP when the returns are high!
-
37879
The wealth of ignorance purveyed in the vast majority of these postings makes me happy we have TSP Board we have, and I commend this decision. 95% of you know absolutely nothing about investing for retirement, and for this reason, should be happy as well. You need protection from yourself. When you are investing for retirement you should have a broad and diversified portfolio. Don't let the ups and downs of the market affect you. If you are day-trading, you are chasing yesterday's winner, and in the end, you will be the loser. Talk to anyone that knows the least bit about investing for retirement and they will tell you, periodic rebalancing and evolution toward a more conservative portfolio as you grow closer to retirement is all you should be doing (and hey, geniuses, they will even do this for you). For those that want to throw their retirement away (and yes, maybe they should have the right to do so), perhaps a fee for excessive transactions is fair. The vast majority of us should not be paying higher fees for your ignorance.
-
37876
So this is where all those day traders went from the Internet stock boom days. They went to work for the government because they lost their shirts. Now, they are doing the same thing, but with their TSP funds. Unfortunately, they are racking up the fees that we all pay. I agree with the board's decision. Trading 12 times in 60 days does not seem to suggest that they know what true long-term investing is about. So, now we all have to be forced to new rules because of them.
-
37872
I agree with the Thrift Board's decision to limit trading to 2x a month. In the absence of that, those who want to trade more often than that should bear all the costs of their trading and force the vast majority of us to bear the costs of their foolishness. You can't time the market!
-
37871
Wait just a minute!! The cost of electronic transfer is miniscule. Before the Board implements any change, they need to do an honest analyis of the real cost. They'll probably find that it's only a fraction of a penny per transaction.
Next is the issue of taking away an individual's right to control his/her own money. Bad choices or good choices are not the issue. The point is freedom to do with your resources what you choose to do, rather than having some Board I didn't elect deciding what I can do or not do with my own money. This is still the USA isn't it?
Bottom line: TSP Board, you need to step back from this one and leave the system as it currently is. Transaction costs are miniscule and relatively insignificant.
-
37868
The TSP board manages the L fund on a daily basis without identifying the costs involved, yet identifies as "destructive" the activity of an individual account if the participant chooses to manage the account more than twice a month. What nonsense! If frequent transactions are costly than the L funds should be charged the highest fees for the daily rebalancing. If the best soluntion this board can come up with is limiting our ability to manage our own accounts, I think it's time to "rebalance" the board.
-
37866
I think the investors should have a right to move their money around - but not at the expense of the passive majority. Institute a transfer fee so the costs are paid by those responsible for them.
-
37861
Lame excuse. I have a Janus fund which allows intertransfers at no charge. The only way to prevent huge loses is by switching money out of a losing fund. Go ahead and no early retirement for me..wait until I'm sixty..yike!
-
37859
The daily restriction on trade is more than enough. It is too restictive with current market volatility. Restricting an account to only two transactions per month is unreasonable. Charging for more than two transfers per month would be a more reasonable solution. Given the volatility in the market, you can't really "day trade" a TSP account very well. The markets fluctuate on on a minute by minute basis these days. Many paricipants could lose substantial funds if they happen to use their two trades early and are prohibited from cashing out of the market after that point. These days, all it would take to spook the market is a 9/11 type event. TSP investors could end up losing big time if a major event occurs without the flexibility to cash out.
-
37857
"... officials are not trying to punish participants or generate revenue ...". Huh? The point of the TSP to charge fees would not be to "punish" or "generate revenues", it would be to recoup any extra costs generated by the transactions. Why would this not be obvious? makes me think that there is a hidden agenda. When the mutual fund programs were being proposed, the "professional" traders were horrified - all us little guys would be panicing on a heartbeat and creating havoc in the markets. History has shown that mutual fund participants are not the problem, the volatility in the markets are caused by the emotional trading we see everyday by the "pros". If we can make a little extra off of those idiots' behaviour, why not? Sheesh.
-
37856
In this changing world, we should be encouraged to actively manage our assets. We should not be benignly complacent about our financial future and leave it your hands. The little choice you given us, you want to take it away (instead of expanding on it). This is not encouraging. If the issue is cost, why don't you charge a transaction fee? Also, while you are making changes why don't you introduce an Emerging Markets Index Fund as another fund we can choice from?
-
37855
It sounds like many of you fund jumpers have never heard of dollar cost averaging. That's the best way to see growth--through consistent purchases of the same investment. By frequent jumping in and out of funds you're only chasing yesterday's performance--which you'll never catch. Read "Money" magazine, it regularily carries articles discussing this bad, and ineffective, habit. TSP is a retirement account that's meant for one to take the long view. If you're so bent on trading then I'd recommend that you apply your money to day trading instead, then you can see the direct result of the trading costs and not inhibit fund performance for the rest of us.
-
37854
I agree with the previous commenters. This fund and its managers are well compensated for managing transfers. There are many trading companies who offer relatively cheap online trades. Also, it seem to me this fund should be more transparent. We really have little control over our investments.
-
37853
I think the TSP Board is regressing instead of progressing. We are going backwards instead of forwards. This is just wrong !!Instead of restricting the amount of transfers which would restrict potential earnings, they should be figuiring out a way to make transfers instant instead of the current 4 hour lag. My intention when I retired was to leave my money in the TSP account but if I don't have the "FREEDOM" to move "MY MONEY" where I want it, then there is no way I stay with TSP and I am positive there will be lots of other folks thinking the same way....This is still the USA isn't it and we still have rights don't we ??? Is the board listening ??
-
37852
Welcome to communism style rationing.
This is what happens when you a have a service provider that is not in a competitive market place and the participants have no representation.
-
37850
Please assure me that there is nothing "fishy" going on with the TSP "pot of approximately 200 billion dollars" that if freed up with legal maneuvering by the Board will enable our good ol' administration to "borrow" more funds than they are currently permitted to borrow from the TSP "G" fund. I would hate to see our TSP end up like the Social Security Fund from which administrations have "borrowed" for years without any repayment.
By the way, how can I find out how much has been borrowed from the G fund since 2001 and how much has been repaid?
Further, is the daily shifting of I-funds being restricted as well? If not, why?
-
37849
They should charge the individuals a per exchange charge for excessive interfund transfers, thats all... that is the free market approach! Why all the bureaucracy?
-
37848
This is basically a mutual fund for long term investments. You guys are treating this like you're some kind of day trader. Anybody who knows anything about investments has heard of a concept called dollar cost averaging. You ignore the daily swings of the market and keep plugging away the same amount, buying shares regardless of what the market is doing. The low share prices when the market is down comensates for the high prices when the marekt is heated up. I rarely if ever move my money around which is equally divided among the C, S, and I funds and I'm doing just fine. It's a long term investment folks, quit chasing the market and stealing my money in trading costs.
-
37842
OK, so we have this awesome retirement benefit that we probably manage on taxpayer time(I do). There is no free lunch! If we have to pay a small fee to be daytrader wannabees, so be it. Two trades per month is a bit much but I would be willing to pay something if the first 4 or 5 trades were free. STOP WHINNING!
-
37841
If others complain as the previous comments, then a fee needs to be charged to the high traders. I am tired of paying for those 3000 folks who continuously trade each month. I am not benefiting from their trades, yet, they are costing me money by doing all of those trades.
-
37840
This one move will greatly increase productive among some federal employees. Some employees daily routine was "check TSP" and make moves prior to doing any other work.
-
37839
So the daily trades instituted by the TSP Board are "good" and the daily trades by the investors are "bad". What daily trades by the TSP you ask? The daily trades to "balance" the accounts of the "Lifetime" funds. I have heard asked many times why the computerized trades by the investors are more expensive than the computerized Lifetime funds trades but no one ever answers, that I've seen. The money is mine, if I want to be stupid that's my problem, it's not the place of the TSP board to paternalize me.
-
37838
We should all demand the TSP be dissolved, or at least be given an option of where we put our retirement savings. Just like a health plan we should have a choice. I would prefer to buy individual stocks or sector type funds. The choices for investment in the TSP are pitiful. The only advantage was being able to trade when you wanted without restriction and now they want to take that back.
-
37837
Here's an idea for Dictator Long. If he wants to restrict access to the TSP for intefund transfers, why doesn't he change our newly imposed 13 digit account access codes to 26 digits. That'd fix us good!!!
-
37836
Market timing does not work. Just ask the all-time master Warren Buffet. Buy and hold for this investor. Day trade somewhere else, not with your retirement.
-
37835
FRTIB sold the new system as a more flexible daily vaalued system. When participants used the new feature, FRTIB balked at the cost of that use. I agree, the only apparent option is to allow at-will withdrawal. Then what would that do to the Treasuery. Anarchy lives!
-
37833
November "returns" are exactly the reason we should have freedom to move funds -- and more than twice a month. I have avioded most of the huge losses in the C, S, and I funds by pulling out my investments there. I'd like the freedom to be able to move them back again if and when the market improves.
Yeras ago, the major complaint about the Thrift was the unability to transfer but once but once a month. That was fixed but now we are going backwards.
The funds shifting is the result of prudent investers who pay attention to what is occurringn in a violatile market. The TSP Director should be applauding them; not punsihing them.
I guess we wants a flock of timid, disinterested sheep that cause him little work! Sounds like we need a more in tune director.
-
37832
November "returns" are exactly the reason we should have freedom to move funds -- and more than twice a month. I have avioded most of the huge losses in the C, S, and I funds by pulling out my investments there. I'd like the freedom to be able to move them back again if and when the market improves.
Yeras ago, the major complaint about the Thrift was the unability to transfer but once but once a month. That was fixed but now we are going backwards.
The funds shifting is the result of prudent investers who pay attention to what is occurringn in a violatile market. The TSP Director should be applauding them; not punsihing them.
I guess we wants a flock of timid, disinterested sheep that cause him little work! Sounds like we need a more in tune director.
-
37831
November "returns" are exactly the reason we should have freedom to move funds -- and mor ethan twice a month. I have avioded most of the huge losses inthe C, S, and I funds pby pulling out my investments there. I'd like the freedom to be able to move them back
-
37830
If they are going to change the rules, mid stream, then I/we should be able to opt out with no penalty and go elsewhere where I/we can control the money without restrictions or interference. The proposed change places an investor in a vicarious position as they can not able to readily protect themselves by reacting to market turns....
-
37825
Why can't TSP Executive Director Gregory Long and his co-horts just do their job!
With the lame Fund catagories that are available, the only way Federal Employees can make any money for their retirements is to jump-in and jump-out.
He should be assisting the Federal Employees not whining about how much work it creates!
-
37824
Are the restirctions going to apply to the "L" funds as well, since they are rebalanced daily? If not how can restrictions be imposed on others?
-
37820
I've got no problem with allowing only 2 transactions per month. What I want to know is... WHY shouldn't the transaction you decide to make, be effective as long as you put your order in before 4:00 p.m. E.S.T. like other mutual fund companies allow?
WHY do you have to decide to make the trade before 12:00 p.m. E.S.T.... FOUR hours before the market closes, when you don't know what direction the market will finish in. That 4 hour lag could cost someone THOUSANDS of dollars!
Someone PLEASE answer that!
-
37818
This really hurts. We have hardly ever had to make more than 2 interfund transfers, but on a few occasions we have had to move the money around.
-
37814
The proposed TSP changes are merely a "money grab" and a "conflict of investing philosophies". The TSP started charging fees because they said their costs were going up - so we gladly pay, we got it they are a business and need to make a profit. The TSP's L funds have basic investing philosophies to protect our investments (That is if your in the L funds, which I'm not!). The L fund investments are more conservative than the 3000 or less than 1% of the total TSP members that are making multiple "risker" monthly transfers. We are managing our accounts and still paying them fees, we are receiving a larger return on our TSP funds because of our risk taking activity, however we also can lose more. I wouldn't mind paying a transaction fee because I know they are a business, however how much can it really cost to make an electronic transaction? I think the TSP Board are financial pigs and investment control freaks that are blaming less than 1% of the members for their failed L fund program. What they need to do is change their L fund mix investment strategies and make more money, as opposed to trying to force their lame formula on us!
-
37812
Hear, hear - kudos to the Board, it's about time. TSP was never meant to be a trading vehicle for a bunch of Ivan Boesky wannabes. I certainly don't care if 3,000 participants are unhappy - better them than 3.6 million investors. Heck, twice a month is probably too much, but it'll do for now.
-
37811
I am displeased at this decision, has TSP forgotten why we invest??????? If there is a group of members who are actively engaged in the management of their accounts and willing to take the risk, with their money; why would you want to restrict them? I thought the point of interfund transfers was to give the members some latitude, now you want members to miss opportunities and debate if they should use their "mother may I pass" to make a transaction because they only have two. Than you have the nerve to present in your facts that it is just a few members. So you are changing the program based on what is being done by a few and I am sure you still want to profess that TSP is customer centered. Now I know the flip side is why all members should have to pay for the actions of the vital few. Well maybe you should take some time around the table and figure out away to make this equitable for those who want to trade. Maybe you need the voice of a few more ordinary members around the table so that you can keep it real.
-
37809
The L funds are adjusted daily. Why the concern if an individual wants to adjust their account weekly if not daily also? If cost is the concern then it should be passed on to those who select an L fund and those that make trades on a daily basis. How much cost can there be to an electronic transfer? According to the TSP board numbers it would figure out to $4.00 per year for each of the 3,000 that they cited. Restricting fund trades to two trades a month by an individual is outrageous! Furthermore, the inference that if an individual places their TSP into the G fund is therefore indecisive and the TSP Board knows better and will move that individuals money into an L fund is just as outrageous and a violation of that individuals rights!
-
37808
We employees are totally responsible for our own TSP retirement funds. To make sure we can secure a good retirement nest-egg, we have to watch the market and make trades that will benefit our TSP. Now you want to limit our limit our interfunds trading which will have a direct impact on what we gain or lose in our TSP. This is totally unfair. I wonder how well this kind of tactic would go over with Wall Street traders?
-
37807
Why don't the TSP board give everybody 2 free transfers per month, and charge a fee for number 3 and over transefer. some people a beating the markets by transfering let them pay for the transfers but don't stop them.
-
37799
"Citing escalating trading costs..." well, how much did it cost? Okay, those approximately 3,000 "day-traders" moved $1.9 Billion around in 60 days. Granted, that is a hugh amount of money sloshing around, but WHAT ABOUT THE ACTUAL TRADING COSTS?
TSP Executive Director Gregory Long tipped his hand when he said, "What we have here is a small group of people who are making an awful lot of transactions, destructing the ability to manage the fund and creating expenses." His unspoken truth, it makes it hard for the poor baby to manage ...that's your job, buddy!
Listen up all you sheeple, these jokers only want your money, they don't give a rats ass if you lose all your retirement funding due to market forces, that's your risk. So your choice is one of what you prefer to cause your slow finacial destruction, locked into a losing market position or safety in the G fund with inflation slowly eating your retirement.
Whatever the actual cost, figure it out and charge for it. If you only want people to trade twice a monbth charge for trades in excess of two, but do your damn job! Don't tell us we are locked into a market because it makes it easier for you, that is the antithesis of capitalism! By the way, I've been in the I Fund since early Septemebr and remain there - that position hasn't and won't change so long as the dollar continues crumbling. Finally, a little finacial tip,...no, better you think for yourselves!
-
37797
In my experience, whenever someone starts telling me 'this is for your own good',it's usually in their own interest not mine. That said, I would really like to know how the actions of such a tiny percentage of TSP Participants can be said to be 'destructing the ability to manage the fund' by trading more frequently than the other 99%? If the expense is so high that the TSP board sees fit to punish all 3.6 million participants by taking away any chance they might have to become better at managing their contributions why not tell all of us exactly what the cost breakdown is if it were to be distributed across all participants for a given year? I am not even one of the 3000 who trade vigoruosly. I am however, someone who heartily believes that this option should not be restricted to two events a month. I congratulate those with enough knowledge and acumen to make use of this option to increase their potential retirement benefits. And who's to say that more individuals such as me are taking lessons form the daring and would enjoy controlling our own destiny by moving our funds to the highest earning positions? Please consider TSP board, going backward with how the TSP Fund is administered is not doing any of us any favors. Insulting all TSP participants by denigrating the few does a disservice to us all. The TSP participants are all adults and I am certain we believe we should be treated as such.
-
37794
One interfund per month should be allowed with no charge; after that charge the participiant the actual expense incurred. Other investors should not pay for that cost. thanks
-
37792
Legislators are concerned with proposed TSP changes because they will have less tax revenue to use for wasteful spending. The only way to protect our money from these imbeciles is to vote them out.
-
37790
It sounds like the TSP is going backwards. One of the reasons for the automated system was to speed up transaction processing, now you are limiting our transactions. There are mutual founds out there that have the prices quated hourly, so that the fund can be traded hourly (with no daily or monthly limits). I sugest unlimited transfers should be allowed, and perhaps a fee charged after the first 2 transfers per month. Also I think 24 annual transfers would be more acceptable vs 2 monthly transfers.
-
37789
"Those 3,000 participants will not be happy" So much for taking care of all participants!!!
"only two interfund transfers per month" Does Ray and Long really think this is appropriate for today's volatile market? Is this the way they truly think? No one this asinine should be in charge retirement account or even a child's piggy bank.
"Ray noted that on Oct. 19, $371 million was transferred into the I Fund. Three days later, she said, $391 million was transferred back out of the I Fund,"
Ray you idiot, this is what it's all about making money and making enough to retire comfortably and now in your not so infinite wisdom you want to do away with the participants ability to make and manage their accounts. Your L-funds will keep the masses working another 10 years before they can retire. Your all insane!!!! Absolutely insane!!! Did Bush appoint you guys because act as dumb as he does. Absolutely, positively, dumber than a box of rocks!!!
-
37786
Well of course let's make it easier and cheaper for the fund managers, rather than consider the needs of the investor. Heaven forbid the fund manager might have to work a little to earn their six figure salaries.
-
37783
First they wanted people to manage their own funds. Now they are saying there are too many trades. When there is volatility in the markets, people will want to make changes they think will be the most beneficial to them. By limiting the number of trades in the TSP, people will just have to trade their other accounts...provided they have any. I know I do not.The difference is timing the long-term trend, or having a daytrader mentality.
-
37782
Before cutting the throats of hard working people, why doesn't TSP find a solution? TSP will experience a mass exodus of accounts if we are restricted to two trades per month. I would rather pay a small fee and trade daily, than watch my money disappear with a stagnant account in a volatile market. I recommend charging $5.00 per trade fee to cover TSP expenses. The least thing TSP could have done was to send out a survey of possible solutions and let the account holders decide.
-
37781
The government wants to control what I do with my money sounds like dictatorship.
Charge me a inter fund transfer fee if you must but to restrict my rights to use my money as I please is communism. As we get closer to government control over our money and lives we lose the American values of Liberty and Justice for all.
-
37779
More paternalism. The L funds are rebalanced almost everyday, but these associated costs are not in question --the L funds are politically correct. If the additional costs were the concern here, they could add the cost of making the change to the fund change transaction.
-
37777
It did not surprise me that a small percentage of individuals are day trading with their TSP but I was surprised the Thrift board allowed it in the first place. I suspect many of those traders have the misconception that the Thrift Plan is like an ETF rather than a mutual fund but this is not clear in the TSP descriptions. Secondly, market timing is not a good strategy for the vast majority of Thrift Plan holders. Lastly, the lack of flexibility in the Thrift Plan is why my own TSP was rolled over to an IRA upon retirement. More choices for investment and the use of trailing stops to preserve gains and conserve retirement savings in severe market sell offs make a self directed IRA much more useful than the Thrift Plan. Using ETF's, I come extremely close to Thrift Plan costs.
-
37775
Thank you for "taking care of all participants" and your oversight of increased transaction costs. Excessive trading is fine if paid by the individual trading.
-
37774
Once again the government, in an effort to fix something, over regulates and takes away employees limited choices.
I do not think everyone should have to pay for unlimited transfers into and out of the various TSP funds, that some government employees wish to take, but instead of saying you get 2 free per transactions per month and then there is a fee, they say there is 2 a month period.
Why for once can they not ever fix something in the correct manner?
Maybe this is proof positive that the government really is unable to manage itself?
No, that is just what the some want you to think. If they mismanage it enough, people will be glad to see it privatized, hoping that will improve performance.
No, again the real problem is fire those incompetant underperformers and put people in place who are fit for and capable of doing the job.
Find a reasonable fee structure that allows those wishing to make multiple changes to complete their transactions knowing their will be a fee and then fairly allow them to be able to decide if the fee is worth the cost to make the transaction.
This way the users who wish to transfer have a choice, but the remainder of the participants who choose not to change so frequently are not forced to fund the trading of the few who do.
Maybe I should leave the FAA and move to the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board?
-
37773
I watch my account and have seen several plunges this year - some of which I have been able to avoid because of watching the trends and moving out of the riskier accounts ahead of time. Why must we be penalized just because we are government employees by have restrictions to our trades? Perhaps a better solution would be to allow a minimum number of 'free' trades per month, but then allow the participant to pay a small fee in order to allow the transaction (and have it occur immediately rather than the current delay). I would rather do that then sit there and watch my money fade away and have no control!
-
37772
Hooray!! Anything the TSP Board can do to keep costs down is to the benefit of all TSP investors.
There will be a lot of complaints about this decision from the tiny minority of TSP investors who call themselves 'traders,' but those folks are costing the rest of us money in the added costs of administrating the system. (They are also doing themselves a disservice by trying to 'time' the market, but that is [was!] their choice.)
One of the major benefits to the vast majority of investors is the very, very low administrative fees in the TSP. This is another smart step by the TSP Board to protect that benefit.
I am a typical (and very pleased) investor, not a TSP employee.
-
37770
Sounds like TSP is going back to the dark ages from which it came..next thing you know the changes will only be effective on the last business day of the month...sound familiar...
I haven't been moving funds and this action by the Thrift Board Managment distresses me. The fund management team does not appear to be looking for active solutions for this modern day rather than just holding up a stop sign.
-
37768
What were the percentage gains and/or losses of the traders vs. the non traders?
-
37767
Another one of the small remaining benefits government employees still have being taken away. Comparing the TSP to those mutual funds that permitted after-hours trading by large corporate customers is pure bull.
-
37766
If I only had 2 Interfund Transfers per month, I'd be up 2% ytd if LUCKY. While currently up 16.06% ytd, this measure will severely limit the TSP participants from achieving possible higher gains.This is the 3rd and most important part of our small retirement benefit (Law Enforcement). By restricting it's use, the Board has made retirement affordablity years longer for this loyal and hard working Government Employee. With mass retirements coming in 2010 and beyond, maybe that's their intent all along. 3.6 million people will now be restricted because 3000 participants desired to trade in and out of Funds and improve their families position. I can only imagine the Law Suites that will occur from this. Many participants have invested in Financial Services related to the timing of Interfund Transfers. This incompetence won't come cheap. Mr. Long has failed to see the bigger picture AGAIN ! It's not the 3000 he has to worry about, it's the 3.63 million that will have restrictions imposed upon them. 3.6 Million and no alternative solutions. This could get interesting !
-
37760
This is a fine example of how the 401(k) is a failure as a retirement tool, and certainly no substitute for a guaranteed pension. First they said that FERS employees would have to manage their own funds diligently in their TSP accounts in order to- at best- make up the difference between the CSRS pension and the FERS pension (the CSRS pension is literally 100% greater than the FERS pension!). Now, they're saying that you can only manage your funds twice per month.
In the extremely volatile markets of our time, where people do not invest in stocks for long-term growth- but rather to make a quick dollar and get out- this proposal by the TSP Board is a disaster. The TSP is now a dinosaur in the wonderful world of "go-it-alone" retirement savings. They're saying, "Watch those markets carefully so you can try to guess the next move and keep your funds growing. Oh yeah, but we're only going to let you adapt to the volatility every other week."
It's time for Congress to enact a Civil Service Restoration Act! Take your worthless government match (nearly all of which we will likely give right back to the governnment in taxes when we retire), and double our pensions like you did for all CSRS employees! Keep the TSP for what it's good for- "play around" money to supplement our pensions.
-
37759
Well, isn't this just great. Here we are trying to maximize our retirement funds and now it appears that the government doesn't want us to take advantage of that opportunity. Who knows? Maybe they can squeeze a few extra years out of us.
-
37758
They take our locality pay, don't give us CSRS and make us use our own money for retirement that CSRS employees got to live on,so in essence, our pay is less. Each year much of the country gets a larger cost of living raise, but Kansas City, and now you want to control where we invest the money that we put in. What's next. Change the retirement system again, and make it even worse but while telling us it's better.
-
37752
This is going to force alot of future retirees to roll their TSP funds over to a private account after they retire. The people managing their accounts by moving money around are trying to secure their future. Take some one who does move their money once a week in and out, odds are they are market wise and making money. Why should someone be forced to stay in a market that they feel is going to go down and loose money. Twice a month is totally unfair. Just think of the loss if less than 3,000 people are trading the amounts described and at retirement they roll over to a private account. Why not charge a fee for excessive transactions? This would seem to make more sense and at the same time produce income for the over worked TSP.
-
37748
You guys should be able to come up with a solution other than restricting the number of trades per month. This is very restrictive to a volatile market and could never offer any value to the participant .Why not charge a fee to absorb the extra cost. Paticipants are willing to pay a fee for freedom
-
37744
So they are telling what to do with my money. I thought the customer (even when their wrong) is always right. I dare them tell me want to do with my money, that un-Americian.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.