|
Posted by Oilcan on September 12, 2007, 9:43 pm
Please log in for more thread options John, I agree with you. I do have a 401(k) with Vanguard and their
reporting through Quicken and the Web never match. They download
transactions like "remove shares" to represent a fee they change for
management (which I have agreed to BTW), when in fact they should be sales
IMHO so I can track the true cost. They also can't handle (in Quicken) the
new Roth 401(k) option which I have.
As far as I am concerned, Quicken just needs a simple approach to load
transactions and handle vesting. I for one don't care if it is before tax,
after-tax, Roth contributions, company match as long as I can get back to an
amount that I have vested. I can always go back to the administrator for
more detail.
At least with Vanguard, I do not have MONA (May our Numbers Agree).
Oilcan
> Rick Blaine wrote:
>
>
>>> To me, the whole 401(k)/IRA/etc. subject is treated wrong in Quicken.
>>> Except for your contributions to the plan, it doesn't belong in your
>>> Quicken file, in my inexperienced opinion.
>
>> Well, that and the fact that most company plans try to make your 401K
>> account look like a savings account instead of a true mutual fund.
>> They mix contributions (both yours and the companies) with a pseudo
>> delta value to account for changes in the share price.
>
> <A very non-Quicken comment>
>
> I don't have a 401k account for myself, but I am maintaining one in
> Quicken for a friend. And that friend has had at least two different 401k
> account administrators since I have been keeping track of the account.
>
> I wouldn't characterize the 401k administrator's goal quite the same as
> you have: I think the main thing the 401k administrator's care about is
> making money ... which they often approach by reporting as little detail
> as possible including not reporting the sale of securities to pay fees.
>
> The 401k administrators benefit in, at least, two ways from this practice:
> fewer transactions lead to smaller statements [also a consideration when
> deciding how often to issue statements), which lead to lower mailing
> costs; and failing to show the sale of shares to pay for administrative
> fees makes it more difficult for the average user to compare the actual
> effect of fees between administrators, and to complain about fees that are
> too high.
>
> [I know that some fee percentage is often announced to the plan
> participants ... a percentage which the participants usually, promptly,
> forget (and which they have no remembered way to compare to some other
> administrator's fees anyway); and do not know how to utilize when they do
> remember it. Watching one's assets being shrunk periodically by an
> unmistakable fee, is the best way I can think of to bring the issue of the
> importance of fees to the conscious mind of the participant.]
>
> </A very non-Quicken comment>
>
> --
> John Pollard
> First initial underscore Last name at mchsi dot com
> Please reply to newsgroup
>
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap