TSP Warning Letters

[whitemingo]

Has anyone else got their warning letters? Mine came today. It states that I am a frequent trader based on the fact that I made more than 3 trades per month during October, November and December. Therefore I must reduce my IFTs to no more than 3 per month starting in February.

[rob10000]

I got mine today..

Dear XXXXX
As explained below, you have been identified as a frequent trader in the Thrift Savings Plan. Unless you reduce your trading activity to no more than 3 interfund transfers per month, we may require you to request interfund transfers by mail only.

Since the Thrift Savings Plan introduced daily valuation of participant accounts in 2003, it has not restricted the number or frequenct of participant-iniated interfund transfers. However, recently, the frequent trading activity of a small number of participants is resulting in higher transaction costs and reduced return for all participants in the affected TSP Funds - including long term investors who do not generate these costs. Frequent trading is also creating greater risk of performance deviation from the TSP Funds benchmark indexes.

By law, the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (which administers the TSP) is required to develop investment policies which replicate the performance of the indexes selected for investment and provide for low expenses. Because frequent IFT activity diminishes the achievement of these goals, the Board is addressing the problem in two ways - (1) Structural changes to the TSP system to implement restrictions on the number of interfund transfers that can be executed per calandar month, and (2) intermin measures designed to lower trade volume in the meantime.

In November 2007, the Board approved a policy initiative that would permit two IFTs per calander month, with subsequent unlimited IFTs into the Government Securities Investment Fund. When compared to the more restrictive limits adopted by private sector defined contribution plans, record keepers, and/or investment fund managersm, this approach provides investment flexibility, administrative simplicity, and control over excessive trading.

Further, based on current behavior, approximately 99% of participants will not be affected by the proposed restrictions. We will soon publish proposed implementing regulations for public comment. The Federal Register notice will include a description of the problem, the restrictions established by other funds/plans, and our proposed solution. We will consider comments as we move towards resolution o this matter in the Spring of 2008. We are also notifying all participants of the proposed changes when we send the annual TSP participant statements in February, 2008.

Our immediate concern, however, and the reason for this letter to you, is the reduction of trading activity among those participants who trade most frequently. Based on the authority granted to the Executive Director to take appropriate action to restrict frequent interfund transfers, we are contacting those participants who have made frequent IFTs and asking them to voluntarily change their investment strategies.

Because in October, Novermber and December 2007, you made more than three IFTs each month, you fall within this frequent trading group. Therfore, unless you reduce your IFTs to no more than three per month (starting in February) we may notify you that you will be required to request your IFTs by mail until the permanent restrictions have been implemented. This proceedure is authorized by Federal Regulation 72 Fed, Reg. 73,251 (Dec 27, 2007) (to be codified at 5CFR 1601.32). We are asking for your cooperation in this matter.

We have posted a set of Questions and Answers about the frequent trading activity, as well as the November 6, 2007 memorandum to the Board, and it's accompanying presentation, under "Information about Interfund Transfer Restrictions" on the TSP Web site's Home page (www.tsp.gov (http://www.tsp.gov)). Links to the regulation cited above can be found at www.frtib.gov (http://www.frtib.gov) and www.tsp.gov (http://www.tsp.gov) ("What's New" or "Information about the Interfund Transfer Restrictions"). We will also post a link to the proposed regulations regarding the structural restrictions when that issuance is published in the Federal Register.

We strongly encourage you to read these materials so you understand the impact of your frequent trading activities and the reason we are taking these actions. If you have any questions regarding this letter, you may contact the TSP at 202-942-1460.

Sincerly,
Gregory T. Long
Executive Director

[NewBee]

I received my letter today. Because of 3+ trades during those 3 months? Oh well. Not happy with the Board's plan of action, but hopefully we can all work together to come to a better resolution.

I just wish I could get the 5% match without having to contribute to TSP. Then I could just put everything into my ROTH IRA or my Trading Account and trade actual stocks.

[alevin]

I haven't been home today so don't know yet if I got a letter. I may not since I was only "hyperactive" for one month last fall after I started following Ebb. But didja notice the OTHER thing they're worried about????

They're worried the frequent-fliers will skew the performance of the funds away from index performance. Ie we're not supposed to do so well that we overbalance the stay-at-home types performance and pull the overall performance of the funds away from the index. Wouldja think about that for a moment? They don't want TSPers as a group overall to do better than the indices. Something wrong with this picture. Watch out everybody, they'll keep changing the rules until it becomes impossible to do much better than the indices.

[Rod]

Has anyone else got their warning letters? Mine came today. It states that I am a frequent trader based on the fact that I made more than 3 trades per month during October, November and December. Therefore I must reduce my IFTs to no more than 3 per month starting in February.

You don't have to do JACK until and if these IFT limits go into effect.

Keep in mind their "fine" print-
we may require...

The heck with them... IFT away until and IF the limits go into affect.

:cool:

[RAE]

You don't have to do JACK until and if these IFT limits go into effect.

Keep in mind their "fine" print-

The heck with them... IFT away until and IF the limits go into affect.

:cool:

You are exactly right, Rod. If I get one of these letters (and I hope I do), I plan to change NOTHING about my trading habits unless and until the actual restrictions go into effect. And, I also plan to respond to FRTIB that they cannot legally implement any such restrictions, because their proposed interim rule about this did not follow proper procedure, AND they never published a final decision on that proposal. Without that, they can't legally implement any of this, including forcing TSP members to make interfund transfers via snail mail. Paladin and Rod, do you guys agree? I say let's not give up the fight yet.......this is nothing but a bluff on their part, it's not legally binding.

[FUTURESTRADER]

I hate to think that one of America's governing agencies is intentionally bluffing it's own people, but it does look and feel that way, leaving themselves an out saying they 'may' restrict IFTs to snailmail. It's a thinly veiled threat. Suprisingly low-life tacticts for the heads of a goverment agency, IMO. (At least a U.S. goverment agency).

[James48843]

"In the work ahead, we must be guided by the philosophy that made our nation great. As Americans, we believe in the power of individuals to determine their destiny and shape the course of history. We believe that the most reliable guide for our country is the collective wisdom of ordinary citizens.

So in all we do, we must trust in the ability of free people to make wise decisions, and empower them to improve their lives and their futures.

To build a prosperous future, we must trust people with their own money and empower them to grow our economy.

“…We trust Americans with their own money…” "

President G.W. Bush, State of the Union Message, January 28, 2008

[qibovin]

Yep, I came home to my wife--who didn't know that I knew it was coming--handing me the opened letter and saying, "You need to read this, but I don't want you to be ρï$$€♂ off all night."

I tend to agree with the following:

You are exactly right, Rod. If I get one of these letters (and I hope I do), I plan to change NOTHING about my trading habits unless and until the actual restrictions go into effect. And, I also plan to respond to FRTIB that they cannot legally implement any such restrictions, because their proposed interim rule about this did not follow proper procedure, AND they never published a final decision on that proposal. Without that, they can't legally implement any of this, including forcing TSP members to make interfund transfers via snail mail. Paladin and Rod, do you guys agree? I say let's not give up the fight yet.......this is nothing but a bluff on their part, it's not legally binding.

However, I have my concerns. I am curious about the following (thank you, rob, for doing the extensive typing that would have taken me all night):

Based on the authority granted to the Executive Director to take appropriate action to restrict frequent interfund transfers, we are contacting those participants who have made frequent IFTs and asking them to voluntarily change their investment strategies…This proceedure is authorized by Federal Regulation 72 Fed, Reg. 73,251 (Dec 27, 2007) (to be codified at 5CFR 1601.32)
Who granted this unelected "Director" power? As far as I understand, the TSP rules still say "unlimited interfund transfers."

Anyway, whether they can legally do it or not, the fact is they have the capability (or maybe they don't...). I am not really in a position to "fight" them on it--obviously they are counting on this. I hesitate to defy their recommendation because this market is not exactly one in which I want to be snail mailing IFTs. Who knows when all this might get sorted out. I am still working full time, and fortunately or unfortunately, my TSP balance is not exactly in the range that my lost earnings would cover the expense of a lawsuit.

Do we have any lawyers who can step out and comment on this. I might be interested in the class action idea if somebody else organizes it, but I'm not sure where else to go from here.:cool:

[qibovin]

I also wanted to highlight
This procedure is authorized by Federal Regulation 72 Fed, Reg. 73,251 (Dec 27, 2007) (to be codified at 5CFR 1601.32)They seem to be pretty confident that it will be codified; even so, can they "act" on uncodified whateveritis?

[oreo]

Yep, I came home to my wife--who didn't know that I knew it was coming--handing me the opened letter and saying, "You need to read this, but I don't want you to be ρï$$€♂ off all night."

I tend to agree with the following:


However, I have my concerns. I am curious about the following (thank you, rob, for doing the extensive typing that would have taken me all night):

Who granted this unelected "Director" power? As far as I understand, the TSP rules still say "unlimited interfund transfers."

Anyway, whether they can legally do it or not, the fact is they have the capability (or maybe they don't...). I am not really in a position to "fight" them on it--obviously they are counting on this. I hesitate to defy their recommendation because this market is not exactly one in which I want to be snail mailing IFTs. Who knows when all this might get sorted out. I am still working full time, and fortunately or unfortunately, my TSP balance is not exactly in the range that my lost earnings would cover the expense of a lawsuit.

Do we have any lawyers who can step out and comment on this. I might be interested in the class action idea if somebody else organizes it, but I'm not sure where else to go from here.:cool:

Also, if there are any lawyers out there, I would like to know if there is any law against political appointees making threats of punitive action against federal employees. Maybe the Hatch Act covers this. I don't know if there is precedence but it certainly seems as if there should be.

[James48843]

The Thirft Board blew it in the resolution they passed.

Here's how:

In the resolution they allowed for the executive director to cut people off, PROVIDED that the ETAC also approve the resolution.

That means they delegated the duty to the ETAC to make the decision.

If the ETAC had told them “no”, they couldn’t have done it.

While the Thrift Board members, and the Executive Director are technically federal employees acting within the scope of their employment, and also have specific law preventing anyone from suing them for losses, the ETAC members do NOT have such protection.

To be clear, if ANYONE gets cut off, and can show on paper that he/she would have made more money if he/she were allowed to move their money, then the ETAC members, individually, are now liable under the law, and CAN be sued personally.

It's because they way the Board worded their proposal, leaving it up to the ETAC to decide whether to give that authority to the Director.

Think about them apples.

The ETAC members will have to pay OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS, and without government representation, in any lawsuit that results from this. There is no protection for them under the law as there is for the Board and the Director. They are not acting under the scope of their employment, so the Justice Department will not defend their actions.

To quote: “Any fiduciary other than the Executive Director or TSP Board member who breaches his fiduciary responsibility, duty, or obligation, as set out in FERSA, shall be personally liable to TSP for any losses resulting from each breach or violation and will be responsible for restoring to TSP any profits made through use of TSP assets, and shall be subject to such other equitable or remedial relief a court may consider appropriate. These fiduciaries may also be removed for a fiduciary breach.”
From: GAO Report 03-400, page 6, at web link: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03400.pdf


Here is what the Thrift Board passed:

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS the Federal Employees' Retirement System Act
of 1986, as amended (5 U.S.C. § 8401 et seq.), provides that the Board members shall establish policies for the investment and management of the Thrift Savings Fund (5 U. S . C. § 8472 (f) (l) ); and

WHEREAS frequent trading has been shown to have a detrimental effect on fund performance because of the resulting increase in transaction costs; and

WHEREAS the TSP was designed as a cost-effective, long-term
investment vehicle, to generate retirement savings.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that, subject to advice from the Employee Thrift Advisory Council, the Board adopts a policy of placing trading restrictions on all of the funds in the Thrift Savings Plan. Initially, this policy shall be to advise excessive traders that they must stop this activity or face being restricted to requesting interfund transfers via mail. Eventually, with changes in automation, this policy shall be to allow participants two interfund transfers per calendar month with additional transfers allowed only into the G Fund.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By making the policy "subject to advice from the ETAC", they just put ETAC members in the position of making the policy, rather then themselves, and opening ETAC members up to personal liability for ANY losses. If the ETAC had told them no, they could not have done it. Therefore, they delegated the decision making to the ETAC, and with it, the responsibility to make up any loss incurred by a TSP share holder.

Start keeping track of each and every move you make, or would have made, had the ETAC not voted to impose the limit. Because THAT is your basis for filing a claim against the ETAC members PERSONALLY.

Got it?

[qibovin]

If they do it they will be breaking the law, plain and simple...willful violation of federal law

While the Thrift Board members, and the Executive Director are technically federal employees acting within the scope of their employmentHelp. Which is it? Any judges out there?:confused:

[Hallatauer]

Would this be better handled by the Attorney Generals office? And since this restriction is being enforced on a select few, would this fall into an EEO violation?

[FundSurfer]

This is interesting. If there criteria is three moves in Oct, Nov, and (or is it OR) Dec, I probably will not get a letter.

It would be interesting to know how many letters they actually sent out.

I may have to make extra moves in February just to see how they react.

[SkyPilot]

Would this be better handled by the Attorney Generals office? And since this restriction is being enforced on a select few, would this fall into an EEO violation?

Probably not an EEO violation because it is not based on the several specific basis required, i.e., age, sex, race, etc...

[Hallatauer]

Yes, you are right, not an EEO... maybe a "prohibited personnel action"? See US Office of Special Counsel http://www.osc.gov/ppp.htm
Just seeing what we can violate them on.

[Rod]

Absolutely. If they do it they will be breaking the law, plain and simple.

I received my letter in the mail today and will respond with a certified letter, return receipt stating that if they in any way limit my ability to do interfund transfers, they will be sued in the United States District Court for willful violation of federal law. The difference is that mine is not a bluff.

HEAR HEAR!!!:cool:

[jon]

As a 007 retiree in this down mkt, I've been thinking about pulling my puny bal out of tsp and opening a roth ira (should have thought about that 5 yrs ago) pay taxes if I have to but trade at will in ETFs or similar. However, could Rod's suit become a class action we could join? What are the aspects of such a suit?

[Rod]

However, could Rod's suit become a class action we could join? What are the aspects of such a suit?

That would be the idea of our fine friend, Paladin.

I'm sure he can fill you in...:cool:

[Boxholder]

I guess I'm officially one of the 3500 dirty birds causing everyone to lose their retirement. Got my letter today. But that's OK, I'm about out of toilet paper anyway.

[nnuut]

Got mine today! I can't imagine why?:confused:
3166

[Hallatauer]

I envisioned mine as a private suit. However, if they damage multiple parties then a class action would be appropriate. Let's see how this develops because I really don't think they are going to violate the law if you know what I mean.

I agree, they won't actually violate any laws, just threaten people that if they continue their IFT ways, they will change the rules.

They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other.

[sugarandspice]

Further, based on current behavior, approximately 99% of participants will not be affected by the proposed restrictions.


So from this am I to assume if you DO NOT receive a letter, and your "current behavior" changes to a more aggresive approach, then you can transfer as much as you want?

If they can impose these restrictions, why are they asking people to VOLUNTARILY change their ways?

[sugarandspice]

Because in October, Novermber and December 2007, you made more than three IFTs each month, you fall within this frequent trading group.

And where is it defined what a "frequent trading group" is? Where is it spelled out? What regulation defines this? Making up stuff as you go along will get you in trouble TSP.

[weatherweenie]

WOOHOO! As Steve Martin in The Jerk said when the new phone books arrived, I AM SOMEBODY!

Got my letter today.

Dum*ucks

[Show-me]

Got one!

[grasshopper]

My letter was in the mail when I got home. Of course I have not opened it yet. I guess I am one of the 3000. Why ME! I feel priviliged to be a member of this group. Now lets make some Money!

[RAE]

So from this am I to assume if you DO NOT receive a letter, and your "current behavior" changes to a more aggresive approach, then you can transfer as much as you want?

If they can impose these restrictions, why are they asking people to VOLUNTARILY change their ways?

It's a bluff, plain and simple. Hence the "may" language in the letter they sent out. They screwed up the Fed. Register Notice (in several ways) proposing this letter to the 3,000 "frequent traders", but they decided to send out the letters anyway, in an attempt to bluff folks into complying with their 3 IFT limit per month. Don't fall for it. Continue to make as many IFT's as you like.....what have you got to lose? Until they actually change the software on the TSP website to block more than 3 IFT's per month, their threats mean nothing. And I don't think you will see the software changed for quite a while (maybe never), because they have not complied with the legal requirements to actually make that change yet. I haven't seen the Fed. Register posting that they are required to do to actually propose making this change, and even after that comes out, there will be a comment period and then a requirement to post a final rule, before they can even START to make this change effective. All of that will take time, if it ever happens. Until then, I suggest everyone carry on as you have always done with regard to your IFT's. Don't fall for the bluff, folks....it's your money, to manage as you see fit.

[Show-me]

I agree!

[350zCommTech]

Got mine today also.

Even though I was expecting it, I feel like I want to kick the living chit out of TRACY RAY!:nuts:

[FUTURESTRADER]

Mine today as well. I'm leaning towards agreeing with RAE. The letter is vague. 3 trades in 30 calendar days or 1 month? They should just accept what they apparently now see as a 'mistake' in creating unlimited IFT capability, declare it so, and put it into affect when they can. Again, I hate to think one of OUR U.S. agencies is bluffing it's own people. Feels underhanded and dishonest. They are supposed to serve our trust. We have put our trust in them. But I suppose we are the minority, and they feel they are serving the trust of the majority.

[frokker]

I saved all IFT emails and looking at them, I made 5 in OCT, 4 in NOV and 5 in DEC but I did not receive a letter today. Maybe tomorrow?

[Barney]

Sorry Folks, :( I guess I can't be in the group. I am not a member. Whoa is me! Cause you see, in 2006, I started lurking in the mb. I only made 24 IFT's in 2006 roughly broken down to:
2006 IFT(s)
Jan -2
Feb -1
May -6
June -7
Aug -2
Sept -3
Nov -2

In 2007, I was playing around with different stategies to see if one worked better than another. I only did 1 IFT each month in Feb, May, June, Aug, Oct, Nov, Dec. In September I did 8 IFT's.
Now, for Jan 2008, I am on my 6th IFT.
So, by their own definition on what a frequent trader is, I should not get a letter because I am not a frequent trader. :laugh::laugh: I love our Government!

[EW_ret]

I received my warning letter yesterday, but am unsure where the THREE IFT limit is about. From what I read its two IFTs then any number of IFTs into G fund. I can have ten IFTs if eight are into G fund, incrementally. The letter states three IFT limit in first paragraph then latter states there is a limit of two IFTs.

[Hallatauer]

I object to being called a "trader". I am not... I transfer my funds within the TSP as per their guidelines, nothing more. One transfer a day per their guidelines. Transfer request initiated at least 20 hours before the transfer is confirmed, per their guidelines. I do not trade in and out of positions all day long. </rant off>

[sdouglas3]

I am one of the 3000 who will get a letter. But, why isn't our right to capitalism in force here. According to Larry Kudlow this is America and we as Americans have the right to capitalism and to make as much money or lose money as we will. Why is the TSP board acting like a bunch of nazi's and keeping us from our rights? I am surprised that the TSP board hasn't tried to shut down this forum yet! The TSP board is keeping their thumb on anyone with the ability to think outside the box and look for a piece of what this country is made of.

TSP Board - Adjust your thinking ability to incorporate new ideas and thoughts to help us the customer to grow our accounts. Not the other way around! Backwards thinking gets you backwards answers and sets back the whole process.

Maybe Larry Kudlow needs to be informed about the backwards thinking going on with the TSP Board!

[FUTURESTRADER]

have to laff..."We are asking your for your cooperation in this matter." Don't p*ss on my leg and tell me it's raining.

[tsptalk]

I received my warning letter yesterday, but am unsure where the THREE IFT limit is about. From what I read its two IFTs then any number of IFTs into G fund. I can have ten IFTs if eight are into G fund, incrementally. The letter states three IFT limit in first paragraph then latter states there is a limit of two IFTs.
I agree. The way they worded it, it almost sounds as if we will have 4 or 5 trades per month, because moves to the G fund may not count as an IFT? The word subsequent is the question.


two IFTs per calander month, with subsequent unlimited IFTs into the Government Securities Investment Fund.

[whitemingo]

I agree. The way they worded it, it almost sounds as if we will have 4 or 5 trades per month, because moves to the G fund may not count as an IFT? The word subsequent is the question.


After reading the letter a few times, this is also my understanding. If this is the correct meaning then I can live with this.

[Birchtree]

I would think that if you move from the C fund to the G fund whether in 2% increments or 75% or 100% that does not constitute an IFT. However, if you move from the G fund back into the C fund that would be regarded as an IFT. Or if you move from the G fund or C fund into the S fund that would constitute an IFT. I can DCA going up into the G fund without penalty but would not be able to DCA more than 2 or 3 times into a particular fund like I did into the I fund making multiple purchases - this will have to be done with payroll contributions which is what I've done with the C fund for years. I would think that one round trip would eat up the monthly IFT. For example - if I moved 100% from the C fund into the S fund that is one IFT - when I move back to the C fund or even the I fund that is another IFT and my choices are finished, unless they are going to allow 3 IFTs/month. So is it 2 or 3 moves per month?

[Barney]

Yes! :cheesy:


I would think that if you move from the C fund to the G fund whether in 2% increments or 75% or 100% that does not constitute an IFT. However, if you move from the G fund back into the C fund that would be regarded as an IFT. Or if you move from the G fund or C fund into the S fund that would constitute an IFT. I can DCA going up into the G fund without penalty but would not be able to DCA more than 2 or 3 times into a particular fund like I did into the I fund making multiple purchases - this will have to be done with payroll contributions which is what I've done with the C fund for years. I would think that one round trip would eat up the monthly IFT. For example - if I moved 100% from the C fund into the S fund that is one IFT - when I move back to the C fund or even the I fund that is another IFT and my choices are finished, unless they are going to allow 3 IFTs/month. So is it 2 or 3 moves per month?

[nnuut]

I'm sure that if you move ANYTHING they count it as a move!:mad: Crooks!:cool:

[FUTURESTRADER]

my take:

Start 100 C; move 25 to G = 1st IFT, = 75C, 25G
move another 25 to G = 2nd IFT = 50C, 50G
move 5 more from C into G = 3rd IFT = 45C, 55G
remaining 45C in 5% increments into G = 9 additional IFTs = 100G

= 12 total IFTs

load up, then nibble out :)

If your first two moves are in to G, they are considered your two IFTs for the month. I don't think you can make an IFT into any other fund after that other than unlimited increments into G

[FUTURESTRADER]

question is will they allow unlimited transfers by mail?

[Oldcoin]

If I am 100% G and I reallocate 25% each to the C, S and I, have I made three moves or one? I do this from time to time………

[Rod]

It's a bluff, plain and simple. Hence the "may" language in the letter they sent out.

EGGZACTLY

CALL IT

[nnuut]

I think we need a clarification of how this works, EXACTLY!:suspicious:

[Gritz]

Got my letter as well, makes one want to seek out an attorney. We are using our thrift funds as we deem best, according to their rules. I'm sure this has been asked before but would some of you explain for me how they can legally restrict a small group of us while all other participants may trade as often as they like?

[hessian]

Hey all,
Got my letter today - Sure sucks (EMS,TR:toung:).

To Old Coin,
In paragraph #4, they say they'll "permit two IFT's (account rebalancings) per calender month" - this seems clear to me as addressing your question: to say rebalance, to say: 20,20,20,20,20 - as long as its all in one day - this counts as one IFT.

Also note, in the same sentence they say: "with subsequent unlimited IFTs into the GovernmentSecurities (G) fund." - keyword here is "unlimited" -IFTs to G - I expect this means moving any allocation, all to the G-Fund (even if its only 1, like "F"). This means you can do this at least 2 times, maybe even a 3 times (since they say "unlimited IFTs to G").

To Rod,
I agree, but I'm personally afraid to test whether this is a bluff -
I expect someone, and likely that quite a few folks will - so sure would be great to get feedback from whomever chooses to ignore (or just naturally finds they cannot abide by) what they "request" in their letter (pargraph #1), or, as they say in paragraph #6 "...asking [us] to voluntarily change [our] investment strategies." :rolleyes:

Recommend to discuss with Tom, if there are any volunteers to go for testing their metal, to somehow privately get this feedback?? -(so rest of us can know)?

[RAE]

Got my letter as well, makes one want to seek out an attorney. We are using our thrift funds as we deem best, according to their rules. I'm sure this has been asked before but would some of you explain for me how they can legally restrict a small group of us while all other participants may trade as often as they like?

Got my letter today, too.........YESSS!!! (I was beginning to feel left out, ha). Gritz - they can't legally restrict a small group. They haven't even defined what a "frequent trader" is, for one thing. My advice, again: don't change ONE THING if you received one of these letters. They can't penalize you for managing your money as you see fit! Why would anyone change the way they want to manage their TSP account, based on an obvious bluff like this? What are they going to do to me if I keep making as many IFT's as I like??? Nothing, because they have no legal authority to impose restrictions. What I really want to know is the first time someone is blocked from making an IFT on the TSP website........now that will be big news. If anyone experiences that, please let us know immediately. But I don't expect that to happen anytime soon, because they have not taken the required steps to even begin to make those changes to the TSP software. THIS IS A BLUFF FOLKS, DON"T FALL FOR IT......THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE HOPING WE WILL DO!! Don't give them that satisfation, it is YOUR MONEY.

[Rod]

I'm jealous...

WHERE'S MINE???:toung:

:rolleyes:

[nnuut]

It's ok Rod, I'll send you a copy of mine!:D
Wait maybe GOD is protecting you?

[Show-me]

Probably not that divine, more like it is delayed in the mail. :laugh: :D Mine did. :D

[Oldcoin]

Thanks Hessian, that’s what I thought, but you never know.

I’m kind of irked that I didn’t get a letter, but it seems my trades during that time frame didn’t make the mark. If I got one I was going to frame it and hang it at work…..something to be proud of.

[alevin]

If I am 100% G and I reallocate 25% each to the C, S and I, have I made three moves or one? I do this from time to time………

Guys, guys, I can assure you, speaking as someone from the very first years of TSP over 20 years ago, that when we only had 1 IFT a month, we could redistribute $ among the 5 (oops, meant 3) funds as we pleased for a single IFT date (IFT would not occur until start of new month, we had to make IFT request 2 weeks prior). Things could be so much worse than they are threatening now, at least now we'd be able to pick the 2-3 dates for our IFTs and have it implemented within the "prompt" timeframes you already know and love. :rolleyes:

I'm kinda jealous, kinda like Rod, if TomNCath got a letter for the one month they misbehaved, I should be getting one too for my month of getting overexcited (made me a boodle that month too, made up for some bigger losses earlier). Must be delayed, we had a lot of snow earlier this week. :suspicious:

[Tomncath]

I honestly DIDN'T expect to get one.... :sick:

[NyteTracker]

Keep in mind their "fine" print-
The heck with them... IFT away until and IF the limits go into affect.
:cool:Good catch Rod.
asking them to voluntarily change their investment strategies…

we may require…
Sounds more and more like a bluff.

btw; nice return for a down month. :)

[k2ds]

Got mine today.
I spit on it, tore it up and put it back in the mail to them.
Would be Great if everyone would do the same. Load up their mailbox with trash.
Really let them know what we are thinking....

[Hallatauer]

I'm going to respond... I typed a letter just to let off some steam. Now I'll rewrite it without so much vitriol. heh

[Sunnyskies]

I haven't gotten a letter yet, but I probably meet the strict definition.

Actually this will hit the retired folks harder, because we can DCA back in small increments without payroll contributions.

[CountryBoy]

Well I got my letter from our Commie TSP Board. If I could just them out back of the woodshed.

CB

[James48843]

I think it may be time to start to get serious-

I am thinking it may be time for a TEA PARTY-

Sending the Thrift Board a Tea Bag and a letter..... What do you think?


3199

[Wildboar53]

I expected to have a letter by now.
Oct I had over ten IFT's, Nov I had 4 last into the I fund where I stayed until Dec 29.
The last move was because of market not the proposed IFT limit btw.
So since is now Feb does that mean if I get a letter now I will have till April to behave?:laugh::toung::rolleyes:

[CountryBoy]

James,

Personally I think it's like fighting City Hall and we are royally f***ed. I've sent letters, signed petitions, etc and until some body with some real power takes an interest, it's like peeing up a rope. I like the idea of threatening legal action against the ETAC ?, but I'm not a legal person. I believe someone, Paladin, mentioned doing something like that and to wait and see what his response he recieves.

CB

[James48843]

On the evening of December 16, 1773, a group of men gathered in the Warf along side Boston Harbor.

They were angry at the actions of men appointed by King George. King George had spoken about being fair to the people throughout the new world. King George liked to exercise his power, and said he would respect the wishes of those in his colony.

But his actions were exactly the opposite.

King George’s men had decided they would show those who held the power. They would levy a new tax that would restrict the trade of tea in the new world. Those in parliament wanted the colonist to acknowledge the power of parliament- men mostly appointed by King George, to come into line.

In May of 1773 Parliament concocted a clever plan. They gave the struggling East India Company a monopoly on the importation of tea to America. Additionally, Parliament reduced the duty the colonies would have to pay for the imported tea. The Americans would now get their tea at a cheaper price than ever before. However, if the colonies paid the duty tax on the imported tea they would be acknowledging Parliament's right to tax them. Tea was a staple of colonial life - it was assumed that the colonists would rather pay the tax than deny themselves the pleasure of a cup of tea.

The colonists were not fooled by Parliament's ploy. When the East India Company sent shipments of tea to Philadelphia and New York the ships were not allowed to land. In Charleston the tea-laden ships were permitted to dock but their cargo was consigned to a warehouse where it remained for three years until it was sold by patriots in order to help finance the revolution.

In Boston, the arrival of three tea ships ignited a furious reaction. The crisis came to a head on December 16, 1773 when as many as 7,000 agitated locals milled about the wharf where the ships were docked. A mass meeting at the Old South Meeting House that morning resolved that the tea ships should leave the harbor without payment of any duty. A committee was selected to take this message to the Customs House to force release of the ships out of the harbor. The Collector of Customs refused to allow the ships to leave without payment of the duty. Stalemate. The committee reported back to the mass meeting and a howl erupted from the meeting hall. It was now early evening and a group of about 200 men disguised as Indians assembled on a near-by hill. Whopping war chants, the crowd marched two-by-two to the wharf, descended upon the three ships and dumped their offending cargos of tea into the harbor waters.


The men appointed by King George thought the people would pay the tax and buy their tea from the single authorized company, rather than to TRADE ON THEIR OWN with other countries. So they imposed a restriction- NO TRADING IN TEA EXCEPT WHAT KING GEORGE WOULD ALLOW- ACCORDING TO KING GEORGE’S TRADING RULES, AND PAYING KING GEORGE’S TAX.

While a few bought and sold according to the new rules, a large group of people objected. And decided to take action into their own hands. They met, and decided to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

On the evening of December 16, 1773, a group of men calling themselves the "Sons of Liberty" went to the Boston Harbor. The men were dressed as Mohawk Indians. They boarded three British ships, the Beaver, the Eleanor and the Dartmouth; and dumped forty-five tons of tea into the Boston Harbor

3200
The last thing said before the men rushed to the harbor was this:



3201
“Let every man do his duty, and be true to his country";




Send your message to the Thrift Board and the ETAC
3202

[BlueMax]

3201
“Let every man do his duty, and be true to his country";




Send your message to the Thrift Board and the ETAC


3202
[/quote]


What are you suggesting? Through our accounts in the harbor?

[Viva_La_Migra]

I like the idea of the tea bag, but I also like the idea of responding to the letters with a one word response.



NUTS! :nuts::nuts::nuts:

[BlueMax]

I like the idea of the tea bag, but I also like the idea of responding to the letters with a one word response.




NUTS! :nuts::nuts::nuts:

Personally, I like the idea of testing their bluff and if they make us do snail mail swamp them with IFTs of very small percent. If they think we are honking up their system now, wait and see what could happen!!

[Barney]

James,
Great motivtion! But what are you suggesting we do? I have indian headdress in the closet and a tomahawk in the garage. :D

But really, what can we do?

[Barney]

On the evening of December 16, 1773, a group of men gathered in the Warf along side Boston Harbor.



Also, we have to be careful because I don't think this mb is a private meeting to discuss our secret plans.

[Barney]

Does anybody know or does the letter say how long the punishment will last for the violators after the warning letter? Is restricting us to snail mail just for that month or is it for life? :confused:

[Gritz]

Without verification that we received letters (registered mail, return receipt, reading this forum :blink:) and that we understood the letters (signed acceptance), how can they implement their illegal plan.

[whitemingo]

The letter just says until the permanent restrictions have been implemented. They also say in the letter that they will post in the Federal Register a discription of the problem, the restrictions of other funds/plans and their proposed solution. After which time they will consider comments as they move toward resolution of this matter in the SPRING of 2008. Thay have already made their decision since they "may" force us to use snail mail for IFTs.

[grandma]

What do any of us know of the individuals who man the Service Counter, the Reception area of the TSP snail-mail address? If we do a USPO mailing request of an IFT, will they actually do it? Will they record it in a timely manner - or claim they didn't get it? If a Confirmation Request is purchased with it, will they refuse to sign it? What happens to the IFT order then? I am wondering if these people, individuals with their own personalities, are `yes- men' to the Back-Room Office, or are they moral, honest, hardworkers who care about what they do? Are they just pawns in this game `That Woman' has tried to patent, as we, the ones with the actual ownership have become?
The e-transfer gets through & is registered instantly - I wonder if they truly want to be suddenly swamped with daily mail-bags of requests? It had to have been bad in years past when everyone's requests were bundled up into just those 15th & 30th dates !!!

[James48843]

First of all, the "mail request" form is no longer available on the TSP website.

Appearently, it has been updated a number of years back, to become an "optical scan" form. They are now only available "from your personnel office".

First, I suggest everyone ask their "personnel office" for a years supply of blank mail forms.

The form is a TSP-50.

In fact, you might want to call the Thrift Line and ask for a year's worth of forms. That would be about 275, if I am not mistaken. There is somewhere around 275 trading days in a year, correct?

If they refuse to send you a year's worth of TSP-50 forms, then please document that.

Next: The address where the forms go is:

Mailing Address:
Thrift Savings Plan
P.O. Box 385021
Birmingham, AL 35238

Do we have any members in Birmingham, Alabama?

Anyone here in Birmingham who wishes to start a little business, of taking e-mail requests, and filling in ovals on a scan form, and then taking them to the post office each morning?

Just wondering......... (this is going to get interesting).

[James48843]

By the way- the TSP NOW has set up an on-line feedback box.

Can you believe it? It took 25 years to do this.

Please feel free to go give them a piece of your mind- (like it will do anything- but hey, it's worth doing for your own gratification )

Here is the link:


http://tsp.gov/curinfo/feedback.html


Have fun.

[JAMIEZ71]

I'm one of the 3000 so called traders. I got my letter yesterday. I think it's crazy that they would take away our right to manage our own money. I've done quite good for myself by just simply watching tv and reading online and then moving funds. What a shame.

[GGal]

Did Ebb get a letter? What will he do?

[Hallatauer]

Are you suggesting that we "teabag" the FRTIB???

[nnuut]

I'm one of the 3000 so called traders. I got my letter yesterday. I think it's crazy that they would take away our right to manage our own money. I've done quite good for myself by just simply watching tv and reading online and then moving funds. What a shame.
Welcome to the Message Board JAMIEZ71. We know how you feel, If you haven't go to the link below and sign the petition we are still fighting!!!
Norman:D

[RAE]

First, I suggest everyone ask their "personnel office" for a years supply of blank mail forms.

The form is a TSP-50.

In fact, you might want to call the Thrift Line and ask for a year's worth of forms. That would be about 275, if I am not mistaken. There is somewhere around 275 trading days in a year, correct?

If they refuse to send you a year's worth of TSP-50 forms, then please document that.



Thanks for the info, James, and great idea! I just sent a FAX to FRTIB (it's free over the internet....just go to faxzero.net - the FRTIB fax number is 866-817-5023) and requested at least 250 copies of form TSP-50. I asked them to let me know if they could not do that (if I get a reply, I'll post it here). I also went to the new "feedback" link at the tsp website and told them why the "frequent trader" letter that Mr. Long sent me this week was not legal, because they have not yet complied with the legal procedures necessary to implement such a change. As you say, this is going to get interesting!

[marco59]

question is will they allow unlimited transfers by mail?

I finally got mine today. Until recently, I was making about 10 IFTs a month. If we are forced to mail them, I'll make even more....just not as risky.

[James48843]

News flash-

I called the Thrift Line today, and asked for them to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms.

The girl who answered said "You don't need that, you can go on-line, or call the thrift line.".

I said I was talking about for when the Thrift Board takes away the right to use the internet and/or the thrift line. She suddenly got quiet. I asked her again to send me 250 blank forms. She said "You'll have to get them from your personnel office".

I told her I did not have a "personnel office". That I am a retired Army Officer (true), and that I wanted her to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms.

She then revealed that they did not have ANY TSP-50 forms at the Thrift Line.

So I called the Thrift Board office in D.C.

And I asked the gentleman there to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms. So that I could be properly prepared. He took my name and number, and said someone would get back to me.

At around 4 o'clock I got a phone call back from them. They said "You aren't on the list, so you don't need any forms". I told them I may not yet be on the list, but I am a Union rep for 11,000 federal employees, and that I wanted to have a stock in hand, since it appears that the Thrift Line says THEY HAVE NO BLANK TSP-50 forms available.

That didn't go over well. The gentleman then said he was just a low level peon (his words, not mine) that was told to call me back and tell me that my name was not on the list, so I shouldn't worry about it. And that 99.9% of people will not be affected. I told him I planned to help the 0.1% of people who ARE affected sue the pants off every person who is involved in this effort- so they better either send me the 250 blank copies of TSP-50 form, or I would be doing a press release in the morning, stating that tjhe Thrift Board is unprepared to execute the threat against shareholders. He hung up on me.

There you have it.

There are NO TSP-50 forms out there. TSP doesn't have any mail in forms.

This could get REAL interesting, real soon.

[James48843]

Yes, it could get quite interesting to "teabag" the TSP Board and each ETAC member.



3214

Let me work on that idea for a bit, and see how we're going to do this. It makes great press if we can get a lot of people on-board with the tea-bag thing.


Let's make a real statement. Let me have a day or two to think about the best way to tea-bag them. Let's send them a message, and get the press to report on it......


3215


P.S.- Are we having fun yet?

[RAE]

News flash-

I called the Thrift Line today, and asked for them to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms.

There are NO TSP-50 forms out there. TSP doesn't have any mail in forms.

This could get REAL interesting, real soon.

Thanks for the upate, James. I think a press release is definitely in order! In my case, I most certainly AM on their frequent trader list, as I got a letter this week, so we'll see how they reply to my FAX, requesting 250 copies of TSP-50. I asked for a reply if they could not send the forms for some reason.

If they wannna make threats, they better be ready to play the game!

[DrFaustus]

The form is a TSP-50.

In fact, you might want to call the Thrift Line and ask for a year's worth of forms. That would be about 275, if I am not mistaken. There is somewhere around 275 trading days in a year, correct?

Actually, I think I read somewhere that there are 250 trading days a year. 365 - 2*52 = 261 .. and then there's a few banking holidays where the market is closed and then there are a few federal holidays on top of that where the market is open but the TSP trading window is closed.



Anyone here in Birmingham who wishes to start a little business, of taking e-mail requests, and filling in ovals on a scan form, and then taking them to the post office each morning?


Now THAT is an interesting idea ...

For that to work though, it would be better to bypass the post office all together and just dump the letters into the TSP's inbox.

An evil thought just occurred to me. Why not send them a blank form EVERY day? Or even multiple blank forms? (in separate envelopes, of course) They can't refuse to take them .. nor can they not take the time to open them, etc.

[frokker]

Cool, I just let a little piece of my mind there!



By the way- the TSP NOW has set up an on-line feedback box.



Please feel free to go give them a piece of your mind- (like it will do anything- but hey, it's worth doing for your own gratification )

Here is the link:


http://tsp.gov/curinfo/feedback.html


Have fun.

[Steadygain]

I called the Thrift Line today, and asked for them to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms.

And that 99.9% of people will not be affected. I told him I planned to help the 0.1% of people who ARE affected.

OK, it's the end of the week and may be this is all meant in fun.

LET'S PRETEND THE ISSUE IS PORNOGRAPHY ON THIS SITE

I have no doubt that 99.9% of the MB would never even consider it. But how are we going to stand up for the 0.1% who want to challenge that. Should we send Tom and all the Moderators a year's worth of petitions over and over until they give in??? Will that in anyway change the ones in charge - or just annoy them?

WHAT ABOUT THE ONES WHO DELIBERATELY ANTAGONIGE OTHERS, WHO GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO ANNOY THEM AND INSULT THEM

Again the 99.9% are innocent - but how do we stand up for that rare one who tells us we are a bunch of idiots, who cheers our losses, who tells us we are the worst example of TSP management...are we all to respond as above???

May be it is time that everyone just grow up and accept the fact that rules and regulations are meant for the overall good of the whole. It is a rare person who goes out of their way to ruin and spoil the overall environment that makes this site so wonderful; and when that individual repeats these inappropriate behaviors it is only right that the governing body deals with it. That way this site remains a wonderful place for everyone else. Why do we (the majority of those voicing themselves) have such a hard time letting this go smoothly and working with it?? Why should we waste our efforts trying to attack the ones in charge? How will flooding the establishment with petetions - endless garbage emails - and all this other crap - do anything to help the overall whole? Why fight a losing battle?? when there is no way you can win??? Why can't we just let it go, accept this, and recognize these letters are really true and now we can either act like babies or act like adults. When you act like a baby it will only work against you - you will show everyone who and what you really are. So I would say "Let's act like adults".

[DrFaustus]

Ok, now this IS interesting

I just got off of the thrift line ... they said that they could not send me 250 forms, that I'd have to snail mail or fax a request for those. BUT ... I asked if they could send me a smaller number ... say, 10.

The girl I spoke said that she could do that ... so 10 forms are coming my way.

Anyone know if these forms are reproducible?

[pogo]

Nice touch! Also, send them a certified letter w/ return receipt stating that if they in any way limit your ability to do interfund transfers as currently provided under law, you will sue them for damages in federal court. Their signed acceptance of this letter will constitute evidence of willful violation of the federal statutes in the event that they do limit your IFTs in the future. They will not be able to claim mere negligence in court and your letter will prove beyond any reasonable doubt that their actions were a conscious and willful violation of the law.
save some money don't send it with a return receipt just a certified letter you can go on line at www.usps.com look for tracking and punch in the numbers and you will get what time you sent it and what time it was receive at the station and what time it was delivered, save yourself two dollars and change for the next letter.

[pogo]

Ok, now this IS interesting

I just got off of the thrift line ... they said that they could not send me 250 forms, that I'd have to snail mail or fax a request for those. BUT ... I asked if they could send me a smaller number ... say, 10.

The girl I spoke said that she could do that ... so 10 forms are coming my way.

Anyone know if these forms are reproducible? why spend money on the copies i won't,i don't have i copying machine and if i do have to spent money save the receipt and charge the tsp board.

[RAE]

May be it is time that everyone just grow up and accept the fact that rules and regulations are meant for the overall good of the whole.

Why do we (the majority of those voicing themselves) have such a hard time letting this go smoothly and working with it?? Why should we waste our efforts trying to attack the ones in charge? How will flooding the establishment with petetions - endless garbage emails - and all this other crap - do anything to help the overall whole? Why fight a losing battle?? when there is no way you can win???

Steadygain - you have a right to your opinion, but please understand that many of us do not consider our protests against what FRTIB is trying to do as wasted efforts, nor do we consider it to be a losing battle. James and others have gone to great effort to demonstrate that they have NOT shown that imposing these new IFT restrictions are warranted, nor will they do anything for the "overall good of the whole". We are not the ones who sent threatening letters to TSP members who are just trying to manage their retirement accounts as they see fit..........and in full accordance with the rules and regulations. Mr. Long and others have chosen to take this heavy-handed approach to beating us into submission, and when you do something like that, you better be prepared to take some heat in response. I, for one, sent in lengthy comments in response to the FRTIB Interim Rule of 12/27/07, and FRTIB has not even had the courtesy to reply to those comments........all I got was a threatening letter a few weeks after that, telling me to stop doing what I was doing (following the rules) or they will force me to make IFT's via snail mail. GIVE ME A BREAK!!! Don't expect me to just lay down and accept these changes, when they adversely affect my ability to manage my retirement
funds, and when FRTIB has NOT demonstrated how my doing so has adversely affected anyone else. I, for one, intend to keep fighting on. If you decide to accept the proposed changes, that is your prerogative.

[nnuut]

Exactly Rae!:d

[Rod]

Why fight a losing battle?? when there is no way you can win??? Why can't we just let it go, accept this,...

Our country was founded upon folks who did the exact opposite of what you are advocating.

I, for one, will continue to support and encourage those who are willing to stand in the gap, aiming their slingshots squarely between the eyes of "Goliath".

[poolman]

Our country was founded upon folks who did the exact opposite of what you are advocating.

I, for one, will continue to support and encourage those who are willing to stand in the gap, aiming their slingshots squarely between the eyes of "Goliath".

Consider me "Gumby", I'm with you Rod. :)

[Show-me]

We all need to call and request the IFT forms. I will first thing Monday morning.

[Steadygain]

I stand corrected and I appologize; if we have a winning chance then we should fight with all our might and not give up until the battle is over. I THOUGHT THE BATTLE WAS OVER. I can absolutely guarantee you that only a very small fraction of the existing .01% have any idea we may still have a chance. [/COLOR][/B]

SO PLEASE IGNORE MY PREVIOUS MESSAGE.

The battle is NOT over. The battle has only just begun. If this were a baseball game, the opposing side has batted in the first inning, and we're now up to bat.

There will be LOTS of back and forth in this game to come.

Look at it this way-

First of all, there IS NO PROBLEM.

1. As pointed out in the actual statistics, the funds are all beating the indexes they are supposed to represent. That is the job of the TSP Board- to try and meet those indexes. Period. If they are able to bring returns that meet or beat the indexes, they have done there primary job.

2. And then there is the cost arguement. TSP is already less than one-tenth the administrative cost of any comparable mutual fund. The is NOT a cost problem. Period. So TSP has already done there job.

3. The "proposed solution" is not a solution at all. Limiting intefund trasnfers does NOT increase the fund's return. As pointed out before, part of the reason the funds BEAT the indexes already is that Barclays is now using "Covered calls" and "fair value adjustments" that operate properly off the fact that people are moving funds. If you impose these draconian restrictions, you HARM the rate of return, not help it. Anyone who has done the actual math, and reviewed the actual data, would discover this fact. It is up to us to shine a BRIGHT LIGHT on truth for all the world to see.

4. It doesn't matter if it is ONE PERSON, or 3,000 who are adversely affected. The fact is that the Thrift Board is able to ram through restrictions without being questioned is what is at stake here. So today "someone" * (Tracey Ray) discovered something that has been going on since the day they invested HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY to allow- the daily movement of funds. This is nothing new. But SHE suddenly discovers it, and decides "it must be a problem", because it doesn't fit with HER concept of how people should handle their own money.

She is entitled to HER concept of how people should handle their own money. However, she is NOT entitled to impose that concept on others. Heck, half the people in the TSP are uneducated or fearful to the point that they never stray out of the G fund. THEY are the ones that Tracey Ray should focus on. Educating them, not handcuffing us.

And that is the whole point. There IS NO "One size fits all" correct way to handle money. Some people need risk, others need safety. Each individual needs to know his/her own situation, and decide for themselves what THEY need to try and accomplish.

Sure, there will be both winners and losers when people are allowed the freedom to try. But THAT is the Thrift Board's job- to allow for the maximum freedom of people to invest for their own retirement. As long as the funds are meeting the indexes, fine. As long as adminstrative costs are "low", (No one can argue that costs one-tenth the costs of average mutual funds are not low), they are doing their job. At that point, the Thrift Board needs to step back and get out of the way. Period.

The vast majority of the "0.1%" KNOW ALREADY that this action is wrong. The vast majority of those 0.1% already know that the Thrift Board is incorrect in identifying the "problem", and the vast majority of those already know that the "solution" being proposed is NOT going to have a positive affect on the returns or the costs. It is EXACTLY because the vast majority of those 0.1% UNDERSTAND how the system is working, how the costs are allocated, how Barclays is working the system, and how THEY = the 0.1% = are able to influence the outcome ONLY IF THEY ALL STAND TOGETHER, and shine the light of truth on this.

This IS the American way.

Truth. Justice. American Way.


3218


Soapbox mode off......

[Wildboar53]

It isnt over until the rules have been changed. This is all an active (at least from our end) discussion and dissent with the proposed rules.
On Monday, I will be going over to my personel office to request several of the TSP-50 forms to do a trial run of how long it will take them to do a snail mail IFT. I will also stress on him that he will need a goodly supply of forms for the coming debacle the TSP board is creating.

[James48843]

It is a far, far better thing to go down fighting, with courage, and principle, and be slain in battlem fighting for what is right,

than to capitulate to wrong, and spend the rest of your life eating soggy cheerios in your old age.




3219


What will YOU do to fight back?

[Hallatauer]

The big point is why should anyone be restricted when they are following the rules? If they change the rules, fine, I'll abide by them, but to limit my access to transfer my funds when I haven't broken the rules... that's simply wrong.

Have costs gone up? Probably but I wonder how much is due to the L Funds and that they are trying to protect their baby by blaming someone else.

If the problem is the I Fund and the charges induces by Barclays, why not restrict transfers into and out of just the I Fund? Heck, I can use the C/S Funds instead. Maybe not as big a gain in the long run but it will suffice. And why not negotiate with Barclays on changing the way they are compensated for deciding UV (Unfair Value) and clicking a few buttons?

And Steadygain... Until they can show the numbers and how, if at ally, the transfering of funds have negatively affected other members, then there is no reson to punish those who choose to actively manage their funds. If the actions of many IFT's has a negative affect, prove it! And then change the rules. I'll gladly abide by them. Until then, hands off MY money!

[FUTURESTRADER]

News flash-

I called the Thrift Line today, and asked for them to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms.

The girl who answered said "You don't need that, you can go on-line, or call the thrift line.".

I said I was talking about for when the Thrift Board takes away the right to use the internet and/or the thrift line. She suddenly got quiet. I asked her again to send me 250 blank forms. She said "You'll have to get them from your personnel office".

I told her I did not have a "personnel office". That I am a retired Army Officer (true), and that I wanted her to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms.

She then revealed that they did not have ANY TSP-50 forms at the Thrift Line.

So I called the Thrift Board office in D.C.

And I asked the gentleman there to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms. So that I could be properly prepared. He took my name and number, and said someone would get back to me.

At around 4 o'clock I got a phone call back from them. They said "You aren't on the list, so you don't need any forms". I told them I may not yet be on the list, but I am a Union rep and that I wanted to have a stock in hand, since it appears that the Thrift Line says THEY HAVE NO BLANK TSP-50 forms available.

That didn't go over well. The gentleman then said he was just a low level peon (his words, not mine) that was told to call me back and tell me that my name was not on the list, so I shouldn't worry about it. And that 99.9% of people will not be affected. I told him I planned to help the 0.1% of people who ARE affected sue the pants off every person who is involved in this effort- so they better either send me the 250 blank copies of TSP-50 form, or I would be doing a press release in the morning, stating that tjhe Thrift Board is unprepared to execute the threat against shareholders. He hung up on me.

There you have it.

There are NO TSP-50 forms out there. TSP doesn't have any mail in forms.

This could get REAL interesting, real soon.

holy cow, that's amazing. Sounds like Mr Long is running the TSP the same way he ran his floundering company.

[Steadygain]

There is no one I respect more than you; and that is so opposite of how I felt in the recent past. My sincerest gratitude for explaining this situation so fully - especially on my post. I am deeply honored.

Please know that over the years I have personally been responsible for many sweeping changes that have have saved "The System" millions of dollars. When I took control of the Employee Health/Occupational Health Department for the State of NC it was easy to see how much waste was involved with faulty policies and these faulty policies were the root of all the waste. So I changed the policies - not to burn the employees - but to create the foundation by which the Occupational Health Department was designed to operate. In all truthfulness it was not so much me changing policies, but much more eliminating many that had crept in over the years that should never had been there to begin with.

And I have continued with this mindset over the years; always looking for ways to maximize quality care by implementing stronger foundations - so everyone knows how to smoothy proceed.

I have used numerous financial institutions over the years for a wide variety of investments and often traded on a frequent basis. I was always charged for "buying" and for "selling" - a percentage of the total amount invested. I was shocked to find the ITFs without any charge involved; and they subsequently became numerous and frequent. I saw this as an obvious oversight by which the TSP Operated - and took full advantage of it as long as I could. I am amazed it took them so long to see this. If I were at the top I would not offer free trades (even 2/month); instead I would tack on a standard charge and let everyone trade as often as they wanted. I would stress "OUR TSP OPERATION" has been faulty and we are now bringing our operation in line with every other Sound Financial Institution.

Anyway, James - you present yourself very well and I wholly support what you represent. I feel the biggest problem here is the TSP Board's lack of accepting responsibility - HERE THE STRESS SHOULD BE "WE WERE WRONG" and it is not the fault of the frequent traders - IT WAS TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY OUR OVERSIGHT and now we are correcting it. But they want to blast "the 3000" which only makes things worse. The 3000 would never have been my focus as they only point to the underlying problem - I think you're right James; there are a lot of idiots up there throwing out the wrong information - making this mess a whole lot worse.

[Christopher]

News flash-

I called the Thrift Line today, and asked for them to send me 250 blank TSP-50 forms...they did not have ANY TSP-50 forms at the Thrift Line.

So I called the Thrift Board office in D.C...He hung up on me.

There you have it.

There are NO TSP-50 forms out there. TSP doesn't have any mail in forms.

This could get REAL interesting, real soon.


Nice job on the spirited effort and follow through. ;)

[James48843]

...I have used numerous financial institutions over the years for a wide variety of investments and often traded on a frequent basis. I was always charged for "buying" and for "selling" - a percentage of the total amount invested. [/COLOR][COLOR=magenta]I was shocked to find the ITFs without any charge involved; and they subsequently became numerous and frequent. I saw this as an obvious oversight by which the TSP Operated - and took full advantage of it as long as I could. I am amazed it took them so long to see this. If I were at the top I would not offer free trades (even 2/month); instead I would tack on a standard charge and let everyone trade as often as they wanted. I would stress "OUR TSP OPERATION" has been faulty and we are now bringing our operation in line with every other Sound Financial Institution.


Fact: The TSP "earns" roughly 12 million in income from the loan fees they imposed a couple years back. The stated purpose of the fee, as described at the time, was to reduce the number of loans being taken out. The object WASN'T to prevent loans from being taken out- it was intentionally to discourage people from taking loans, because the result would be lower earnings for the people in the long run. Now it "earns" more than $12 million a year in income for the TSP.

Fact: Millions are also "earned" in "abandoned accounts". If a person seperates from federal service, and they have not yet become vested, the agency matching money doesn't go back to the Agency it came from. Instead, it goes to the TSP, for use as they see fit. A nice, stady income for the TSP. I don't remember the number right off-hand, but it is in the millions each year. For it, the TSP doesn't have to do anything.

Fact: Recently, the TSP has sent out a letter, and more than 200,000 of them came back. The TSP simply doesn't know where they are. It turns out that if someone leaves the federal service, and doesn't tell the TSP where they are, then the account simply grows on it's own, with no end in sight. You see, Congress forgot one simple thing. People die. Eventually. And if no one claims the account, well, if it were a bank, the money would end up going to the state.

But it's not a bank. And the TSP doesn't know what to do. There are litterly MILLIONS of dollars now sitting idle in accounts- where the person is very likely dead. But since no one reported the death, the TSP is unable to do anything to track the heirs down. Not being able to find over 200,000 of your customers SHOULD be a big deal to this board. But it's not. Instead, they want to waste time trying to curtail the legal transfers of their own members.

Should they impose a small fee for an IFT? I have no problem with that approach, IF it would solve any issue.

The problem is that they have NOT identified an issue that needs to be solved. They themselves have said they can't calculate a cost assoicated with interfund transfers. They want to "social engineer' a solution to a problem that does not exist. THAT is what I have a problem with.

But they are not willing to look at ideas.

I've thrown out several-

1. A small IFT fee, on the order of $10 per move, would generate on the order of $24 million per year . No one would be unhappy with that, if it were necessary to balance a budget. The truth is, however, that the actual taxpayer costs of administering the TSP (2007 budget around 75 million appropriated, compared to over 90 million appropriatated in the 2001-02 time frame). A small IFT fee would be easy to implement. But they are not even looking at that.

2. A limit of no more than $100,000 per day move per person. That would work much better if the issue is the amount in each day's swing. Only those with large accounts would be affected, and then they still would be able to move substantial sums over a number of days. Very little harm in doing that. But they are not willing to hear of such things.

3. A "per year" rather than a "per month" limit- for the volatile times like we've just been through would be better than what they have proposed.
Again, no takers from the Thrift Board.


OUR TSP is not faulty. It is operating EXACTLY as Congress intended.

If there is a problem- fine. Let's get it out in the open, and talk about it, and ask for possible solutions. That's not what is going on. What is going on is PURE SOCIAL ENGINEERING- Tracey Ray wanting everyone else to follow HER theory of how to make money.

And THAT, my friend, is why I will use every breath I have to bring the gleeming glare of daylight to the situation- to bring along everyone else I can in this battle.

The war has only just begun. It ain't over by a long shot.

[tsptalk]

Well said. If a limit or a fee is imposed in the end, it better come with a better IFT deadline. If they are trying to mimic the rules of other institutions, they shouldn't be able to cherry pick only the rules that they think benefit them.

[alevin]

It's so very obvious they are just muddling their way along, haven't a clue what the implications are. The language they use in their communiques-"may" vs. "will". The person writing these things is an inexperienced fed or a contractor that doesn't get it that nuances have legal consequences. If they mean "will" they darn well better say "will" in writing, instead of "may" if they expect it to be defensible when challenged. :notrust:

Aside from that, I ran across something this afternoon when searching for TSP-50 on the web. It should make retired military sit up and go to war faster than anyone else, if they push the warning letter issue. The TSP hardcopy TSP-50 and other forms (even if you can find one) are only to be used by civilians and ACTIVE military, per the site below, which is a TSP.gov page. Retired military are not allowed to use the forms, I have no idea why (because no access to a personnel office to process?).

http://http://www.tsp.gov/uniserv/forms/index.html

[Steadygain]

James,
A recent post said everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I disagree with that as I believe anyone giving an opinion without knowing the FACTS and without really having a thorough grounding in the subject matter is not qualified to make an opinion. If they do give one it will only make them look like an idiot - as my first post did.

I am so impressed with the extent of your knowledge and your ability to solidly deliver the facts. Your information means everything to me and without it I have no idea what is really going on. If I could make any wish at this moment - it would be to put you in charge and make whatever changes you feel are needed to make the TSP operate correctly and get all the horse s### out as soon as possible. You would have my total and full backing on any and every decision - because I am thoroughly convinced any decison you make is based on a comprehensive understanding of what's involved.

James, if you would send me a PM on how I can help I will do what I can. Your past few posts are absolutely amazing - and I have been "in the dark" and therefore incapable of understanding or giving a valid opinion.

Sincerely,
Steadygain (Rick)

[Callme_CO]

I'm voting for president. Seriously since neither side can put up anybody with a brain, i figure it's my job to vote for one. will have one vote for presidency :)

[pogo]

It's so very obvious they are just muddling their way along, haven't a clue what the implications are. The language they use in their communiques-"may" vs. "will". The person writing these things is an inexperienced fed or a contractor that doesn't get it that nuances have legal consequences. If they mean "will" they darn well better say "will" in writing, instead of "may" if they expect it to be defensible when challenged. :notrust:

Aside from that, I ran across something this afternoon when searching for TSP-50 on the web. It should make retired military sit up and go to war faster than anyone else, if they push the warning letter issue. The TSP hardcopy TSP-50 and other forms (even if you can find one) are only to be used by civilians and ACTIVE military, per the site below, which is a TSP.gov page. Retired military are not allowed to use the forms, I have no idea why (because no access to a personnel office to process?).

http://http://www.tsp.gov/uniserv/forms/index.htmlParticipants may use Form TSP-50 to request TSP contribution allocations and/or interfund transfers. Unlike many other TSP documents, Form TSP-50 is not available from this Web site because the form was designed to be read by an optical scanner; if it were downloaded from the Web, this might not be possible. However, employees are encouraged to use the more efficient electronic media, on this Web site, to request investment changes. this is what it says on our website

[James48843]

Steadygain, take a look at this thread:

http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?t=5162

That is one of the threads where we talk about what can be done to fight back.

And then browse http://tspshareholder.org , where we expand the ideas on what exactly is happening, and what can be done to resist.


Again, if there were competent people in D.C. running this show, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Unfortunately, we have a group of folks who don't know the first thing about managing billions of dollars, in charge of setting the rules. We have a group of Thirft Board members who consider this their part-time job, and only listen to the rantings of a "Chief Investment Office" who has no experience dealing with the federal TSP system before now; and an ETAC board who meets twice per year for sheet cake and cookies, with no knowledge of international finance. Sure, they both take their jobs seriously, but they haven't the first clue as to what they are doing, what their mission is, and who it is they are supposed to protect.

Sorry, but it really bugs me not to have competent people examining the rules when you are talking about a 235 BILLION dollar set of assets.

[Steadygain]

Thanks James,
Will get it done tomorrow. You got my word; and half of this is out of respect for you (and all those who really did their homework to understand and appreciate all that's involved). Your last sentiments are very much in line with how I view this matter and the other half is out to let them know it.

Thanks again for all the info and for helping me to take the stand I'm taking. Thanks for putting up with me too, and again I'm sorry about the previous misunderstanding.

[Hallatauer]

I am so impressed with the extent of your knowledge and your ability to solidly deliver the facts. Your information means everything to me and without it I have no idea what is really going on. If I could make any wish at this moment - it would be to put you in charge and make whatever changes you feel are needed to make the TSP operate correctly and get all the horse s### out as soon as possible. You would have my total and full backing on any and every decision - because I am thoroughly convinced any decison you make is based on a comprehensive understanding of what's involved.



Well said!

[Rod]

If nominated, I will not run.

If elected, I will not serve.

Old soldiers like me don't die. They simply fade away.

But while alive, and breathing, and while I still have the energy and ability to click a mouse, I will only "not ask what your country can do for you, but rather what you can do for your country."

I like it.

Praying for you.:)

[hessian]

There seems to be some confusion, from the letters we got, on the number of IFTs "allowed" per month:

To clarify:

I rec'd the letter - in it it states you are allowed - two "account rebalancing" IFTs, +/PLUS, "unlimited IFTs to the G-Fund!"

I think its clear, in reading this: that its "allowing" us a possible maximum number of 5 IFTs in a month -NOT 3 as I keep hearing folks say!

While I agree this still sucks, saying 3 is the limit is just INCORRECT! (for example, if the 1st and last IFTs were moves to all "G" - the other 1 to all "G" being in between the two "account rebalances" = 5 total).

Most months though, would most often likely be 4 IFTs (or less) -depending on number needed:cool:
:sick:

[FUTURESTRADER]

Where is the 5 comming from? As I see it, you could be 100 C, then do 20 IFTs @ 5% in to G. (20 trading days avg/month)

[James48843]

There seems to be some confusion, from the letters we got, on the number of IFTs "allowed" per month:

To clarify:

I rec'd the letter - in it it states you are allowed - two "account rebalancing" IFTs, +/PLUS, "unlimited IFTs to the G-Fund!"

I think its clear, in reading this: that its "allowing" us a possible maximum number of 5 IFTs in a month -NOT 3 as I keep hearing folks say!

While I agree this still sucks, saying 3 is the limit is just INCORRECT! (for example, if the 1st and last IFTs were moves to all "G" - the other 1 to all "G" being in between the two "account rebalances" = 5 total).

Most months though, would most often likely be 4 IFTs (or less) -depending on number needed:cool:
:sick:


I am afraid that it is useless to try and understand what their proposed requirements are. They can't even make that clear to TSP shareholders, and they have NOT published any clear definitions of their proposed rules.

I would argue that no one should try and interpret what the Board intends, because any attempt to interpret rules which have not been set are wrong. One interpretation is that you could move stocks twice, (say, 50% C, 50% S, and then 60% C and 40% S, and then have an unlimited number of little moves towards G.--- 59%C 40% S 1% G; 50% c 40% s, 10% g; 40% c, 40% s, 20% g, ETC, ETC, ETC), and still meet their rules.

The problem is their proposal is not clear, and since it's not clear, there is not much gained in anyone speculating what the rule is going to be.

The fact is that today there is no rule other than "unlimited interfund transfers".

Instead of trying to figure out what they mean here, perhaps the best thing is to set down a number of scenarios, and call them up and ask them what is suggested by them as THEIR idea of acceptable reallocations of YOUR MONEY.

Think about that for a minute. That is what we are talking about- what allocations THEY think YOU should be able to do.

[nnuut]

There are no multi IFTs to the "G" allowed! Read the beloww a transfer to the "G" counts just like a transfer to the other funds. They need to change that wording.!:

Q2. What are the new restrictions on interfund transfers? http://www.tsp.gov/resources/top.gif (http://www.tsp.gov/faq/faq14.html#top)
The Thrift Savings Plan will implement restrictions on the number of interfund transfers a participant can make per month in order to curb frequent trading and its associated costs to TSP participants. However, the TSP does want to provide the opportunity for participants to rebalance their accounts and to permit unrestricted access to the Government Securities Investment (G) Fund. Accordingly, the restrictions would be as follows:
Participants can make two (2) interfund transfers per calendar month. After that, they may only move money from the Fixed Income Index Investment (F) Fund, the Common Stock Index Investment (C) Fund, the Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment (S) Fund, the International Stock Index Investment (I) Fund, and the L Funds to the G Fund.
We will count the interfund transfer based on its process date, not the date the interfund transfer was requested.
If your first or second interfund transfer in a month moves money only to the G Fund, it still counts toward your two (2) interfund transfers per month limit.:cool:
http://www.tsp.gov/faq/faq14.html#sub2

[DrFaustus]

There are no multi IFTs to the "G" allowed! Read the beloww a transfer to the "G" counts just like a transfer to the other funds. They need to change that wording.!:

Q2. What are the new restrictions on interfund transfers? http://www.tsp.gov/resources/top.gif (http://www.tsp.gov/faq/faq14.html#top)
The Thrift Savings Plan will implement restrictions on the number of interfund transfers a participant can make per month in order to curb frequent trading and its associated costs to TSP participants. However, the TSP does want to provide the opportunity for participants to rebalance their accounts and to permit unrestricted access to the Government Securities Investment (G) Fund. Accordingly, the restrictions would be as follows:
Participants can make two (2) interfund transfers per calendar month. After that, they may only move money from the Fixed Income Index Investment (F) Fund, the Common Stock Index Investment (C) Fund, the Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment (S) Fund, the International Stock Index Investment (I) Fund, and the L Funds to the G Fund.
We will count the interfund transfer based on its process date, not the date the interfund transfer was requested.
If your first or second interfund transfer in a month moves money only to the G Fund, it still counts toward your two (2) interfund transfers per month limit.:cool:


Well, yes there are. After you reach your limit (2 or 3 moves now, it's unclear), you can still shift funds into G. But once they're in the G fund, you can't get them back out.

So, under the two-move limit, you can go from
X to S to F to G to G to G to G .... or
X to S to G to G to G to G ....

Maybe we should rename the G fund to be the 'Q' fund (for Quicksand) ... :D

[nnuut]

Well, yes there are. After you reach your limit (2 or 3 moves now, it's unclear), you can still shift funds into G. But once they're in the G fund, you can't get them back out.

So, under the two-move limit, you can go from
X to S to F to G to G to G to G .... or
X to S to G to G to G to G ....

Maybe we should rename the G fund to be the 'Q' fund (for Quicksand) ... :D
OK, if that's so it's good. Why don't those all knowing administrators at a TSP explain that MORE CLEARLY?:confused: Yes you can get stuck in the "G". I have been enlightened, Thanks.:D

[hessian]

It is all VERY confusing.
- Just looking at the letter (what I received) - it alone is ambiguous.

I took my initial read from Paragraph #4.

Now I see that in Paragraph 7, it says:
["Therefore, unless you reduce your IFTs to no more than three per month (starting in February), we may notify you that you will be required to request your IFTs by mail..."]

I don't want to risk having to do "snail-mail," so this latter, bolded wording is what I'm personally going by.
I have to interpret this for myself -by the letter sent me -until there further official rule/correspondence. :sick:

No disrespect is intended if other's have different views, or have found other info posted elsewhere. :o
Very appreciative and respectfully,
Thanks, All!

[Fivetears]

I wonder how many you can do by mail? :nuts:

[sugarandspice]

Why send letters in the first place?

3000 get letters to tell them if they don't stop their TSP behavior then restrictions will be placed on them. These 3000 are notified by a letter even though these same restrictions have been posted on various other sites and apply to all TSP members. Or do they? Shouldn't all members be notified by letter? What if your behavior changes and you make more than 3 in a month for the first time ever in your life. Are you restricted? You didn't get a letter so how would you know? The letter seems more and more like a threat.

[qibovin]

I wonder how many you can do by mail? :nuts:Unlimited, as I understand it, from the current wording of the law. (Please correct me, legal scholars, if I'm off.)

[gewoodfo]

Hi All:

I got mine on Saturday! I like the idea of fighting this legallly: But like others in this, I cannot afford to start a lawsuit!!

Surely there must be lawers out there who could give us some advice.

Hey, here is a wild and crazy idea, How about going to the Americain Civil Liberites Union? Can you image the press: them fighting the govt on behalf of a small subset of govt. employees?

Later!!

[Viva_La_Migra]

I haven't received a letter as of yet, but if I do, and I am restricted to mailing in my transfers, I'm just going to move 1% in and out of a fund each day. It will cost me stamps, but it will cost them more in manpower to process the mail and make the trades! ;)

When they see how much this is costing them, they will either back off, or take more draconian measures to prevent us from moving our funds around.

[Idaho Dave]

I got my letter the other day and decided to ignore it. I expect we'll have the Gestapo visiting our houses and taking away our stamps as their next move to limit transfers.

[sugarandspice]

So if I have money in all 9 funds (Excluding G) then I can transfer 9 times back into the G fund. Thats 9 IFT's. plus 3 I get to the other funds? And TSP is going to build in software that flags my account if I am transferring to any other fund other than G. Come on! If that is the case and they are "making software corrections" this has computer glitch/meltdown all over it. People that have no idea what kind of changes are being made will soon find out because the WHOLE system will haywire.

[FUTURESTRADER]

Who's made or making their third IFT of the month today? Who's gonna admit it? Maybe not a good idea to reveal in here? TSP board spies? :)

[DrFaustus]

So if I have money in all 9 funds (Excluding G) then I can transfer 9 times back into the G fund. Thats 9 IFT's. plus 3 I get to the other funds? And TSP is going to build in software that flags my account if I am transferring to any other fund other than G. Come on! If that is the case and they are "making software corrections" this has computer glitch/meltdown all over it. People that have no idea what kind of changes are being made will soon find out because the WHOLE system will haywire.

dont forget that a transfer to the G fund can count against your IFT limit if you haven't made the allowed number of IFTs yet

[Fivetears]

This post is for any TSP Board Member searching aimlessly through this MB forum for direction;

GET YOUR DAMN ACT TOGETHER and DRAFT SOME CLEAR INTERFUND TRANSFER RULES!

[Callme_CO]

I've made my 3rd this month....what are they going to do? come and get me. I fight with criminals every day what's one more.

[qibovin]

This post is for any TSP Board Member searching aimlessly through this MB forum for direction;

GET YOUR DAMN ACT TOGETHER and DRAFT SOME CLEAR INTERFUND TRANSFER RULES!

I'm not wasting my time looking, but I'm guessing that the "rules" are listed on the TSP website somewhere as something to the effect of "no more than one IFT per day."

[tsptalk]

So if I have money in all 9 funds (Excluding G) then I can transfer 9 times back into the G fund. Thats 9 IFT's. plus 3 I get to the other funds? And TSP is going to build in software that flags my account if I am transferring to any other fund other than G. Come on! If that is the case and they are "making software corrections" this has computer glitch/meltdown all over it. People that have no idea what kind of changes are being made will soon find out because the WHOLE system will haywire.
Theoretically, according to the new rules, we can make a transfer everyday if weu are in the stock / bond funds and want to move into the G fund.

Monday 100% C
Tuesday 99% C / 1% G,
Wednesday 95% C / 5% G
Thursday 90% C, 10% G,
Friday 80% C to 20% G,
Monday 75% C, 25% G,
etc....

So, we can dollar cost average out of stocks, but not into stocks. :rolleyes:

There is a compromise out there somewhere but they don't seem to want to negotiate, even though they have not put much time and effort into a reasonable solution.

[Megansh]

Interfund transfer friends..... after reading all of the TSP Board's propoganda..they continually cite the IFT's in and out of the "I" Fund as 88% of the increase of costs from 2006 on associated with their perceived IFT problems..... I wrote my senator and told them to look into this if only the "I" Fund is the culprit then change that IFT rules ONLY on the "I" fund and leave the G, F, C, S Funds alone .. MIke in New Hampshire

[TonyMan]

When they stop spending huge amounts of money to "rebalance" the L Funds daily, then I'll stop "rebalancing" my account as I see fit. I wish everyone here would start refering to inter fund transfers as rebalancing their account. We move our money only a fraction of the amount being moved daily in the L funds. Everything is in the label they slap on our IFT. By labeling it "Day Trading", which it is not, they win with the masses. I rebalanced my account to 100% G Fund last Tuesday and haven't touched it since. I've saved them a huge amount of money this week, by not rebalancing my account daily as they have done with the L funds. ;)

TonyMan

[nnuut]

Theoretically, according to the new rules, we can make a transfer everyday if weu are in the stock / bond funds and want to move into the G fund.

Monday 100% C
Tuesday 99% C / 1% G,
Wednesday 95% C / 5% G
Thursday 90% C, 10% G,
Friday 80% C to 20% G,
Monday 75% C, 25% G,
etc....

So, we can dollar cost average out of stocks, but not into stocks. :rolleyes:

There is a compromise out there somewhere but they don't seem to want to negotiate, even though they have not put much time and effort into a reasonable solution.

So if you only move to the "G" or after your 1st IFT you only transfer to the "G", there is NO limit.
From TSP site:
Q2. What are the new restrictions on interfund transfers? http://tsp.gov/resources/top.gif (http://tsp.gov/faq/faq14.html#top)
The Thrift Savings Plan will implement restrictions on the number of interfund transfers a participant can make per month in order to curb frequent trading and its associated costs to TSP participants. However, the TSP does want to provide the opportunity for participants to rebalance their accounts and to permit unrestricted access to the Government
Securities Investment (G) Fund. Accordingly, the restrictions would be as follows:
Participants can make two (2) interfund transfers per calendar month. After that, they may only move money from the Fixed Income Index Investment (F) Fund, the Common Stock Index Investment (C) Fund, the Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment (S) Fund, the International Stock Index Investment (I) Fund, and the L Funds to the G Fund.

We will count the interfund transfer based on its process date, not the date the interfund transfer was requested.


If your first or second interfund transfer in a month moves money only to the G Fund, it still counts toward your two (2) interfund transfers per month limit.:cool:

[NyteTracker]

When they stop spending huge amounts of money to "rebalance" the L Funds daily, then I'll stop "rebalancing" my account as I see fit. I wish everyone here would start refering to inter fund transfers as rebalancing their account. We move our money only a fraction of the amount being moved daily in the L funds. Everything is in the label they slap on our IFT. By labeling it "Day Trading", which it is not, they win with the masses. I rebalanced my account to 100% G Fund last Tuesday and haven't touched it since. I've saved them a huge amount of money this week, by not rebalancing my account daily as they have done with the L funds. ;)SPOT ON!!! :rolleyes:

[Alamo]

People,
All I read on this thread are complaints! Quote:
"(TSP) This is a retirement fund, not a day-trading account," Brown (Richard Brown, vice chairman of the thrift advisory council) said. "The goal here is what is for the greater good of all, not for the greater good of a few."

Keep it simple, if you want to play foolishly with your retirement money then start an account outside TSP and day trade away... I resent the actions of a few costing me gains. I see few making any better gains by making numerous IFTs. By the way, if you folks really knew how to invest, you'd be working up on Wall Street and not on the Federal dole.

[Show-me]

Nice to have you on the message board. Welcome.

[weatherweenie]

People,
All I read on this thread are complaints! Quote:
"(TSP) This is a retirement fund, not a day-trading account," Brown (Richard Brown, vice chairman of the thrift advisory council) said. "The goal here is what is for the greater good of all, not for the greater good of a few."

Keep it simple, if you want to play foolishly with your retirement money then start an account outside TSP and day trade away... I resent the actions of a few costing me gains. I see few making any better gains by making numerous IFTs. By the way, if you folks really knew how to invest, you'd be working up on Wall Street and not on the Federal dole.

The TSP board is the one that gave participants the ability to make once daily IFT's. By the way that's not day trading.

So, if the TSP board is the one that provided participants that ability, what exactly is the problem?

[camper65]

People,
All I read on this thread are complaints! Quote:
"(TSP) This is a retirement fund, not a day-trading account," Brown (Richard Brown, vice chairman of the thrift advisory council) said. "The goal here is what is for the greater good of all, not for the greater good of a few."

Keep it simple, if you want to play foolishly with your retirement money then start an account outside TSP and day trade away... I resent the actions of a few costing me gains. I see few making any better gains by making numerous IFTs. By the way, if you folks really knew how to invest, you'd be working up on Wall Street and not on the Federal dole.

Next time an air craft smashes into a building, or trains blow up, or the jobs report is going to be in the toilet, (and you know it), ---and--- you have already used your 2 IFT's, you'll be glad to have the option of a third IFT I think!

[BlueMax]

People,
All I read on this thread are complaints! Quote:
"(TSP) This is a retirement fund, not a day-trading account," Brown (Richard Brown, vice chairman of the thrift advisory council) said. "The goal here is what is for the greater good of all, not for the greater good of a few."

Keep it simple, if you want to play foolishly with your retirement money then start an account outside TSP and day trade away... I resent the actions of a few costing me gains. I see few making any better gains by making numerous IFTs. By the way, if you folks really knew how to invest, you'd be working up on Wall Street and not on the Federal dole.

Alamo,

I think you bought into TSP propaganda that is just not true. Those of us on this site have common concerns and sometimes venting helps us feel better. You are certainly welcome to visit or not. We DO value new opinions.

[350zCommTech]

People,
All I read on this thread are complaints! Quote:
"(TSP) This is a retirement fund, not a day-trading account," Brown (Richard Brown, vice chairman of the thrift advisory council) said. "The goal here is what is for the greater good of all, not for the greater good of a few."

Keep it simple, if you want to play foolishly with your retirement money then start an account outside TSP and day trade away... I resent the actions of a few costing me gains. I see few making any better gains by making numerous IFTs. By the way, if you folks really knew how to invest, you'd be working up on Wall Street and not on the Federal dole.

The cost of trading has gone up to about $80 per year, per person. That's like losing 1 penny a share in the F fund. This is a problem for you? Are you kidding me? In January, this was one day where the I fund lost 4%. For a 100k account, that would have been a $4000 lost, in one day.

[qibovin]

People,
All I read on this thread are complaints! Quote:
"(TSP) This is a retirement fund, not a day-trading account," Brown (Richard Brown, vice chairman of the thrift advisory council) said. "The goal here is what is for the greater good of all, not for the greater good of a few."

Keep it simple, if you want to play foolishly with your retirement money then start an account outside TSP and day trade away... I resent the actions of a few costing me gains. I see few making any better gains by making numerous IFTs. By the way, if you folks really knew how to invest, you'd be working up on Wall Street and not on the Federal dole.Desparado, is that you? Have you reincarnated?

[ThirdWorldChild]

Although this is my first posting, I have been visiting TSPTalk.com for 6 months. As a result of the TSPTalk posts and wealth of information I was able to make intelligent decisions regarding my account and effective use of IFTs. I’m deeply thankful for the posts, insights, discussions, intra day quotes and external links. The site is truly lives up to its mission.

I must respond to the recent post from those who feel the activities of TSPtalk participates are detrimental to all TSP funds holders. It is…very simply..not true. Rather those who are concerned with proposed restrictions in our ability to effective manage OUR accounts through intelligent timing of IFTs are beneficial to ALL TSP account holders. These folks have certainly contributed to my goals of retiring early with no dependence on social welfare or extended government service.

We live, as do all generations, in a period of high volatility. It is through a collaborative mission driven site like TSPTalk that one can financially and socially prosper during these times. We have all choices…I’ve chosen to learn how to manage my TSP account and this site has been an effective teacher….

My account +10.83%
TSP 2020 -3.06%

[weatherweenie]

Although this is my first posting, I have been visiting TSPTalk.com for 6 months. As a result of the TSPTalk posts and wealth of information I was able to make intelligent decisions regarding my account and effective use of IFTs. I’m deeply thankful for the posts, insights, discussions, intra day quotes and external links. The site is truly lives up to its mission.

I must respond to the recent post from those who feel the activities of TSPtalk participates are detrimental to all TSP funds holders. It is…very simply..not true. Rather those who are concerned with proposed restrictions in our ability to effective manage OUR accounts through intelligent timing of IFTs are beneficial to ALL TSP account holders. These folks have certainly contributed to my goals of retiring early with no dependence on social welfare or extended government service.

We live, as do all generations, in a period of high volatility. It is through a collaborative mission driven site like TSPTalk that one can financially and socially prosper during these times. We have all choices…I’ve chosen to learn how to manage my TSP account and this site has been an effective teacher….

My account +10.83%
TSP 2020 -3.06%

Welcome aboard!

I never have understood all the negativity over frequent IFT's. It's like they think we're doing something illegal.

[FundSurfer]

I resent the actions of a few costing me gains.

Show us the losses. Looks like the frequent traders made you money last year.

[tsptalk]

Welcome ThirdWorldChild and Alamo! Thanks for sharing your opinions.

[FundSurfer]

In my opinion, the hardest part about this fight is language. Getting people to understand what is going on. I've explained it to a couple of my officemates and their eyes glaze over and they just stick to a pat answer of they don't think that frequent trading (IFT, rebalancing, fund swapping) should be allowed because it cost them money. They (the majority of federal employees) don't really want to think about it. It is difficult to understand the details of both sides of the arguement. Unfortunitely, I get the same impression from the ETAC. I don't think they understand it.

I'll take your suggestion to heart and start calling it frequent transfers.

[ou81200]

Got this from comcast internet---

By Associated Press
2/20/08 10:40 AM

WASHINGTON- The Supreme Court says individual participants in the most common type of retirement plan can sue under a pension protection law to recover their losses.

In a unanimous

[ou81200]

Got this from comcast internet---

By Associated Press
2/20/08 10:40 AM

WASHINGTON- The Supreme Court says individual participants in the most common type of retirement plan can sue under a pension protection law to recover their losses.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices are allowing participants in 401(k) retirement plans to sue. The decision has implications for 50 million workers with $2.7 trillion invested in such plans.

James LaRue of Southlake , Texas, says the value of his stock market holdings has plunged $ 150,000 when administrators at his 401(k) retirement plan failed to follow his instructions to switch to safer investments.

Perhaps the folks at TSP should know about this before trying to impliment their outragous plan.

Any input???

[ou81200]

anidoc---

I firmly belive that TSP will eventually have to explain their expendatures. Right now, they are blaming the 3000. But common sense dictates that it's the L-funds that's the culprit. I don't know what oversight commitee governs TSP ( there are alot more people more knowledgable on this board than I about this), but they will have some explaining to do. I am truly grateful for the overwhelming response of everyone in this board on such matters. I think they underestimated the response and intellegence from this board and now they are being careful as to their next move. That's why everybody who is still following their style of transfering funds still have access to manipulate their account via internet :). Also reasons like what I posted earlier have got to play a role.

IMO---It would be in their best interest to come up with a compromise.

[DrFaustus]

Hey, I have a question that the TSP Board should find it difficult to answer. If the TSP is a savings plan ... why are accounts allowed to lose money? That's the strangest savings plan I ever heard of ...

[tsptalk]

Hey, I have a question that the TSP Board should find it difficult to answer. If the TSP is a savings plan ... why are accounts allowed to lose money? That's the strangest savings plan I ever heard of ...
Good point. Buying and holding is just one way to save. Why should they impose on anyone, a particular way to save / invest? They don't educate us (and I don't think they should) so how can they say, "do it this way?" Who says that's the right way?

[ou81200]

Bottom Line---

They're backstrokin- plain & simple. If 3000 TSP members have that big of an impact on the funds as they claim. Imagine those same members suing TSP for losses because they were unable to transfer to the safety of the G - fund.

I know someone has probably allready mentioned this, but I want to make sure it's still fresh on their minds.

[alevin]

Bottom Line---

They're backstrokin- plain & simple. If 3000 TSP members have that big of an impact on the funds as they claim. Imagine those same members suing TSP for losses because they were unable to transfer to the safety of the G - fund.

I may be out to lunch here, but I think that's why they've been saying we'd still be allowed "unlimited" transfers back to G after the first 2 moves.:notrust:

[alevin]

Bottom Line---

They're backstrokin- plain & simple. If 3000 TSP members have that big of an impact on the funds as they claim. Imagine those same members suing TSP for losses because they were unable to transfer to the safety of the G - fund.

I may be out to lunch here, but I think that's why they've been saying we'd still be allowed "unlimited" transfers back to G after the first 2 moves.:notrust:

:blink:Well, looks like I'm going to have THOSE words for lunch! :sick: My logic is too logical for them, AND my comprehension of English grammar and definitions is apparently better than theirs too! "unlimited" MEANS unlimited!, NOT "one" move total back to F/G as a 3d-last move for the month.

NOW I'd say there are grounds for class action regarding abdication of fiduciary responsibility-for those that have gotten nailed for 2 moves into/among FCSI, followed by 2 subsequent cumulative (incremental) moves back to F/G. My overly cautious and skeptical nature didn't want to believe they as professionals were THAT bad at explaining where the line gets drawn on #transfers back to F/G, but apparently they are. What is so bad about incremental transfers back to G in a month until you're all the way back out???! Good grief. If a person only moves 20% back into G on the 2d move, then they are stuck the rest of the month in FCSI with 80% of their $. How is that an "unlimited" ability to transfer back to G?????? THAT's going into my personal commentary to the FR. As is the need for truly unlimited ability to move incrementally back to G in a month, until all the way back out if that is what is needed for CP. A lot can happen in a day, much less 3 weeks.

You know, Demonstrated skill in competency of written communications should be a selection criteria for the Board members-it's typically a selection criterion for virtually any professional position in my outfit. I wonder if it was for any of them. Couldn't prove it by me at this point. Disgusted rant done.:mad: Sign me-Disgusted with Incompetent FRTIB "communicators"

[Megansh]

Looked this decision up and went to the Employees Retirement Security Investment Act and any govermental agency with a retirement plan is not covered under this act....so I don't know if the Supreme court ruling affects us .. Mike in NH

[BIGBULLY]

:blink:Well, looks like I'm going to have THOSE words for lunch! :sick: My logic is too logical for them, AND my comprehension of English grammar and definitions is apparently better than theirs too! "unlimited" MEANS unlimited!, NOT "one" move total back to F/G as a 3d-last move for the month.

NOW I'd say there are grounds for class action regarding abdication of fiduciary responsibility-for those that have gotten nailed for 2 moves into/among FCSI, followed by 2 subsequent cumulative (incremental) moves back to F/G. My overly cautious and skeptical nature didn't want to believe they as professionals were THAT bad at explaining where the line gets drawn on #transfers back to F/G, but apparently they are. What is so bad about incremental transfers back to G in a month until you're all the way back out???! Good grief. If a person only moves 20% back into G on the 2d move, then they are stuck the rest of the month in FCSI with 80% of their $. How is that an "unlimited" ability to transfer back to G?????? THAT's going into my personal commentary to the FR. As is the need for truly unlimited ability to move incrementally back to G in a month, until all the way back out if that is what is needed for CP. A lot can happen in a day, much less 3 weeks.

You know, Demonstrated skill in competency of written communications should be a selection criteria for the Board members-it's typically a selection criterion for virtually any professional position in my outfit. I wonder if it was for any of them. Couldn't prove it by me at this point. Disgusted rant done.:mad: Sign me-Disgusted with Incompetent FRTIB "communicators"

Hey there Alevin,

When I read that about "unlimited transfers" I was bloody scratch'in my head. I thought "UNLIMITED?", WHAT!!???? Is this some sort of joke!!!?? Sounds like a very bad sales pitch!! What a consolation they are making - so generous they are??? My opinion is that this is simply Socialistic (with a capital "S"). Given the opportunity to respond in writing is just a big smoke screen. The decision has been made and will be forced upon us. Unbelievable how Socialism has now shown it ugly head even here in our nation's free enterprise capitalistic market. They don't even entertain the idea of offering frequent "transfers" within a fee structure like typical brokerage firms. I, like many others, will take what contributions beyond the matching and make money elsewhere. - BIGBULLY

[hessian]

My advice-
Sue the bastards.


http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41vL8msxOtL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_OU01_AA240_SH20_.jpg

Every one of the ETAC members, because they had it within their power to say no when they were asked, and they didn't. ETAC members are not covered by the law which protect Board members.

Let the federal court system decide whether or not they are culpable. Can you imagin each ETAC member having to expend thousands for their own defense? Remember, the law does NOT allow the TSP to spend any money to help defend them, nor are they covered by immunity, as they are not performing in those roles as federal employees.

A few hundred of those lawsuits ought to get their attention.

File.

YES! -BRING ON OUR LAWYERS! -WE NEED TO DO IT NOW!!!

AND, IMO, we need to get as many of the "Retirement Organizations" behind us as we can - backing this - because this does directly harm retirees (as well active employees wanting to retire).

Retirement Organizations have tremendous Congressional lobby, clout, money, & especially legal staff resources!!

Baby-boomers now retiring cannot rely just on Social Security!
Folks retiring need help, not walls thrown in our path!!

(I did fax my comments on the FR Notice to FRTIB. -FWIW.)

[Asylum]

i currently put 15% of my pre-tax income into the TSP but now I think I will go back to the minimum needed to get matching funds and open a separate account.

If the L funds reallocate funds daily then we should be able to do the same thing.

[James48843]

Since I only moved twice in the month of December, I am not one of the unlucky ones to receive a letter or a certified letter.

If I was, I would be on the phone to the lawyers already.

The list of defendents would be found under my signature below, titled "ETAC".

[Braveheart]

Braveheart (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/member.php?u=4317)
TSP Talker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 137



http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/images/icons/icon1.gif Hillary Clinton wants a TSP Account Plan Congress Currently Utilize MUST READ
Key Components of Hillary Clinton’s American Retirement Accounts Plan MEMBERS OF CONGRESS CURRENTLY UTILIZE THE TSP !!!!!!!

Here is Link - http://benefitslink.com/pr/detail.php?id=41211
Matching Tax Cuts to Help Middle Class and Working Families Save: This new proposal will provide a matching refundable tax credit—dollar-for-dollar—for the first $1,000 of savings done by every married couple making up to $60,000. The plan will provide a 50% match on the first $1000 of savings for every couple making between $60,000 and $100,000, which will be phased out after that. This matching tax credit will be available to all Americans in existing 401(k) type accounts as well as the new American Retirement Accounts. That means tens of millions of middle-class families will get matching tax cuts of up to $500 and $1000 to help them build a nest egg for retirement.A New “American Retirement Account”: Like Hillary’s approach to health care, her American Retirement Account plan will build off the existing employer-based retirement savings system. Those who like their current retirement savings accounts can keep them —the only change is that they may be eligible for generous new matching tax credits. For those who want a new choice, Senator Clinton will let all middle class Americans open a new American Retirement Account. These accounts will allow individuals to contribute up to $5,000 per year on a tax-deferred basis. The first $1000 contributed into the accounts will be eligible for the new 1-to-1 and 50% government matches. In addition, the new American Retirement Accounts will:
Offer secure, diversified investment options: Individuals will have the choice to set-up their accounts with any private provider that offers diversified investment options and that includes as a default option, a passively managed lifecycle-type fund. Individuals will also have a fall-back option of setting up accounts through a similar system to the one that Members of Congress currently utilize.
Help Build Wealth and Provide a Cushion During Economic Downturns: The new American Retirement Accounts would, like existing IRAs, limit penalty-free withdrawals to major life investments—buying a home, paying for higher education, and retirement. But in light of the growing economic uncertainty facing American families, workers will also be able to withdraw 10-15% of the savings from their American Retirement Accounts to help tide them through periods of extended unemployment. Individuals would also have the option of taking out loans from their American Retirement Accounts in limited circumstances.
Provide the First Fully Portable Matching Account: The American Retirement Account will be the first account that provides a secure, diversified opportunity to get generous matching financial incentives for saving regardless of whether you are working for a firm that provides an employer match or traditional 401(k). This is particularly important to middle class workers who start their own businesses, take time off to care for a child or relative, or work independently or part-time. Hilary does not believe that we should deny matching retirement incentives to these workers and parents simply because they are outside the employer-sponsored system. Rather than having to rely on full-time jobs with certain employers, these Americans will continue to receive a strong financial incentive to build wealth throughout their lives.
New Choices Without New Bureaucracy: American Retirement Accounts will be established without any new government bureaucracy, by creating competition in the private sector to provide plans that are both secure and marketable. Individuals will get to choose how they want to set up their American Retirement Accounts. They can set them up with private providers who offer diversified investment options with a default passively managed lifecycle-type option and low administrative costs. Or they will have an option of opening an American Retirement Account through a publicly managed clearinghouse similar to the Thrift Savings Plan which Members of Congress can currently utilize. Investments in the accounts opened through this public clearinghouse would be held and managed by private financial institutions, who to the greatest extent possible would manage administrative and transactional support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Braveheart http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?p=155326#post155326)
Well One would think Congress would step up here since this has an impact on them. I wonder if they got a letter. They make big $$ so the target group would be those who have been in Congress for 15 years + but is that a conflict of interest and the reason why they have not stepped up.

It is clear Hillary Clinton would be on our side in this. She has the power and connections to get people moving Obama forget it and McCain probably doesn't know what it is.

I am sending her a message and so should you. I used workers concerns but Military & Discrimination are the other choices. She has Millions of Government Workers and their families, relatives and friends that need her to stop this now in PUBLIC and tell those at the TSP the investigation is on !!!!!!!!! Here is her link -

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/?30385f40

Not a single reply :suspicious: - this is amazing you want a voice you have it. You want the links you've got them. You think anything is going change without someone like this on our side you will regret this last chance to do something about. Talk is cheap action is louder than words. I have taken action and for anyone interest President Bill Clinton signed into Law that the Military be included into the TSP. So I can read post after post about outrage and we're going to do this bla bla bla THIS WILL STOP IN IT'S TRACTS WITH YOU SENDING THE MESSAGES TO HER. Don't do it and don't complain in May when you have 2 trades per month.
Last edited by Braveheart : Today at 09:59 PM. Reason: add