Thread: TSP Transfer Fees and/or Transaction Limit Discussion

Sounds good.

Also, let's make sure we request email confirmations when making IFTs. Having hard copy mailed each time probably ends up costing around a buck each time e.g., materails, postage and handling, etc.

If you have never done it or don't know that you can, just type in your preference of email address in the space provided on the page you enter your IFT on (usually just above and before the spaces where you enter your transfer allocations).

Let's all work together to save trees and expenses!

If you want a hard copy, print the confirmation on your own when it arrives as an email, or copy the screen confirmation(ctrl + PrtScn) and paste it into a document.

Good luck!

Excellent recommendation.

I have had mine on email returns and had forgotten that this was a request that you needed to make.

Originally Posted by SkyPilot

It has not been demonstrated that IFTs incur any appreciable cost, and certainly would cost no more than the daily rebalancing of the L funds.

If you are asking for support or a demonstration for the above statement, then you might want to be able to prove the lower statement with a link to a report as support.

Originally Posted by SkyPilot

The cost for management of TSP are lower than any other similar plan, and the cost continues to decline.

Which maybe there is somewhere and it is common knowledge on Mr. Causey's discussion boards but I don't know since I am knew to all this discussion. So if there is, could you point me to this so I could read it? I would love to write an email too and your letter is a good model for all of us to write our own.

Email has been sent to Causey.

CB

I also sent Mike an email!

Thanks SkyPilot

Lobo

THANKS!

Email sent.

I basically used yours and added this sentence to the end of the first paragraph...which anyone here is welcome to use.

Rather than use the L funds, I prefer to create my own "fund" and rebalance as I choose, rather than daily as the L funds do.

Sent a copy. Thanks for taking the time to write a letter up.

Originally Posted by SkyPilot

Let's all send Mr. Causey a note regarding his article supporting interfund transfer fees.

mcausey@federalnewsradio.com

Here is one suggestion for text: Add, modify or compose your own.

Dear Mr. Causey,

I am opposed to fees for Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) interfund transfers (IFTs). It has not been demonstrated that IFTs incur any appreciable cost, and certainly would cost no more than the daily rebalancing of the L funds.


The cost for management of TSP are lower than any other similar plan, and the cost continues to decline. An imposition of fees just for the purposes of having fees without any other justification would certainly be in conflict with the purposes of providing all federal employees the most flexible options at the lowest cost possible.

Please consider these issues when discussing the plan, and refrain from suggesting that changes be implemented for the sole purpose of change itself, or to manage or modify the independence and autonomy of the Thrift Savings Plan participant.It is my belief that I can manage my finances better than a bureaucracy when given the tools and opportunity.


Respectfully submitted,

Recently, there has been a lot of talk about limiting or charging fees for IFT in the TSP. This kind of thinking is inappropriate on several levels, yet it seems to be gathering steam and moving forward. To make matters worse, Mike Causey indicated in a radio broadcast that 4 out of 5 TSP participants favor either limiting the number of trades or charging a fee for each IFT. This would be devastating to us TSPtalk members.

There have been some discussions on Ebbnflow's tread about fees for IFTs, and Truehonest suggested that we e-mail Causey and tell him our feelings as they represent the feelings of the vast majority of TSP participants. I did just that. I sent an e-mail to Mike Causey last night indicating my disagreement with his statistics. I told him that he needed to get out of the ivory tower of the beltway and find out what the majority of the TSP participants wanted. I received an immediate response indicating that those statistics are what he received from the e-mails he had received. He said that he appreciated my opinion and would use my e-mail in his broadcast. That suggests that Mike seems to be willing to tell "the rest of the story" if we just give it to him. So we all need to e-mail Mike, and whoever else will listen (including our congressmen), to let them know how we feel about the fees for trade idea.

In order that we might have a united front in our e-mail efforts, I started this tread to compile a list of the reasons why limiting or charging fees for IFT is a bad idea, so those ideas can be included in every e-mail.

Listed below are some of the reason that come to mind right away, and I would like everyone to add to it so we can have a comprehensive list of the reason that this is a bad idea.

1. Fees for IFTs goes against the Feds original premise and motivation for establishing the TSP to begin with. The Fed have spent a lot of money trying to get government employees and military personnel to contribute to the TSP as a means of improving their retirement income so they won't become a burden on the government resources after retirement. Fees for trades would discourage the use of the TSP rather than encouraging individuals to participate in it.

2. The motivation behind TSP participation is to save our current income for our future retirement so we won't become a burden on the government when we retire. The motivation of the private sector is profit motivated so investors can make more money now to purchase new cars, boats, houses, etc. Most private sector stock market investments are not for retirement purposes where that income acquired is used for retirement.

3. The Feds established the 'L' funds as part of the TSP program, which makes no fee trades every day to meet the needs of those participating in that fund. Why should be be penalized by paying a fee just because we choose to make our own trades rather than having a committee in Wash D.C. do it. Changes are made every day to the TSP without a fee associated with it, i.e. payroll deductions to purchase fund shares, 'L' fund transfers, TSP loans, money taken out of the TSP as income by individuals, etc.

4. Trades or IFTs in the TSP are far less expensive than in the private sector. In fact, TSP IFTs are the most efficient in the industry.

5. There are less than 1% of the TSP participants that perform more than a dozen trades a year. Most just buy and hold. The cost of administering the fee for trade for the few who perform frequent trades would be more costly than the revenue received.

6. In the private sector, where fees for trades is the norm, buyer and sellers get professional advice before making trades, which is the primary cost of the trade. And they are able to trade immediately rather than having to wait almost 24 hours before their trades are effective.

7. If the Feds start charging for IFTs then any funds changes, which includes purchases, withdrawals, and well as IFTs, should require a fee, which would be a nightmare.

These are just a few of the ideas I have on the top of my head. Please help us all out and add to the list , or correct any obvious errors I have made (I tend to ever-exaggerate at times).

Thanks for your help!

It seems that we both had the same idea here. I just started a thread on Fees for Trades (IFT) also today. Spaf suggested I do it based on my input in ebbnflows tread yesterday. Maybe we can join the two together, but I don't know how to do that. Anyway, check out my thread. I am starting a list of reasons why the Feds should not create fees for IFTs. I also sent Causey an e-mail and he responded favorably in a return e-mail.

Originally Posted by crhuss

It seems that we both had the same idea here. I just started a thread on Fees for Trades (IFT) also today. Spaf suggested I do it based on my input in ebbnflows tread yesterday. Maybe we can join the two together, but I don't know how to do that. Anyway, check out my thread. I am starting a list of reasons why the Feds should not create fees for IFTs. I also sent Causey an e-mail and he responded favorably in a return e-mail.

crhuss,

Your letter was way, way better than mine!
Great points and sound logic.