Hello! I was wondering how I might set-up the following scenario.

We lend privately to real estate investors using promissory notes.

We receive a high rate of interest income. I take this income and deposit it into our RRSPs.

Thanks!

Hello, I'm trying to figure out why deposits in my ACCOUNT TFSA TFSA_Client account are higher than what I'm depositing in them? The yearly deposit should be $4920 per year but it's closer to $8000 per year (my wife's TFSA deposits are fine).

Hi, my CCPC has amounts invested with no additional income. How to I reflect a 5% growth in the CCPC investment factoring in the dividend payments. I am already depleting the investment pool via dividends as personal income.

What operating system does this work on? Windows? Apple? Linux? Android? and what versions? I can't find any info on hardware and software requirements on your site. Thanks.

I'm wondering if you might have a demo account available that could be used to show friends MRA?

Will there be an email reminder sent when the annual renewal fee is due? Thanks

Hi. I just tried using MR again after many months. It won't let me enter different inflation rates for future years, it just allows one entry with no end date. I was able to successfully enter different prime rates for future years.

Both my partner and I have RRSP contribution room. I can't seem to figure out whether TIME MACHINE has made the contribution. Where does it show the contribution? Thanks

In the report for columns Account RRSP Balance, Deposit, Growth, I see numbers like this: $205,012.33 -$22,333.10 $10,623.04 $169,094.54 -$37,927.71 $6,029.77 ---- I assume the 2nd row Balance would be $205,012.33 -$22,333.10 + $10,623.04 =$193302.27 But I see $169,094.54 How do you get that number? I see this in all reports I generated. thanks for your help

I must be entering my GIC's incorrectly as it is throwing off my reports? First I don't see an option for GIC only fixed which shows up as bonds. Second I have not checked off the box to repurchase yet the model shows I am buying the GIC again in 2023? I have GIC listed as lowest priority also. I am finding the model is pulling from my spouse's RRSP in 2023 and therefore setting us up for a large tax bill. Can you let me know if it the addition of the GIC's on my last run that is causing this issue and if so how do I enter them properly?

LOL! If it makes you feel any better, the program just tacks on the climate incentive to reduce the final tax bill, it’s not part of the calculation. Given its uncertain future, it’s not indexed (that’s what I do to uncertain credits). So to negate it, just add a non-indexed expense of $490.00.

I didn’t think about the Climate Action Incentive payment.  I suppose I should have read the manual a little more thoroughly before submitting a comment.  But for me this raises a follow-up question.  Should the CAI payment be included in the tax calculation?  My opinion here leans towards no.  I’ll try to explain why. 
The first reason is that I consider the CAI payment to be short lived, at least relative to a 20 to 40 year financial projection.   This is just a guess, of course, because it’s impossible to predict what the existing government will do in the future, let alone trying to predict what a different federal government might do, or even a provincial government trying to distance itself from Ottawa.  If we have a rightward shift in the federal government, the Incentive might be eliminated along with the carbon tax itself.  If we stay the course or veer left, the payment will likely be eliminated or reduced over time without an associated change in carbon pricing.  Either way, I think the incentive is short lived.   I get that I’m attempting to predict the future and doing so is not a sound basis for a future-looking software algorithm.  But, when I compare the known degree of near-term tax error with the CAI payment NOT included versus the probable degree of long-term tax error with the CAI payment included, I tend to favour the former.
The second reason is that I don’t really consider the CAI payment to be a true tax component.  It’s included in the tax schedule and it is deducted from the tax owing.  But in my mind, it’s there only as a matter of government convenience, or as a means to eliminate a separate submission and payment process.  Convenience aside, IMO, the “correct” tax amount is the tax without the CAI payment deducted.
The question, then, is: How would I propose the CAI payment be included in the projection?  I'd suggest that it should simply be deducted from expenses.  The climate tax itself is essentially a consumption tax, so in my mind the refund that offsets the consumption should occur on the “consumption” side (i.e., expenses).  I’m not suggesting that the MRA should reduce expenses by the CAI payment in its calculation.  I think that would cause a lot of confusion in the numbers.  I think a better solution is for the user to deduct the CAI payment from expenses before he/she/they enters expenses into the app, assuming he/she/they believes the amount of the incentive is meaningful with respect to total expenses.  
To make a long story short, if that’s still possible, can I add to the wish list with a suggestion that a tick-box option be given to the user to defeat the CAI payment?  While this adds to the programming burden, it allows people like me to opt out.   Failing that, my suggestion would be for the core tax calculation to not include the payment and it be left to the user to integrate it into the expenses if it’s important.  My rationale is that I’m just not convinced that including the payment over the long term offers a better degree of projection accuracy than NOT including it.
Just my 2 cents.

(After composing this e-mail I reflected on it a bit.  How important is this, really.  A legitimate reply might be, "What's all the fuss about?  It's only a few hundred dollars and likely just noise in the overall calculation."  True that.)

I short-changed the Basic Tax Calculator's Alberta tax a wee bit. It calculates close to $575. But that's still substantially less than the $2056 that I think it should be. What am I missing?

So I solved the problem by using the retained earnings in the TIME MACHINE preflight, and getting rid of the revenue completely for 2023. This seemed to fix the salary payout and also doesn't affect the total networth.

The issue I am having is the error message I am getting saying the CCPC cannot pay out a salary. I trouble shot a bit and when I add in another corporate account with a large balance it will no longer give me the error and everything works normally but obviously this throws off our net worth calculations. Is this an error? Since I have a revenue more than large enough to cover the salary but it seems to only be willing to pay a salary if there is enough money in the corporate account. Reading the PDF I understood that it should use the revenue first and THEN the account to cover the salary. Thank you.

Great feedback and I agree with being careful of over simplification. This being a US person and treatment would have different capital gain and dividend tax treatments. 

I believe a Canadian perspective, with Canadian historical data, communicating to people what they should realistically expect for returns could be very helpful with their long term planning. The information may also increase the chances of using the Money Ready model which will give a much more accurate result. 

Your call on writing an article but hopefully at least this article has provided something to consider? 

Great article to show historical returns when you consider the tax implications on three types of investment accounts. Good thing money ready takes taxes and inflation into account. 

Thought you might find this interesting but not surprising and could possibly be used in your communication? 

https://bestinterest.blog/how-do-taxes-affect-stock-returns/

For “Gross Income” and “Net Income”, it would be nice to include the account withdrawals.  To me, It would make more sense if “Gross Income” included all gross income  and “Net Income” is the amount after taxes. Since my total spending for 2024 is forecasted to be net $75,620.66 (taxes are omitted), and having a “Net Income” of $79,689.26 makes it much easier to comprehend.  What do you think? My hang-up was having the report state my “NET INCOME” was $47,937.76 but my “TOTAL SPENDING” is $87,798.55.

I discovered that some column headers in the TM export file were changed. Just wondering why these were changed and if more are forthcoming?  I transform your export files (TM and Investments) using Power Query and whenever a column header changes, it blows up the transform.  It's all fixable, but I wasn't expecting these changes.

I'm also wondering whether it was just the column titles that changed or if the data in any of the affected columns changed, too?

May I request that changes to the export files be communicated when they happen so that I know what is changing?  Thanks. 

I entered $100000 as an automatic saving from “other” in 2023. It goes to a non-registered account. In Time Machine, it shows up in 2023 as a deposit of $37,283.72. The total for all my account deposits in 2023 is $57,575.32, so it’s not using priorities to reallocate the deposit. What’s happening to the $100,000 deposit?