Latest news with #finances
UAE Moments
6 hours ago
- Business
- UAE Moments
♋ Cancer Daily Horoscope for July 30, 2025
Today favors open-hearted conversations. Whether you're in a relationship or still figuring things out with someone, vulnerability becomes your strength. It's not about being overly emotional—it's about showing your truth. If you're single, someone may admire your sincerity more than you think. Finance: Mind the Details You're usually cautious with money, but today, a minor detail or miscommunication could affect your finances. Double-check numbers, receipts, or emails before confirming anything. However, there's potential for a delayed reward from a past effort—maybe a refund, commission, or someone finally paying back a debt. Your consistency is being noticed—even if people don't say it out loud. You might feel a little underappreciated, but don't let that discourage you. An email, update, or compliment from someone higher up could shift your energy. Keep delivering quality over quantity. Health: Emotions Need Space Too You're carrying a lot mentally. It may not show on the outside, but today, your body might tell you it's time to slow down. Gentle movement, a stretch, or even a short walk will help release tension and bring clarity. Avoid overindulging in comfort food—it won't fix the root cause. Extra Insight: Trust the Process Even if you're unsure of the path, the universe is laying bricks behind the scenes. Stay emotionally present.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Job loss and high costs push Toronto couple to consider move to Vietnam but they worry about CPP, OAS, taxes
James,* 72, and Nguyen,* 46, have been married seven years and, until recently, were worry-free with respect to finances, even with the high cost of living in Toronto. That changed when the federal government made steep cuts in the number of foreign study permits. Nguyen, a college lecturer, lost her job and $60,000 annual income. Now, the couple is contemplating whether they should move to Nguyen's native Vietnam, where they first met and where they believe they can comfortably live on James' retirement savings and pensions. A do-it-yourself investor, James has saved $400,000, including $200,000 in high growth stocks, $140,000 of which is equally held in tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs) and registered retirement income funds (RRIFs). He also holds $60,000 in an investment trading account and $200,000 in an employer retirement fund managed by the defined contribution pension plan administrators, which generally follows the S&P 500. Nguyen has about $40,000 in a savings account. 'We could buy a lovely two-bedroom condo in Ho Chi Minh City for $160,000 to $180,000,' said James. Still, their preference is to stay in Toronto – but only if their savings will continue to grow and provide Nguyen a comfortable lifestyle after James dies. Can James and Nguyen afford to stay in Toronto, where James has lived and worked for 51 years? If not, and they do move to Vietnam, what will happen to James' Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and Old Age Security (OAS) benefits and employer pension? Will he face non-resident withholding taxes on CPP and OAS? And what could this cost? Will he have to pay any Canadian income tax in Vietnam? James' current monthly income is about $4,470. This includes $1,363 in CPP payments, $647 in OAS payments, $600 from an employer pension, and $1,860 from RRIFs. The couple's current monthly expenses are $4,291, including $2,000 in rent and $741 in life, long-term care and critical care insurance premiums. 'Will these plans be valid in Vietnam?' James asked. As well, given his age, he wonders if he should shift away from growth stocks to dividend-paying stocks. 'I want to make sure my holdings do not depreciate. I withdraw about six per cent from my RRIFs and want to grow my capital by at least that same amount so that in 10 or 20 years when I die, that will still be there for my wife.' What the expert says Eliott Einarson, a retirement planner at Ottawa-based Exponent Investment Management, understands the appeal of moving to Nguyen's lower-cost home country, but it may not be the solution to their financial concerns, he said. 'The first step is to consult a cross-border tax accountant specializing in this area of tax to confirm tax rates on income and potential loss of benefits like the OAS if they make a permanent move,' said Einarson. 'Once they have this information, a retirement plan will help them understand the financial impact of different scenarios.' Since most of James's RRIF is with a large financial institution, Einarson recommends he request some retirement planning from that company or from his insurance adviser. 'In addition, he can ask about the long-term care insurance benefits. Will they pay for care in another country? What will those facilities look like?' Einarson said. Einarson points to other risks and considerations, such as the loss of medical and social services and other benefits Canada offers, tax rates and changes that come with a permanent move, currency risk on exchange rates since all pension income would be in a foreign currency and the cost to relocate. 'What is Nguyen's plan if something happens to James and his pension and CPP are reduced or eliminated?' asked Einarson. While moving to Vietnam might initially look affordable, the couple does not have a home to sell in Canada to subsidize the cost of purchasing a home in Vietnam, so if they buy a condo it will take all their non-registered investments, savings, and more, he said. 'James would only be left with $270,000 registered investments that he is drawing from, a modest company pension income plus CPP,' said Einarson. 'Even if what remains can create enough income to live on, around $3,800 before tax, they must consider the 'what-if' scenarios in detail. What if James's remaining RRIF funds don't perform as expected or the rising RRIF minimum withdrawals that come with age deplete the account and nothing is available for Nguyen? If they use all other capital to buy a condo, what will they do if they need money for anything unexpected? With an almost 30-year age gap, what remains for income may not be sufficient for Nguyen over her lifetime, which could be three to five decades of retirement after James passes. In addition, Nguyen would not be adding to her CPP if she no longer works in Canada and would be giving up her future OAS payments by not residing in Canada.' Einarson said staying in Toronto might be the best choice. The couple's total monthly expenses are about $4,300 and James has a monthly income of about $4,470. 'Assuming this is his total gross income, if they remain in Canada, they can keep the TFSA and non-registered money invested and make up any shortfall from the $40,000 in savings until Nguyen finds work.' Einarson is concerned that James's desire for an annualized compounding of his portfolio of at least 12 per cent may not be realistic, especially if he wants to both draw an income of six per cent and reduce risk. 'Shifting towards dividend-paying stocks may give him more certainty but this strategy should be only one element of managing the overall portfolio. James may have distinct objectives for various accounts, necessitating investments that are appropriately aligned with those specific goals, allowing him to grow some accounts while depleting others,' said Einarson. 'To offset the increasing minimum required withdrawals from his RRIF, James could consider keeping the non-registered and TFSA accounts invested and adding to the TFSA each year he has extra funds.' Overall, Einarson said James's goal to maintain his current capital balance of $400,000 seems reasonable, but Nguyen will likely need to find some work to cover any budget deficit, at least until she can receive CPP income. Should Douglas, 66, start tapping his RRSPs and boost his TFSA to minimize tax? Should a B.C. couple, both 45, sell their GICs to buy a bigger house? 'They have a lot to learn and consider before potentially moving. Since they really would like to stay in Toronto, they should focus on making that work,' said Einarson. *Names have been changed to protect privacy. Are you worried about having enough for retirement? Do you need to adjust your portfolio? Are you starting out or making a change and wondering how to build wealth? Are you trying to make ends meet? Drop us a line at with your contact info and the gist of your problem and we'll find some experts to help you out while writing a Family Finance story about it (we'll keep your name out of it, of course). Sign in to access your portfolio
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Katie Price's boyfriend JJ Slater urges bankrupt star to 'sort her finances' as he issues 'ultimatum' after split rumours
Katie Price 's boyfriend JJ Slater has reportedly given their relationship 'ultimatum' to force the former glamour model to 'sort her finances' after split rumours. The former glamour model has been involved in a stop-start relationship with Slater since publicly confirming they were romantically involved last February. But she prompted inevitable speculation regarding her current relationship status after reshuffling her social media platform to prioritise pictures that focus on her children and passion for horse-riding. Katie, 46, also drew attention to her easter pantomime role in Pinocchio - in which she plays a fairy - as well as promotional photos and videos for CBD oil and niche, online fashion retailers. And now friends close to the couple have told The Mirror JJ has given the personality an ultimatum and has to 'start taking accountability for her finances'. A source said the publication: 'JJ has had enough of all the drama' 'Katie isn't responsible with money and has been struggling with the moving situation, which JJ feels she sometimes takes out on him. 'He has given Katie an ultimatum, explaining that she needs to start taking accountability for her finances and get her ducks in a row – if they're to have a real chance together.' Katie is notably absent from his Instagram platform, with the first visible photo of the model seemingly shared last November. Despite a clear shift in tone across social media, sources have denied claims of another rift in their relationship. A source told MailOnline: 'It's not true.' The couple began dating in early 2024 and even sparked speculation of an engagement after Katie was pictured wearing a diamond while recovering from her sixth facelift in Turkey last year. Price recently admitted she wouldn't date someone who has 'only slept with two or three' women as she likes to know a man has 'been around the block'. The model has had a number of high-profile romances over the years - including a marriage to Peter Andre, a relationship with footballer Dwight Yorke and a cheeky kiss with Simon Cowell. And now friends close to the couple have told The Mirror JJ has given the personality an ultimatum and has to 'start taking accountability for her finances' Katie has reshuffled her social media platform to prioritise pictures that focus on her children and passion for horse-riding Likewise, Katie is notably absent from his Instagram platform, despite the London based designer previously peppering his grid with photos of the ex-glamour model And in a recent interview on the Disruptors Podcast, Price laid bare exactly what she likes in a man. 'I like to know they've been around the block,' she remarked. 'I'd rather a man know what they're doing. If someone hadn't had many, I wouldn't really like that - isn't that weird! 'I'll ask them: "Do you know how many you've slept with and that?" Price was also asked what the 'minimum number' of girls she would like a potential boyfriend to have slept with is. She said: 'When I was younger, I'd be jealous but I think because I'm at my age, I just think if a man's been there, done it, knows what they want - they're more settled in their head aren't they. 'Imagine if it's like two or three girls [a man's body count], they don't even know what they're doing. 'My friends say "Katie, you're gross, that's disgusting, why would you want a man that's been everywhere" and I'm just like, I'd rather it.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Woman Tells Boyfriend Not to 'Expect Anything Financially' from Her
A 24-year-old woman doesn't offer her boyfriend anything but water when he comes to her apartment since he doesn't contribute financially A woman was very upfront about finances with her boyfriend, telling him not to "expect anything financially" from her. In a since-deleted Reddit post, the woman explained that she has been with her boyfriend, both 24, for over two years. The woman shares that at the beginning of the relationship, her boyfriend would come over once a week. However, about a year in, he started coming over four to five days a week, and had "a key and space in [her] closet." As that number gradually increased, the woman decided that her boyfriend would pay for all their dates and other expenses since he spent so much time at her house. 'During this time we would go to the cinema, eat out, etc. I didn't offer to pay when we went out and expected him to pay," she shares. "This was because he didn't have any contribution towards the house. He didn't pay the bills, didn't help with chores, didn't clean after himself and only brought groceries which mainly included snacks for himself which I don't eat much from." Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. However, after nearly six months of this tradeoff, her boyfriend told her that he 'felt the financial burden and wanted to go 50/50." 'I told him that I didn't understand his reasoning, but agreed to it. When that happened I told him to get his things out of my house. He can come over only during the day, but the only thing he will be offered is water, because he doesn't contribute,' the woman shares, noting that she became "obtuse to anything that required extra energy" aside from her own expenses. 'I didn't buy any gifts outside of his birthday, he was only allowed to use one cup and plate in my house, I didn't offer him any food,' the woman continues. 'This went on for three to four months and then he made a comment that he doesn't feel welcome in my house and wanted to go back. We had a discussion and we then agreed to go 70/30 financially." While the boyfriend often made comments about "having to pay for everything," she "chose to ignore it." The poster noted that, despite their agreement, she spoiled him on his birthday, but that night he told her that if she "expected him to pay for everything then [she] should be in a relationship with someone else.' The poster was "hurt" by the comment as she "contributes in other ways financially." "A few days later I told him that it's best not to have financial expectations from anyone," she writes. "If there is a shared activity each will pay their own, if one person doesn't have the money the activity will be cancelled. Also he shouldn't expect anything from me that requires money to attain." After sharing this on Reddit, many of the people in the comments section of the post told the woman she should break up with her boyfriend, as "it doesn't sound like you even like each other." "Why even continue this charade of a relationship?' one person asked. 'This is a stupidly unhealthy relationship. I can't imagine nickel and diming someone I'm supposedly in love with. I can't imagine having anyone over to my house as a guest and not allowing them to eat. Do you even like your bf?' another person remarked. Read the original article on People Solve the daily Crossword
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
The Left has a long history of catastrophic financial errors – Reeves is about to follow suit
Is being Left-wing bad for your finances? Does distrusting markets lead to bad investment decisions? And if so, is this the common thread that brings together the cataclysmic choices of The Guardian, Unite the union, Gordon Brown and Rachel Reeves? The Guardian is owned by the Scott Trust, an endowment now valued at around £1.3bn, whose purpose is to keep the paper going in perpetuity. Much of this money originates from the sale of what started off as a car listings magazine, and then became an online marketplace, Autotrader. The Guardian Media Group sold 49.9pc of Autotrader's parent, Trader Media Group, to private equity firm, Apax, for £675m in 2007 – and the remaining 50.1pc to it for around £700m in 2014. This may at first sound like a brilliant deal. The Guardian's initial decision to invest in Autotrader certainly was a wise one. But the deal looks rather less great if you take a look at Autotrader's current valuation. Apax floated the Auto Trader Group on the London Stock Exchange in 2015 with an initial market capitalisation of around £2bn. It now stands at nearly £7.3bn, and many commentators, including The Telegraph's own Questor column, think the company is still undervalued. It is rather delicious that The Guardian's net zero zealots owe the paper's survival to a site flogging cars – it certainly isn't down to the paper's own profitability. The paper lost nearly £25m in the year to March 2025, and £37m the year before. But just think how much more greenery and tax hiking the paper could push if its endowment was not £1.3bn, but over £7bn. Unite, one of Britain's largest unions with around 1.2 million members and a Labour Party affiliate, has done rather worse with its own assets, as an interim internal report revealed last week. Under its previous general secretary, Len McCluskey – a staunch socialist and champion of Jeremy Corbyn – the union spent over £110m on a hotel and conference centre, the Aloft Birmingham Eastside – but the building is only valued at £35m. The report states that the cost of drilling holes in blockwork walls was estimated at £91,000, but was charged at £1.3m. The union has not submitted a full annual return to the Certification Officer, a legal requirement, since 2020. Unite would perhaps have been better off if it had shunned capitalist enterprise in practice, as well as in theory, and avoided going into business altogether. On a national scale, Gordon Brown's decision as chancellor to reduce the nation's gold holdings was a truly appalling commercial choice. Between 1999 and 2002, the Treasury sold 401 tons of gold, reducing the UK's strategic reserve from 715 tons in 1999 to around 314 tons in 2003. The sale price averaged at $275 per ounce and brought in a total of around $3.5bn (£2.7bn). The gold price, generally quoted in US dollars, now stands at over $3,300 per ounce. The holdings sold by Brown would now be worth over $42bn, or over £31bn – tenfold what Brown brought in.
