We have lots (a really lot) of messaging that deals with various brokers and what is allowed/not allowed by them in terms of buying/selling new issues on the Over The Counter (OTC) markets and many other issues.
For instance some brokers allow pretty much any transaction. I personally like eTrade as I have never had a trade rejected by them–while I have an account with Fidelity it restricts my ability to buy Fixed-to-Floating rate issues.
This area is for an exchange of information on all the various brokers–good, bad and otherwise.
Like all the various discussion pages if folks could ‘stay to topic’ the page will be more valuable to all, but staying to point.
If you want to start a new thread go to the bottom of the page and do a comment–instead of a reply.
Heh, my vanguard account shows the accurate value of my $1000 par preferred! Guess they finally fixed their display issue.
HOO-rah! Finally! I’d sure love to sit in on the post-mortem of that bug fix. Only took ’em 9 months… and that’s just how long I’ve been tracking it. No idea how long it’s actually been around.
Another contestant in the “Best Brokerage” to use beauty pageant. Often times an III’er provides feedback on various brokerages that either do something well or more commonly do something poorly. Best I can tell, there is no single winner amongst all of the brokerages. Oftentimes an III poster will talk about using multiple brokerages for various reasons.
I guess we needed another brokerage, since all of the existing ones have quirks. So what I describe as a group of celebrity investors decided to start a new brokerage called “Public.com.” It appears to be geared towards people that trade on their smartphones, kind of like Robinhood. Public.com addresses the main criticism of Robinhood and says they do NOT accept payment for order flow, aka PFOF. This is the setup where your brokerage literally sells all of the orders it receives to a “wholesaler” typically Citadel or Virtu. They usually pay the brokerage a fraction of a cent per share on stock trades. PFOF provides the majority of income for Robinhood.
Since Public.com offers free trades like every other brokerage and does NOT accept PFOF, how do they make money? One of their income sources is “tipping.” When you place an order, there is a screen that allows you to add a tip to the trade. The example they show adds 25 cents to the trade. Seems like a pretty unique setup to me.
There is an added wrinkle to PFOF. The SEC Chairman Gary Gensler has been critical of PFOF and might ban it. If the SEC bans it, it will be a major hit to Robinhood and to a lesser extent most of the other brokerages with the exception of Fidelity. Not clear how Robinhood would be profitable without PFOF, of course profits seem optional for many listed companies these days.
As part of not accepting PFOF, Public.com does provide some good data showing their customers receive better pricing on trades compared to brokerages that DO accept PFOF. You can understand that on high volume issues that trade with narrow bid/ask spreads. Not so clear what it would mean for our lower liquidity issues that trade with wider spreads. My pure guess is that it MIGHT mean you get more orders filled, since the wholesaler is not trying to collect their penny per share.
We do NOT have any accounts at Public.com, nor are we invested in it or receive any compensation as an “influencer.” We do NOT plan to open any accounts there since our hands are full dealing with a gazillion other issues. But if some III’er wants to take the plunge and report back, maybe Public.com gets crowned the new winner and receives the tiara.
Link to how Public.com makes money:
https://public.com/learn/how-does-public-make-money
BTW, totally different topic, stock exchanges are starting to make changes that could impact III’ers, but it will take several years to implement.
Interesting. There is always a catch. Read the not so fine print:
ARBITRATION NOTICE. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DISPUTES ARISING FROM THE BROKERAGE SERVICE (WHICH ARE RESOLVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC BROKERAGE AGREEMENT) AND CERTAIN OTHER KINDS OF DISPUTES DESCRIBED IN SECTION 18, YOU AGREE THAT DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THESE TERMS WILL BE RESOLVED BY BINDING, INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION, AND BY ACCEPTING THESE TERMS, YOU AND PUBLIC.COM ARE EACH WAIVING THE RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY OR TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY CLASS ACTION OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING. YOU AGREE TO GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO GO TO COURT TO ASSERT OR DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THIS CONTRACT (EXCEPT FOR MATTERS THAT MAY BE TAKEN TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT). YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE DETERMINED BY A NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR AND NOT A JUDGE OR JURY. (SEE SECTION 18.)
Doesn’t every broker have a similar arbitration clause?
TDA and the RIV dividend and rights issue:
Today was dividend day for RIV. TDA paid the dividend on the shares I owned prior to receiving the shares I acquired in their recent rights offering, but they did NOT PAY DIVIDEND ON THE SHARES ACQUIRED IN THE RIGHTS OFFERING… This is clearly wrong as per https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001501072/000138713121010851/riv-497ad_110821.htm which says, “Shares of common stock issued pursuant to the Rights Offering will be record date shares for the purposes of the Fund’s November 2021 distribution payable.”
If others own RIV at other brokers, could you please post whether or not your broker got it right and if you own at TDA, best you check the numbers – most likely the same thing happened to you.. To date I have heard that Pershing got it right as did ML Edge..
BTW, the response I got from TDA couldn’t be more helpful…. HAHAHA… ‘We’ll start an inquiry that will take a month of Sundays to complete, do you want us to send the report by snail mail or put it in your online Inbox?’ They didn’t even make a call to the backoffice to confirm why the dividend on the rights offering shares wasn’t paid. I should have just asked why didn’t I receive the correct amount of dividend instead of telling them why I thought I had not…….
Royal Capital Ltd. is a Bangladesh-based stock brokerage firm that provides fully integrated equity trading services to its clients. The company was founded in 1996 and since its founding, it has emerged as one of the largest, most respected, and technologically advanced stockbrokers in Bangladesh. The company is accelerating digital transformation by adopting enhanced online trading platforms, contactless payment systems such as mobile banking, online fund transfer, and online BO account opening. Royal Capital is rated A+ by world-renowned credit rating agency CRISIL for its financial position, and flexibility, accounting quality, operating efficiency, competence, and Integrity. Our reputation thrives on our track record of honesty.
https://royalcapitalbd.com/
Looks like some spam made it thru the net……..
Has anyone else tried Fidelity’s new ‘dividend view’ inside the Accounts tab?
It shows the ex-div date for each position, the pay-date, current yield, as well as the % of the account each position occupies. This is a big improvement over the old look…very useful!
And, it is sortable by ex date and by yield! A very useful tool if you like to be aware of x-dates. It works for Baby Bonds but not for other types of bonds.
Fidelity scores points with this new ‘dividend view’ accounts page, but their reporting functions are still archaic. I’d like to see them produce something like the ‘expected investment income’ report that Merrill Edge has. A ‘dividend view’ for watch lists would also be nice.
Any opinion of which broker is best among the giants. Schwab, Fidelity Etc. I currently have Merrill but they seem to restrict etfs and have a delay for new preferreds..
I have tried to by a few etfs like SCHY and DIVO. I can not at Merrill. Not sure why I can’t buy SCHY?
Ideas?
Thank you
Sometimes the giants are not the best. The smaller ones can be quite useful. But if I had to pick a giant it would be TD Ameritrade. Next would be Ally or Interactive Brokers.
David, brokerages are kind of like spouses. All of them have some positive aspects and all of them have some quirks. Understand that we III’ers represent a teeny, tiny percentage of investors, certainly less than 1% based on some of the individual preferred stocks we buy. For the other 99%, probably any of the major brokerages would be fine. A lot of times it comes down to what you are used to. So if you are planning on investing in “mainstream” stocks and ETF’s, pick any of them. If you want to get IPO issues like we talk about around here, that is a different constraint. If you want to consistently be able to talk to a human with short wait times, that is another constraint. If you want to have a margin account that consistently borrows money, yet another. If you want to do automated trading, yet another. Do you want a fancy “trading platform” that many brokerages offer or just plan to use a web interface or smartphone app?
So it is up to each investor to decide what they are looking for in order to find the best match. And like I said, if you are only interested in conventional stocks and ETF’s, pretty much all of them will work for you.
As someone else noted, all brokers have their own individual quirks. It depends on what your needs are.
Over the years I have had accounts with all of them, including many that no longer are around. Shoot back in the tech IPO heyday, I probably had a dozen or more accounts with different brokers to gain access to free money tech IPOs.
These days my needs and focus are much different. I now use Fidelity for everything – regular account, rollover IRA and I manage my daughter’s retirement accounts all on Fidelity as well.
You should be fine with any of them unless you have very specific needs in which case learn the quirks of each
Keep Merrill and add another one that lets you trade the stuff Merrill won’t.
Haven’t seen this mentioned yet. Schwab is adding $6.95 commissions for OTC and Canadian stocks. This is listed at https://www.schwab.com/legal/schwab-pricing-guide-for-individual-investors and according to the statement insert, takes effect Dec 6th.
Anyone able to negotiate it lower?
No, but I was able to get some free trades thrown my way by a chat agent. He admitted that he didn’t know if they would actually work. I haven’t made a trade yet.
If you want to trade Canadian stocks, Fidelity’s platform worked very easily for me, without assistance.
Is anyone using a broker that still offers free OTC trades? I’ve been looking into it this week with Schwab’s new fee. Any feedback would be appreciated.
My review so far:
Tradestation – I funded an account just to see their trading system. Unfortunately, like every other broker that I’ve looked at recently, their quotes don’t match up to Schwab – for reasons I don’t understand, Schwab often shows better bid/ask prices than Fidelity, TD, etc., but never worse. So I was thinking I could use Tradestation to trade, but rely on Schwab for quotes. This would be a pain in the butt, so I’m not sure it’s worth it, but I do a considerable amount of OTC trading.
Firstrade – I emailed to find out if they have Limited Margin in IRAs and the Rep that responded didn’t seem to know what that is and answered a different question instead.
eOption – Never heard of them before, but I guess they’ve been around for a while.
Vanguard is free and so is Ally… But Im phasing Ally out as they are so incompetent.
Vanguard and Merrill both free.
Just wondering if any others incur this problem: In my TDA account, I am not allowed to trade preferred shares pre or post market hours. but, because other brokerage firms do allow trades of this type , I am at a disadvantage because others are trading when I cannot ( and it costs me money ). Simple example is HCDIP getting crushed after hours on 10/4, because they priced their secondary, when I could not trade. Advice or suggestions would be appreciated. ( Am I doing
something wrong ? )
I do trade preferreds at TDA in extended hours, and don’t pay for it-I’m not aware I did anything special to be able to. The bid/ask is often prohibitive, but I have gotten fills. OTC cannot be traded in extended hours, though. And my TDA employer ira account doesn’t allow it.
Sorry, I should have deleted my comment.
I realize it is only 5 character OTC symbols that
cannot be traded after hours on TDA.
If I had been up and at em, I would have been
able to trade HDCIP after hours.
My error and my small loss. Thanks
Howard , I tried to snag it pre market on TD and it disallowed the trade. I didnt try to use my other 2. But I doubt Vanguard would allow it either.
Anyone know how to take advantage of the LAND Preferred DRIP where you can buy shares at $22.75 under the initial offering. On MyIPO they only offer shares at $25.
Shares purchased through myIPO can be transferred to the transfer agent for subsequent dividend reinvestment. Contact Michael Warren at Cambria Capital, LLC, 801-456-2337 or mwarren@cambriacapital.com. He can send you an authorization form to fill out, get notarized, and return to him. He has been very helpful. It appears to me from reading the info on myIPO that the DRIP only applies to reinvested dividends. Maybe your interpretation will be different.
I have just gone through this process. Yes, Michael Warren has been helpful. You can email the notarized form, to move shares to the transfer agent which is Computershare. Side note: when I was in the business, we had to have the original form with the raised seal. The raised seal was discontinued years ago.
**NOTE** MyIpo whacked me for $25 to transfer the shares.
When you move these to Computershares, do you then actually open up an account there and hold them under that account name???? Thus all the rules set up to owning LAND B shares stay in effect there and all future dividends are dripped at 22.75?? What happens when the shares ultimately become listed? Do you then have to move them out to another account somewhere else if you wanted to trade them? All of a sudden, maybe the idea of buying LAND preferred thru MyIPO should be back on the table…
I have an account already with Computershare that contains various securities. I reinvest dividends and have the ability to buy or sell shares, depending upon the plan agreement (including fees) between Computershare and the individual companies. I have, in fact, transferred several stocks from Computershare to TDA without a problem. I would not think that you would have to move shares, once listed, elsewhere since Computershare is in business to allow investors to buy and sell shares and reinvest dividends. They make money off of this. I would look at all of the materials from LAND.
I hope you questioned the $25 charge. Nothing was either verbally or in writing communicated to me about such a charge. Of course, I haven’t returned the form yet. Thanks for the heads up.
I questioned the charge, and the answer came back that the charge is imposed by Folio (JP MORGAN) and will not be waived. Mike Warren (nice guy) said it was clearly stated in the description – and I checked and it says
“*At this time, My IPO does not offer the ability for investors to participate in the dividend reinvestment plan instead of a cash dividend.”
I think they added that bit to the website after I invested, but I have no way to prove it.
JPMorgan will get my $25 and my accompanying ill will.
Just a reminder that in life there is no free lunch, and to warn people the discount is likely taxed as dividend income, so you are surprised when your 1099DIV shows up and it is far higher than the dividend amount.
Hmmm… I am checking on this. Here’s what I’d expect:
– dividend issued (taxable event)
– shares are then purchased at $22.75 using the dividend just issued (*not* a taxable event)
– those new shares have a basis of $22.75, so if later sold above that price, the difference would be a taxable capital gain
To have the dividend reinvestment purchase also be a taxable event, I assume that would mean the cost basis of the newly-purchased shares would then be $25 (similar to the way employee stock purchase discounts are treated)? So:
– dividend issued (taxable event)
– shares are then purchased at $22.75, which is also a taxable event, incurring $2.25/share ‘income’
– those new shares would have a basis of $25
Anyway, I’m asking my broker to check with LAND. I’ll report back.
Good news. I’m told that later this year or early 2022 FIDO will allow opening trades on fixed to floating preferreds. Bout time.
Lol, they could activate that any day. Why take months to do it?
If Hank’s experience is anywhere similar to what I’ve had, he’s probably managed to get a rep trained to say it’s coming just to get you off the phone feeling encouraged… Hank – here’s an experiment for you: try innocently to make that call again and assuming you don’t talk to the same person, see if you get the same answer…….I’d say the odds are 50-50. The only consistency I’ve heard is each jockey saying they agree with you that they don’t like the limitation either…
I agree with 2WR. I’ve been told many times they are working on a fix. This over many years. Not holding my breath.
And BAM. Just like that. Can no longer buy ABRFP (now ABRPRF for Fido users) nor NRZPRD. I was able to buy in, but no longer.
Does Fido view reset rate preferreds as risky, or is something else going on? In a rising rate environment, I’d think these would be a good bet.
I have initiated a transfer on of one of my accounts from one broker to another. The ACAT has run into problems with the transfer of three securities: AATRL, SLMNP, and WTREP. Anyone have experience with similar matters?
Not directly, but for WTREP I speculate it may be that the issue is now delisted. I hold a position w E*TRADE, and they now list the position in my portfolio by its CUSIP with a zero value.
That’s as my WTREP shows up in the current account.
It gets stranger. Now they say they will accept transfer of those 3, including WTREP, but not KTBA. Makes no sense.
How good is Schwab at not deducting Canadian taxes on securities held in a US IRA? Thanks.
I have a few Canadian stocks in my IRA at Schwab and they have never withheld any taxes.
Great, thanks, Larry.
I think you may be asking the wrong question.
The US brokers don’t decide whether to withhold – the Canadian custodians do. They deduct the withholding amount and send it to Revenue Canada before sending the remainder to the US broker to pay to you.
The real question is whether Schwab will go fight with the Canadian custodian when they get it wrong. The answer to that is generally “NO”.
So, as long as the stock you own has a good custodian who gets withholding right, schwab is fine. If your stock has a lazy/inept/etc. custodian in Canada that withholds when it shouldn’t, Schwab is not much help. I went through this a few years ago on a couple of preferreds. Schwab had lots of excuses why they couldn’t help, but ultimately wouldn’t lift a finger to go fight with the custodian on my behalf.
I eventually got someone who agreed that there shouldn’t have been any withholding, but they basically said it was my problem and they would do nothing to help. But – if I managed to get the custodian to fix things, Schwab would pay me the revised amount the custodian sends to them (thanks for nothing).
I gave up after a couple of quarters and just quit trying to have those preferreds in an IRA.
Interesting – TRP, PBA and ENB – hopefully are using pros.
Tim W…unfortunately my experience with Schwab is similar to Private. I have held CNUTF and FORFF in my IRA’s at Schwab and they always withhold the 15% tax and I could not get them to change.
Has anyone had experience with Schwabs share lending program?
I transferred shares of UPST to them in June to take advantage of the ridiculously high rates they were paying. I have requested a daily accrual accounting but they are….hesitant to provide it. In the year 2021, I would think this is a matter of a few keystrokes to provide. All they give is a daily update on the interest rate, and a monthly total. It is less than I expected based on my rough estimate.
Furcal, the current rate for lending shares is ~0.5% annually on a non-Schwab platform I checked. Schwab probably splits it with you 50%/50%, so you would get 0.25% per year. Trading today @ ~ $200/share, so you should receive about 14 cents per day per 100 shares loaned out. Gonna take a while to earn a steak dinner on this one. . .
Tex, thanks, I am familiar with the program.
Back in June the rate was higher for a few weeks prior to the lock up expiration. What I am looking for is the daily accrual accounting.
UPST borrow rate cratered in June after the unlock.
Does anyone have more clarity on when various brokers will stop allowing bids on Pink No Information securities? TD had said mid-August, while Schwab said late August.
I would expect buy side liquidity to drop incrementally as each broker adds the restrictions, which means if you have accounts at one of the late movers (Schwab compared to TD, as an example), you may have the opportunity to be one of the last retail bidders and could have one last shot at some low ball purchases.
I had to call inept Ally to clarify a small problem. You know, the kind where you try to sell something and it says you dont own the issue even though the shares are clearly in the account…Anyhow, I asked the rep there and she said there are no restrictions presently and no restrictions are planned. Of course that could change tomorrow. Or she could no nothing and be wrong. I dont assume anything with those cats. TD is well known.. Vanguard has not notified
me of anything, but they long ago choked off most of that stuff making it almost irrelevant.
Looks like Schwab has cut off buying of Pink No Information as of today. Can no longer place bids on the LTS bonds.
TD is still allowing bids, but that probably won’t last much longer.
I have a tiny position in LTSH at Schwab. Schwab is still showing quotes (400 shares traded by someone today). But as Karma stated, no buy orders are being accepted. I should say no NEW buy orders because I have a limit order placed a few weeks ago still showing as active. No position at Fidelity….I see they are not accepting buy orders.
Ha, good point! I have a couple limit orders still open, too. It will be interesting to see if they come through and cancel those or not.
I would think the quotes should still be there for another month until the SEC rule officially kicks in. You can sell, of course.
I still don’t know how the “expert market” is supposed to work after that. What I’ve read implies that even retail investors can still place limit orders somehow, you just won’t be able to see any quotes. But if all the brokers say that we can’t enter buy orders, I don’t know if there will actually be anything we can do.
Karma, I got notice 8/18 TD has extended deadline in trading these securities and they still trade there.
We previously communicated that ahead of the regulatory enforcement date, we will only accept orders to liquidate impacted positions (i.e. no new buy orders) starting August 13, 2021. With the fluid nature of the situation and to better align our efforts across the combined company, we have adjusted the date for restricting the securities to on or after September 3, 2021. After the amendment officially goes into effect on September 28, 2021, it may be more difficult to liquidate these securities. Quoting and market liquidity may also be very limited.
>I still don’t know how the “expert market” is supposed to work after that. What I’ve read implies that even retail investors can still place limit orders somehow, you just won’t be able to see any quotes. But if all the brokers say that we can’t enter buy orders, I don’t know if there will actually be anything we can do.
-Expert market – SEC nixed this, not on their agenda anytime soon.
-It would have allowed accredited investors to post & see quotes
-Retail brokers don’t seem psyched to allow trading so imagine this will be relegated to full service brokers.
– AS IS: Anyone that has a broker that will facilitate access will be able to trade however, there will not be any publicly disseminated quotes. So you’ll be blindly submitting a limit order without seeing an order book.
As is typical, they have made it worse in every way and increased the chances that people will make mistakes, get screwed by having an illiquid market, have poorer access to pricing data etc…
The most frightening combination of words in the English language remains, “We are from the government, and we are here to help.”
Someone just came in with a dump on some LTS notes. One of my limit orders that Schwab left open was filled at $18.92 on LTSL.
I would bet a steak dinner that Schwab reverses the trade.
I’d bet the trade stands
Justin, I don’t think so. It’s not like it’s an illegal trade or anything. Schwab restricted new buys but left open buys outstanding. There is still almost a month left until the actual restrictions are required. I expect they will cancel open orders at that point.
tdA charges $6.95 commission on OTC trades. This is now added to all of the newly changed issues. If you trade in multiple small increments you’d better be aware of the charges. They are not prominently displayed.
Martin – FWIW a long time ago, before free trades, I managed to talk TDA down to 4.95/trade and that still stands for me today on the charged trades….I am assigned to the Private Client group or something like that but it’s not because I’m an extremely big hitter or especially active trader, but I mention it now because who knows, maybe commissions will once again via this backdoor way become important again…
Email from Schwab today.
“On September 28, 2021, new amendments adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) go into effect to enhance investor protection and improve issuer transparency. These amendments restrict the ability of market makers to publish quotations for those companies that have not made required current financial and company information available to regulators and investors.
Ahead of the regulatory enforcement date, Schwab will only accept orders to liquidate positions (i.e. no new buy orders) starting in late August 2021. Please note: After the amendment officially goes into effect on September 28, 2021 it may be more difficult to liquidate these securities. Quoting and market liquidity may also be very limited.”
CNUTF is the only listed security although I also own CUTLF which are both Canadian Utilities. I suspect other OTC symbols will soon become restricted.
I stopped reading after I the saw CNUTF. Here is the complete list. It is large, in my view.
https://www.schwab.com/resource/otcexpertmarket
Another case where the implementation of the new Rule is problematic. These two issues are identical from a regulatory point of view yet one is black-listed and one is not.
CU is a 20-billion dollar company (utility) whose finances are readily available at the company’s website and at it’s own country’s version of the SEC. Whether or not CU’s securities were the intended target of the new Rule, this is an example of what, in practice, will get caught up in the silliness.
The new SEC rule, all 297 pages of it, is poorly conceived, poorly written, and will be poorly implemented. That’s my call.
Are you feeling protected yet?
Total waste of time, and money.
Schwab was very good at opening OTC symbols. I suspect those days are gone.
On that list, and along the same lines, is BKFAF, which trades in Toronto as (I think) BAM.PR.B. It’s a preferred issued by giant Brookfield.
I have a short-term gain in that position at Schwab. I could just sell it and re-buy on the Toronto at IBKR but I hate to pay the tax man.
What do you all think, is there any chance I could get them to swap it into the otherwise mostly useless Schwab Global account? What’s the over-under on how many hours I’d have to spend on the phone to get someone who knew what I was talking about?
Mike – I’ll take a knowledgeable stab at this.
Clearly Brookfield does not belong on the banned list. They are SEC reporting and trade on the NYSE. The situation you describe arises because the BAM preferreds are not SEC registered (some exceptions). You are correct about this being BAM.PR.B. You can find the prospectus at SEDAR. For no good reason, some of the BAM preferred are Pink OK and some are Pink not OK.
I am inclined to believe that misclassifications of major issuers like BAM and ENB will get straightened out on OTC in the end and they will end up as Pink OK. But I may be wrong. You may end up with an untradable security. Pays like clockwork but you can’t sell it.
I do not believe that you can migrate from the OTC ticker to the TSX ticker without it counting as a sale for tax purposes. I know that IBKR won’t accept the transfer of “F” OTC tickers.
Regarding IBKR, if you want to be a serious buyer of Canadian preferred or other Canadian equities (especially those without NYSE tickers) you should do it through IBKR. By “serious” I mean probably 100k plus; otherwise it isn’t worth the time.
To buy Canadian issues at IBKR you need to first buy CA$, which you can do easily at IBKR. Then you buy. It is truly a multi currency account which American are generally not very familiar with.
If you really want global go to IBKR. You can buy almost any major exchange in the world but you do so in local currency.
Thanks Bob. I’m inclined to take my chances and let them ride, but any further buys will be at IBKR. I do have the Lite account even though the amount I have in Canadian preferreds is far from the $100k “serious” mark. More like “comical”!
I am holding CNUTF. Same issue decent capital gains and nice dividend (5.6% at the price I brought it at). I suspect CNUTF will be called in Sept 2022 and replaced with a fixed rate reset (4.5% fixed rate coupon).
It reports enough to Schwab to be a qualified dividend. Dumb to be on the list. I suspect Bob is correct, they will fix issues like BAM, Emera, and Canadian Utilities
Oddball Stocks says it is covering this regulatory change in it’s subscription newsletter. I have never paid for the newsletter, but I’ve followed the blog for a number of years and the author is very savvy and, as you might guess be the blog’s name, has his universe of stocks being significantly impacted by the change. So I’m going to bet that he is digging into this topic more than any of us and probably has some good input (but as I said, I’ve never subscribed so I don’t know for sure). But for those who want to understand these changes to the best of their ability, maybe it would be worth the price.
http://www.oddballstocks.com/2021/07/sec-rule-15c2-11-restricted-securities.html
IMHO Schwab has really gone down hill since reg TD merger . The main thing I see is that if you call for service. They used to be great knowledgable etc. Now you call you get “hold On’ ” I will check”. The reps that answer now are dumb as dirt, and seemed very confused. Im really think of moving back to Fido.
Max
I think the issue is the combined entity looking to save money. I feel like TD service has significantly as well.
Who gets my vote?
I bought a bunch of METCL today. My efforts began at about 830 AM, when I saw the issue had made its way onto NASDAQ. I would have bought all my shares at Vanguard if possible but Vanguard didn’t recognize the ticker. TDA did, as did IBKR, but I held off to see if Vanguard would get it up on the platform.
They didn’t, so at 9:15 I entered pre market orders at two separate IBKR accounts and a TDA account, all at the same time/price. The two IBKR orders executed immediately. I paid $1.00 per 100 shares for the privileged. That’s $1.00 per $2,500.00 in face value.
The TDA order sat there until market opening and then executed. For the delayed execution I paid a flat $6.95 fee. Why I was charged the fee I’m not sure (this should be commission free I believe) but I’m not going to call TDA over $6.95. I think they depend on that.
I still wanted additional shares but those had to be bought at Vanguard, as they were headed to qualified accounts held there. By this time Vanguard had the issue up on the platform but you had to call to do the trade. Not going to spend an hour on the phone with Vanguard, sorry. Been there done that too many times.
By about 10:30 Vanguard was allowing buys without the phone call, but the price had gone up 30 cents/share. I bought anyway. The additional cost was an order of magnitude more than the combined commissions at IBKR and TDA.
So, for this one, my vote and the trophy hands down goes to IBKR. Saved me time, money and aggravation. More money coming out of Vanguard and headed to IBKR.
FWIW, Bob – I bot METCL @ TDA at about 9:50AM yesterday and was not charged anything.
Same here, 2WR. TD actually had the issue loaded Monday so I entered bid then, but it quickly jumped right over the 25.10 bid next day, so I reloaded at 25.30 to hit. This doesnt seem like a 2WR purchase… Boredom creeping in and need a bit of excitement? 🙂
Grid – It hits the 2wr screen primarily due to its 5 year maturity…… Dicey perhaps, but not 9% dicey imho. So bot at same prx you did but with hopes like Bob that I overpaid and could add more lower.. darn! up 1.8% complaints complaints complaints…
Well I feel better now you bought it. I should have sold everything and just bought up the float. I mean your so conservative, you wont buy a bond from a company, unless they have zero debt! 🙂
It was inherently hard to predict a price path for METCL. Small company, short operating history, no other outstanding issues, no good comps, and so forth. I would not be surprised to see this trade at 30 at some point, or 20. So I just let ‘er rip. In 5 years I’ll either be sipping Dom Perignon or Two Buck Chuck.
In the last 6 months I have erred on the side of caution too many times so if I like an issue I’m in big and fast these days.
Bob, it doesnt matter as the world is coming to an end anyways. Our Phoenix baby bond just cleared $18 today. The dead are rising from the grave.
Vanguard still has Phoenix marked at my original acquisition cost. I would buy more if it dropped under 14.
nothing I like but lots of quick nickel stackers to feed mamas QVC purchases.
Glad we’ve got somebody else fueling the QVC coffers too, micahc. This vicious cycle of buying QRTEP solely to have the divvies pay for wifey’s purchases is killing me. At least we get some good food out of it sometimes…. but I’d be happy to have yo mamas purchases take over for mine…. lol
Would feel blessed to receive an assorted bag of mixed nuts. She sticks mainly in the nick knack lane.
Loves Christmas. Will become Santa’s elf next week as I start the yearly pilgrimage to the basement bringing up her treasures. Has to have them all.
Ah yes, Christmas in July – all day every day, the true $pirit of Chri$tma$…. You must be from the South…I can’t even begin to count the number of truly dedicated Christmas stuff storage rooms we’ve seen when we go to estate sales in TN…fully dedicated and not closet sized either…
Ha! TDA credited me back the 6.95.
Here’s another email response to sort thru with TDA, this time having to do with the miniscule amount of BMTX I received from CUBI when it was spunoff via a SPAC in January….. Trying to get the restrictions removed that I thought had to do with a lockup period and nothing else… They’re trying to say it has something to do with Rule 144… Say what???????????????? To their credit, I’ve received this from TDA. I’ve received no responses from Fidelity where I also have shares acquired the same way. I’m awaiting further input/clarification from BMTX.
Dear ,
We have received your request to remove the restriction on shares of BM Technologies Inc. in this account. The certificate is marked with a restriction under Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 144, prohibiting the sale, or other transfer of ownership, of the security, until the legend is removed. This email includes the needed forms as attachments and contains information on the removal process.
The following documentation is needed in order to complete this request:
–Rule 144 Non-Affiliate Packet
–Minimum Account Requirements ($250 in available funds)
Please complete the necessary forms and return the originals to a TD Ameritrade branch or send them by mail to the address below. Please do not email or fax these documents, as originals are required.
TD Ameritrade
Attn: Cage/Restricted
P.O. Box 2760
Omaha, NE 68103-2760
or for express delivery
TD Ameritrade
Attn: Cage/Restricted
200 South 108th Ave.
Omaha, NE 68154-2631.
What you need to know:
— We are providing forms and information on the document requirements for Rule 144, since it is one of the more common stock restrictions. If your securities are restricted under another rule, please contact a TD Ameritrade Restricted Stock Specialist at 888-723-8504, option 7, for further information.
— TD Ameritrade provides short-term (30 days) safekeeping for clients to provide the documents needed to complete a deposit.
— The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations vary based on your Affiliate status with the Issuing Company of this stock. If you are an Affiliate of the Issuer, please contact the Restricted Stock & Safekeeping Department at the number above, so we can provide alternate paperwork. (If you are not certain of your status, please feel free to call us for more information.)
— Non-affiliated clients must have at least $250.00 in available funds in the account, above the value of the restricted shares, to process the removal. Fees charged to TD Ameritrade (“Pass Through” fees) may also be assessed to your account. These fees may vary in amount. If funds are not available in the accounts, you will be contacted to deposit additional funds. Fees involved in the removal process are not credited or refunded. Please determine if the value of the stock is equal to or greater than your expenses in removing the restriction.
Below are detailed instructions:
— Restricted Stock Handling Guidelines, Non-Affiliate – This document is a reference and fact sheet for you to review and keep. Please review it thoroughly, and feel free to contact the Restricted Stock & Safekeeping Department with any questions.
— Rule 144 Client Pledge, Non-Affiliate – This document must be completed by all shareholders listed on the certificate. Please read each statement carefully and answer each to the best of your knowledge unless directed to leave blank by the Issuer’s attorney. Please return it to the address listed at the top of the form.
— Restricted-Stock Questionnaire – This document will assist TD Ameritrade in processing your securities quickly and efficiently, in accordance with SEC regulations, by providing use with important information. Please complete it in its entirety and mail it back, along with the Rule 144 Client Pledge, to the address listed above. Investor Relations for the Issuing Company can usually provide the name and phone number (voice/fax) for the attorney; should Investor Relations tell you there is a blanket legal opinion on file, you can write “blanket on file” on the Corporate Counsel line of the questionnaire.
TD Ameritrade requires that your account have at least $250.00 in cash in the account to meet the minimum account requirements. The minimum requirements do not include pass through fees that may be charged from the transfer agent or attorney. We will notify you if additional funding is required to proceed.
Please keep in mind that these documents are only for use in clearing a security under SEC Rule 144. If your security is restricted in a way other than SEC Rule 144, please contact us for alternate paperwork. If you have any questions, please reply to this email or call a Restricted Stock Specialist at 888-723-8504, option 7. weekdays, excluding market holidays, between 9:00 AM and 5:30 PM Eastern, if you have other questions.
Thank you for choosing TD Ameritrade.
Caleb Miner
Asset Clearing Services
TD Ameritrade Clearing
Doesn’t ring true with me. No way it should be 144 and even the lock up sounds wrong. Lock ups are founders. I’ve acquired shares in spin offs many times and I don’t recall a one that had any trading restrictions.
That is boilerplate. They received a non registered security, which happens a lot with no -US spin-offs. Most of the time they just sell the shares in the home market and get cash. Not sure why this is different, but it is.
BMTX had filed a registration statement and all the entities involved were U.S. No reason for TDA to mess this up.
I just got Bermudian shares spun off from a Canadian company in my U.S.-based Vanguard account and had zero issues.
Yes, but TDA is not alone. I received shares at Fidelity too. They still only identify the shares as CUSIP, not symbol and have heard no response from them yet.
It has a lock-up…For everybody.
Bottom of the press release outlines the terms where the restriction is lifted.
Don’t see that every day..
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210105005588/en/Customers-Bancorp-Announces-Successful-Completion-of-BankMobile-Divestiture
Justin – Thanks for the reminder. I had read that way back when but had forgotten the details….. HOWEVER, BMTX’s CFO declared that “the restriction was lifted on July 1st.” Based on conditions in your link, I suspect that they qualified to be lifted based on “(iii) the date on which the closing sale price of the common stock of BMT equals or exceeds $12.00 per share (as adjusted, in certain circumstances) for any 20 trading days within any 30 trading day period beginning at least 150 days following the closing.” So what’s that to do with Rule 144 as TDA is claiming??? I believe TDA’s sending me unnecessary forms to fill out that will do nothing to lift the restriction. Somebody internally or whereever needs to do something…
Thanks again for the reminder…
the 144a is boilerplate language they use for all restrictions, but the trading restriction lift from the market price is something that the transfer agent should be sending through DTC to all participants that the previous “legend” has been removed from the shares. Unfortunately, even though the restriction was lifted automatically, TDA will probably charge you a restricted fee to remove it.
Don’t know if this has been posted before, but got this notice yesterday from TDA:
On September 28, 2021, new amendments adopted by the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) go into effect to enhance investor protection and improve issuer transparency. These amendments restrict the ability of market makers to publish quotations for those companies that have not made required current financial and company information available to regulators and investors.
Ahead of the regulatory enforcement date, we will only accept orders to liquidate positions (i.e. no new buy orders) starting August 13, 2021. After the amendment officially goes into effect on September 28, 2021, it may be more difficult to liquidate these securities. Quoting and market liquidity may also be very limited.
What this means for your account(s).
You are receiving this notification because you currently hold one or more of the impacted securities in your account. We’re including the list below but be aware that it may not include all of your impacted securities. There is also a chance that the impacted companies could come into compliance with the regulatory requirements ahead of this date and be removed from the list. For a current list of all securities (which is subject to change), please visit http://www.tdameritrade.com/retail-en_us/resources/pdf/TDA101550.pdf.
EBBGF
To be candid, I don’t really see how this is enhancing my “protection.”
NH – you’re in need of an attitude adjustment. You need protection, even if you don’t know it. Why, ENB is a small outfit. Oh, wait, it has an enterprise value of a couple hundred billion. Scratch that argument.
But it’s not an SEC reporter, it didn’t just do a US$1.5 billion SEC registered issue.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/895728/000110465921085731/tm2120459d2_424b5.htm
Geez, guess it did. But, still, you need protection. I’m from the government and I’m here to help!
Bob, its “protection” with assistance from “computer screened” criteria without a lick of common sense added to the procedures. Who needs logic and common sense when the computer can do all of that?
Bob, here is government at its finest…It creates a regulatory enforcement that bans buying of a security whose genesis was from the government creating it in the first place… AGRIP is on the TD “no no” list, despite its birth from legislation. Oh, and also being recognized as one of the 50 safest banks in the entire world. If this wasnt true, it couldnt be made up.
President Theodore Roosevelt planted the seeds of the Farm Credit System in 1908, when he appointed a Country Life Commission to address the problems facing a predominantly rural population. The commission documented a lack of adequate agricultural credit, where a farmer could readily secure loans on fair terms. Its findings led to additional government studies, which included extensive analysis of other nations’ rural credit systems. Lawmakers chose a cooperative credit structure based on 12 Federal Land Banks, using $125 million in government seed money but financed by private capital from investors.
Grid – one can go online today and “invest” in funeral homes, some guy named Joe fixing up his basement, dilapidated real estate, and a lemonade stand. All with the SEC’s blessing.
But try to invest in some of the largest financial and industrial companies in the world and the SEC will shut you down.
If some desk jockey with just a modest cranial capacity from OTC went through that TD list, within an hour many of the “offensive” issues could be culled from the hit list. But that would take too much effort.
Which is unsurprising, since those issues are all pink sheets and should be bought and sold in their home market.
And this list is preliminary, I expect a not insignificant number to get removed from the list as challenges to particular issues come in.
Justin, the regs are totally fine with these entities to trade Pink going forward. For example huge common stock market cap internationals Nestle and Daimler trade on Pink sheets. They just got things incorrect such as listing many Enbridge preferreds as pink sheet current and a few of them as not current which they cant be both.
Surely, as you mentioned, some of these will get corrected in time though. Its just ironic how they spew videos and info to tell people to get current and knowledgable on the new regs, but are totally clueless on cleaning their own house up first.
Man that is some long list
Just took a VERY quick glance and I saw names from Brookfield, Canadian Utilities, Toronto Dominion Bank then a ton of Ishares issues, JP Morgan, a bunh of Vanguard issues plus names mentioned here like IPWLG, IPWLO , Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services, Ocean Spray
This link seems to work better
https://www.tdameritrade.com/retail-en_us/resources/pdf/TDA101550.pdf
I talked to TDA about this previously. sounds like they are just taking the list from OTC and regurgitating it. It is supposed to update every week.
Interactive Brokers is doing away with its month low activity fee. Was $10 per month unless you generated $10 or more in commissions in a month of had a 100k balance. Now, if you want to try IBKR starting with a small balance it’s a bit cheaper to do so.
Thanks for the heads-up, Bob. So I guess this means I can move from Lite to ‘regular’ for no additional cost?
Bur – rather than give you my interpretation I just reproduce the notice:
Dear Client,
While many of our clients actively trade or maintain substantial equity in their account, we have decided to eliminate our monthly inactivity fee so there are no impediments to maintaining an account with IBKR.
Effective July 1, 2021, you will no longer be charged USD 10 for not maintaining a minimum balance or transaction activity for account U********. This change will be reflected in your August 2021 account statement.
Our decision to remove inactivity fees aligns us with industry standards and reflects our ongoing commitment to provide clients with low-cost trading solutions.
I like how they put such a marvelous spin on it.
Look at their sentence:
“Our decision to remove inactivity fees aligns us with industry standards and reflects our ongoing commitment to provide clients with low-cost trading solutions.”
Should be:
” we admit that we have NOT been aligned to industry standards from the get go, and are now forced to change as customers start to realize we are screwing them up & down. This reflects our admission that we have been gouging our hapless customers with nuisance fees all this time notwithstanding our stated commitments to provide low cost trading. We were seeing lots of departures and so we were forced to do this to survive. We don’t give a crap about our customers but we sure need their business.”
Inspy – and I thought I got cynical at times!
Price is what you pay; value is what you get (hey, I just thought of that!). Of the 4 U.S. brokerages I use IBKR is my favorite. That’s based on my criteria. Assets at IBKR have grown substantially since I began with them 2 years ago, while others have shrunk. Most of that is asset movement, not appreciation, although I’ve had plenty of that, too.
I am voting with my feet.
Bob – it’s those ‘market data fees’ and clunky platform that made me relocate away in 2012 – along with the horrendous FX platform that I traded on for a year or more – man that was terrible. I only used it because it spared me from having to open a separate FX broker account, but after I did transition to Oanda (FX) I realized I was literally overpaying thousands in spreads.
The Pro is excellent for active equity traders, and you have mentioned that you’ve had access to foreign issues and early OTC preferreds (on Pro or Lite?), which is good.
Fredson – things have changed. IBKR is fantastic for foreign exchange trading. I can buy any amount of FX, any currency pair, in 5 seconds, right off the brokerage platform. The pricing is institutional for trades of US$20k and above. The spread for major pairs will be a few pips.
Getting quotes is the same as it used to be. You can “trick” the system into giving you live bid/ask without paying for them by pretending to enter a new order. But truth is I get my market data elsewhere. Freerealtime has great charts and will give you the last 30 trades. I will use Vanguard for quotes, too, and TDA for Level II, and FINRA for bonds.
During the trading day, if I’m at my desk, I will have them all open at the same time.
For foreign, you have access to most exchanges in the world. One thing they don’t trade is US OTC grey market issues, so no temp ticker trading.
IBKR doesn’t have funds, doesn’t manage money, doesn’t do underwriting. They only do brokerage, so they work hard at it. That is my perception.
My statement from Fidelity is showing the SCE Trust VI 5.00% Trust Preference Shares (SCE-L) dividends as non-qualified. This site lists them (and the others) as qualified. Which is correct?
TIA
SCE-L dividends are qualified. If this is a recent acquisition you may not have met the holding period yet. If it’s not new it is an error. In my experience such errors are almost always corrected by the time you get a 1099. It’s only the 1099 that matters. If that’s in error you want it fixed.
OK Yes, recent purchase.
Looking at my YTD report I see they also have AGM, EQH, and AHL preferred dividends listed as non-qualified however on last years 1099 they end up properly listed as qualified. So there you have it – they should get it straight by the time YE tax docs are issued.
Thanks
IBKR continues to do good things …
Couple of examples. One, they run great webinars. From beginning level material to expert topics, from macro, to nitty gritty trading subjects ….
https://ibkrwebinars.com/?source=WBNewsletter_WBlogo
Two, they make tax time much easier by providing cap gains trading detail as a PDF separate from the rest of the 1099. (For Form 8949.) Just attach the whole document; no need to parse it like I have to do with other brokerage statements. A great time saver.
Phone support may be mediocre but IBKR puts a lot of thought into every aspect of their brokerage platform and they do a lot of things that none of my other brokers do.
They send me emails when an issue I own is about to flip from short term to long term. Acts as a reminder to sell if you want a short term loss or not to sell if you want to hold until a gain goes long term. Nobody else does that.
What is everybody’s list of annoyances with their broker tax statement that their:
1. Broker does wrong (other than a certain broker getting qualified dividends wrong, I already know about that ha)
2. wish they had been warned about it before the statement
3. An Explanation would be nice to have
Both regular accounts and 1099R/5498’s.
E*TRADE never correctly reports fractional share values (which I have a lot of because I DRIP a bunch of holdings), and then contradicts itself between a) the initial transaction, b) the portfolio holdings, and c) the 1099.
I once spent 15 minutes on the phone stepping a rep through the issue, got them to acknowledge it and promise to file a support case, which (of course) disappeared into a black hole. Admittedly I’m talking pennies (thousandths and ten thousandths of shares), so I never bothered to follow up. But it still gripes my a**.
Vanguard and TDA hit it right on the money.
I mentioned a few weeks back that Schwab sometimes shows a tighter (but never wider) bid/ask spread than TD and Fidelity. You can see this at the moment with GMLPF. TD and Fidelity show 23.40/23.50 right now while Schwab shows 23.40/23.41.
P.S. Watch out if you’ve traded GMLPP at TD. Now that it’s OTC, there is a $6.95 transaction fee!
Any opinions on this? Got this today from ETrade
———————————————————
New rules will affect your ability to buy and sell “Pink No Information” securities, including at E*TRADE
On September 28, 2021, new requirements take effect that will impact the market for—and value of—certain “over-the-counter (OTC) securities” you currently hold or have held in the past. The new rules apply to “Pink No Information” OTC securities of companies that fail to publicly report and keep current financial and other company information and will restrict the ability of U.S. brokers, like E*TRADE from making these products generally available.
Some background on the new requirements
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted amendments to SEC Rule 15c2-11 governing the submission and publication of OTC quotations. These amendments will prohibit broker-dealers from submitting or publicly disseminating bid/ask quotations for OTC securities of issuers that do not meet enhanced information filing requirements.
Securities of issuers that make the required information publicly available by the deadline in the rule should not be affected.
What these changes mean for you
Starting September 28, 2021, you will no longer be able to buy or sell “Pink No Information” OTC securities through E*TRADE. Other restrictions related to the purchase of these securities may apply sooner. Please keep in mind that the upcoming changes will negatively affect the value of any “Pink No Information” OTC securities you hold now or in the future.
I wonder if there exists a Master List of all OTC ” Pink no information ” securities, so we can see if any of our holdings fall into that category?
On otcmarkets.com you can use the stock screener, select for market = pink, type = preferred, and USA issue (in my case), then sort by market until pink-no-information is at the top.
You can produce such a list at otcmarkets.com.
Vanguard banned pink no info issues a couple years ago.
Slapped that into a google sheet. You can find it at
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18MYpt4jxWWL3isQbVPAgr99gfjcW_LP7d8JOr6Vi_Q8/edit?usp=sharing
Sorted so ‘No Info’ is at the top. There are 30 of ’em.
Thanks for doing the Spreadsheet, Bur. I was also able to obtain the info from the OTC website, but yours is more compact.
Does the restriction coming on September also include “No pink information” Common Stocks as well? OTC website says there are about 5400 of these.
Inspy, I don’t know. I should add that to create that spreadsheet I simply followed Farwell’s spec; I don’t claim that what I posted accurately captures the list of pfds which will have trading restricted.
Also, note there’s a lot of discussion about this issue over on Reader Initiated Alerts.
Not sure if this is the right area but I saw some institutional comments. In any case, is there a decent quality source people use for basic features of institutional prefs / bonds i.e. quantum but for the institutional space? FINRA is typically missing call dates/floating coupons, same for IB and Schwab, ETrade/Tradeweb is ok but it only shows maybe 10% of the population at any one time.
A.
bloomberg or eikon
re: institutionals
You can go to Bloomberg or Eikon (Reuters) but you will pay richly for the privilege.
Personally, I do my own spreadsheet for those issues in which I have an interest. The FINRA bond site can help in identifying issues of interest and provide pricing information. You can build your own watch list at FINRA, too, for current price information.
For terms, I almost always go to the FWP for the issues I follow. FINRA links to the 424 but the FWP is much easier to follow, and provides the CUSIP.
Be sure you understand the terms of the issues of interest as there are meaningful differences between institutionals and exchange traded issues.
If you’re going to be serious about trading institutionals I recommend IBKR. Better availability and better pricing than other platforms, although I also hear good things about Fidelity’s bond platform. I also buy through Vanguard but only if it’s buy and hold forever as spreads are not tight enough for my liking.
thanks mcg, Bob. Was hoping to avoid Bloomy/Reuters as I no longer have access.
Not all cusips have a prospectus linked from FINRA e.g. 174610AH8 from Citizens Financial etc. In fact, I couldn’t find complete details about that issue anywhere.
174610AH8
I loosely follow the issue and it is one of the few for which I could not find a prospectus. It probably was issued by a predecessor company. But look through other SEC filings and you will find terms.
Info I have is it went to floating as of Apr 6 at 3mL+3.96% and trading right about par, so about a 4% yld on a callable floater. Wish I’d bought it (and many others) a year ago when it traded down to 65.
CFG had, if I recall correctly, has a total of 4 preferred on the institutional list.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/759944/000119312515119732/d901081dex31.htm
Good research! Appears that at one point they were issued as 144A securities and later registered.
In the ongoing saga of getting-to-know-IBKR… In addition to a $1/bond commission (expected), IBKR is charging me a varying amoung of “Misc Fees”. Anyone know what these could possibly be?
These Misc Fees seem to have no relation to volume (I was charged a few bucks more in ‘Misc Fees’ for a *smaller* order).
I’ve never seen these fees with other brokers, though I’m not complaining: I’ve never been able to place a limit order on bonds with other brokers the way I can w IBKR.
Bur asked: “Anyone know what these could possibly be?”
Bur, the “miscellaneous” fee is just another form of commission for bond trades. You have to add these two together to get the actual commission that was charged. And you never know in advance exactly how much you will be charged for any bond trade. The reason for this is that IB uses many different bond trading exchanges to place your trade. It seems that they do NOT all charge the same amount and IB just reflects the actual charges. In general the maximum you will be charged is $1.5 per bond on buys. However it can be larger for small quantities of corporates and/or CD.s Say you have a buy order for 25 ($25,000) corporates and only get filled on 2 ($2,000) In that case you might get charged up to ~ $4 per bond. Getting fills this small are NOT the norm when you have an open order to buy a larger quantity but it does happen. . . Not bad, not good, just another quirk you have to deal with.
Noted, and thanks.
BMTX – Does anyone else own BMTX at Fidelity from the original spinout from CUBI????? To this day Fidelity is still identifying it only as 232CNT014 and not by symbol BMTX. To the best of my knowledge I still cannot sell it at Fidelity if I wanted to… Call to Fidelity ends up with a line of crap about them still waiting for the info to come from the company. Yeah, right! Pick up the phone and find out why 3 months after the rest of the world has it identified as BMTX you are still waiting on the company…. Having owned CUBI at both TDA and Fidelity, I know TDA got the info to take care of this months ago. Keep waiting for Godot, Fidelity… don’t do anything proactive…. grrrrrrrrrrr… Anybody else still own “232CNT014” at Fidelity?
Can you sell it by replacing the symbol with the Cusip #? If not ask the phone rep to do that, sometimes it works but not all reps know that.
Martin – I’ve not toyed with it at all because the amounts are small and I planned to take a wait and see attitude on the position anyway to see if they can make something out of this fintech…. But it does bug me that it’s still not shown properly or valued at all in my account… After the fact I began to wonder whether or not there’s a lock up period for those who acquired this directly via that CUBI spinoff, but nevertheless, it makes no sense that TDA has my position there properly identified as BMTX and Fidelity doesn’t… Also in the back of my head, I keep betting myself that within a few days time Fidelity will have miraculously fixed this despite their excuse making blaming the problem on external forces… We’ll see.
2wr: It’s times like that I wish they’d offer a pay-as-you-go support option with one of their web engineers. You just know that 5 minutes on the phone with one of those folks would lead to an ‘aha’ and a bug fix in short order. Although I’m probably underestimating the size of their bug stack…
I moved my portfolio of mostly Canadian preferreds from Schwab to Fidelity after Schwab refused to correctly classify them as qualified dividends and feedback from this board indicated that Fidelity didn’t have the same problem. That was incorrect information, Fidelity misclassified them all, except for one small holding in a Brookfield preferred issue. I did a write-up of IRS regulations which clearly allow for qualified treatment and submitted a spreadsheet showing the results. My CPA is going to report them as classified on my tax return. Fidelity’s service team told me I could pound sand. I then reached out to their private client support service team, which is at least being polite enough to read the regulations that I sent them. Hoping for the best.
TW my first hand experience is that Schwab misclassified 100% of Cdn pref dividends. Vanguard got them 100% right as did IBKR and TDA. No experience with Fidelity on the subject.
Vanguard got the withholding on one Cdn pref wrong initially but corrected after some persistence on my part.
Go where you are treated best.
Tim, I’ve had experience with this issue at Fidelity. Well. not Canadian preferreds…but other preferreds that were reported by Fidelity as non qualified when I knew they were qualified. I too was told to pound sand by customer service. Actually, they flat out lied to me and said they had verified the info from the company’s website. I asked for a link…no response. I eventually got it solved with an email from the CFO at the company verifying that the dividends were qualified. Situation resolved by the TAX department…Call them, not the regular service group. Rep there actually listened. Good luck.
Thanks, I’ll let you know how it turns out. They’ve said it will take a while to address it. Better a slow “yes” than a quick “no”
Fidelity has taken up Schwab’s position asserting via a servicing processor that Canadian Preferred issues must be registered with the US Treasury department as equities for their dividends to be treated as QDI. IRS regulations do not include this requirement, under IRS Publication 550. Disappointing. Any moron with a computer terminal can look up (for example) the Bank of Montreal’s investor relations information and see that their preferred stocks are equities. If I can get the exact treasury department filing repository I’m willing to ask my issuers to make such a filing. Other suggestions welcome.
Stop beating your head against the wall. Vanguard, IBKR and TDA (for now) get the taxes right. Don’t be Don Quixote, just move.
They actually don’t get them right.
They are just relying on the treaty provision and being lazy.
It is a little more complicated than that.
This page from Riocan IR explains a little better.
https://investor.riocan.com/investor-relations/distribution-info/United-States-Unitholders/default.aspx