How to minimize damage from sale of savings account
"Bank of America has been selling off their local branches to smaller banks in recent years.  Here are a few news stories related to this: Along with the branch buildings, the local customers' savings and checking accounts are sold to the new bank.  It is interesting that you were told that your savings account is being sold, but that your checking account will remain with BofA.  I guess it depends on the terms of the particular sale. Here are your options, as I see it: Let the savings account move to the new bank, and see what the new terms are like.  You might actually like the new bank.  If you don't, you can shop around and close your account at the new bank after it has been created. Close your account now, before the move.  If you have a different bank you'd like to move to, there is no need to wait. Since your checking account is apparently staying with BofA, you could move all your money from your savings account to your checking account, closing your savings account.  Then after ""mid August"" when the local branch switches to the new bank and everyone else's savings account has moved, you can call up BofA and tell them you want to move some of the money from your checking account into a new savings account. If you really have your heart set on staying with BofA, option 3 looks like a good, easy choice. To address your other concerns: Bank of America is a big credit card company, so I doubt that your credit card is being sold off.  Your credit card account should stay as-is.  Even if your savings account and checking account are at a different bank, there is no need to switch credit cards. Your savings and checking accounts have nothing to do with your credit report or score, so there is no concern there.  If you end up wanting to switch to a new credit card with a different bank, there are minor hits to your credit score involved with applying for a new card and closing your current card, but if I were you I would not worry about your credit score in this.  Switch credit cards if you want a change, and keep your credit card if you don't."
Brokerages are supposed to keep your money separate from theirs. So, even if they fail as a company, your money and investments are still there, and can be transferred to another brokerage. It doesn't matter if it's an IRA or taxable account.  Of course, as is the case with MF Global, if illegally take their client's money (i.e., steal), it may be a different story. In such cases, SIPC covers up to $500K, of which $250K can be cash, as JoeTaxpayer said.  You may be interested in the following news item from the SEC. It's about some proposed changes, but to frame the proposal they lay out the way it is now: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2011/2011-128.htm The most relevant quote:   The Customer Protection Rule (Rule 15c3-3).   This SEC rule requires a   broker-dealer to segregate customer securities and cash from the   firm’s proprietary business activities. If the broker-dealer fails,   these customer assets should be readily available to be returned to   customers. In addition to the adjustment type in NL7's answer, there are a host of others.  If there are any adjustments, form 8949 is required, if not, the gains can be separated into short and long-term and added together to be entered on Schedule D.  Anything requiring an adjustment code in column F of the 8949 requires an entry in column G.   Some other example entries for column F include: (see the 8949 instructions for a complete list) **A wash sale occurs when you sell or trade stock or securities at a loss and within 30 days before or after the sale you: Buy substantially identical stock or securities, Acquire substantially identical stock or securities in a fully taxable trade, Acquire a contract or option to buy substantially identical stock or securities, or Acquire substantially identical stock for your individual retirement account (IRA) or Roth IRA. (from Pub17) In most cases of fraud, your liability is limited to $50 if you report it within certain number of days (I think 2). After that the liability grows to something like $500. You are covered even if your negligence has caused the breach. In addition VISA guarantees credit cards - in most cases you have 0 liability. Finally checking & savings accounts are FDIC insured up to $250,000 in case the bank goes bankrupt. The $250,000 is a total for all accounts at the given bank. It's up to  you to report and ask for refund though and sometimes you have to jump through hoops to get it but usually it's fairly straightforward and it usually takes only 2 or 3 days. First, what's the reason? Why do you have that much in cash at all - are you concerned about market volatility, are you planning to buy a house, do you have tens of millions of dollars and this is your slush fund?  Are you a house flipper and this is part of business for you? If you need the money for short term use - ie, you're buying a house in cash next month - then as long as you're in a sound bank (one of the big national ones, for example) it seems reasonable.  You can never predict a crash like 2008, but it seems unlikely that Chase or Citibank will go under in the next few weeks. If you like to have a cash position, then split the money among multiple banks.  Buy a CD at one major bank with some of the amount.  My in-laws have a trust which is partially invested in CDs, and they use multiple banks for this purpose to keep their accounts fully insured.  Each separate bank you're covered up to 250k, so if you have $150k at Chase and $150k at a local bank, you're covered.  (You're also covered in a much larger amount - up to 1MM potentially - if you are married, as you can have a separate account each for $250k and a joint account up to $500k.) Otherwise, why do you have that much in cash?  You should invest it in something that will return more than inflation, at a minimum... Edit post-clarifications: $350k is around my level of 'Maybe, maybe not'.  You're risking $100k on a pretty low risk (assuming this isn't a small local bank, and even those are pretty low still).  In order to remove that risk you have to do something active - ie, take 100k somewhere else, open a new bank account, etc. - which isn't exactly the hardest thing in the world, but it does take effort.  Is it worth the 0.001% chance (entirely made up) you lose the 100k?  That's $10, if you agree with that risk chance.  Up to you. It wouldn't be particularly hard, though, to open an account with an online bank, deposit $100k in there in a 6 month CD, then pay the IRS from your other account and when the 6 month CD expires take the cash back into your active account.  Assuming you're not planning on buying a house in the next six months this should be fine, I'd think (and even then you'd still have $150k for the downpayment up front, which is enough to buy a $750k house w/o PMI). Additionally, as several commenters note: if you can reasonably do so, and your money won't be making significant interest, you might choose to pay your taxes now rather than later.  This removes the risk entirely; the likely small interest you earn over 3 months may be similar to the amount you'd spend (mostly of your time, plus possibly actual expenses) moving it to another bank.  If you're making 2% or 3% this may not be true, but if you're in a 0.25% account like my accounts are, $100k * 0.25% * 0.25 is $62.50, after all. Personally I solve this by saving enough liquid capital (aka checking and savings) to cover pretty much everything for six months. But this is a bad habit. A better approach is to use budget tracking software to make virtual savings accounts and place payments every paycheck into them, in step with your budget. The biggest challenge you'll likely face is the initial implementation; if you're saving up for a semi-annual car insurance premium and you've got two months left, that's gonna make things difficult. In the best case scenario you already have a savings account, which you reapportion among your various lumpy expenses. This does mean you need to plan when it is you will actually buy that shiny new Macbook Pro, and stick to it for a number of months. Much more difficult than buying on credit. Especially since these retailers hate dealing in cash. Banks work pretty hard to make themselves a big part of your life with bill pay, auto-deposit, loans and other services.  You need to carefully unwind each one and be on the lookout for fees.  If you close a savings account, will your checking account suddenly have fees?  If you stop auto deposit, will there suddenly be a fee? Do you have a business that deposits money?  A Google Ad sense account?  PayPal or the equivalent?  These all might be tied to your bank accounts. Wait a couple of months, leaving enough cash in the old back to prevent fees if possible.  If two months go by and there isn't any activity on the account, you can probably close it. After you are sure all the written checks have cleared, go to the back and get a counter check for the balance of the account.   You could alternately just write yourself one more check for the remaining balance and call the bank to close the account.  You could electronically transfer the funds if you wanted too.  HOWEVER, it is important to be careful of the timing, the last thing you want to do is write a check or transfer the money after the account is closed. (per Dilip Sarwate) If you do the check and phone call thing, make sure you do it in a short enough period of time that you don't incur a fee. Having and closing regular bank accounts won't have any tax implications in the US. If you have multiple accounts, you have to empty them all before you can deduct any losses. Your loss is not a capital loss, its a deduction. It is calculated based on the total amount you have withdrawn from all your Roth IRA's, minus the total basis. It will be subject to the 2% AGI treshhold (i.e.: if your AGI is > 100K, none of it is deductible, and you have to itemize to get it). Bottom line - think twice. Summarizing the discussion in comments: If you have a very low AGI, I would guess that your tax liability is pretty low as well. Even if you deduct the whole $2K, and all of it is above the other deductions you have (which in turn is above the standard deduction of almost $6K), you save say $300 if you're in 15% tax bracket. That's the most savings you have. However I'm assuming something here: I'm assuming that you're itemizing your deductions already and they're above the standard deduction. This is very unlikely, with such a low income. You don't have state taxes to deduct, you probably don't spend a lot to deduct sales taxes, and I would argue that with the low AGI you probably don't own property, and if you do - you don't have a mortgage with a significant interest on it. You can be in 15% bracket with AGI between (roughly) $8K and $35K, i.e.: you cannot deduct between $160 and $750 of the $2K, so it's already less than the maximum $300. If your AGI is $8K, the deduction doesn't matter, EIC might cover all of your taxes anyway. If your AGI is $30K, you can deduct only $1400, so if you're in the 15% bracket - you saved $210. That, again, assuming it's above your other deductions, which in turn are already above the standard deduction. Highly unlikely. As I said in the comments - I do not think you can realistically save on taxes because of this loss in such a manner. "You might find some of the answers here helpful; the question is different, but has some similar concerns, such as a changing economic environment. What approach should I take to best protect my wealth against currency   devaluation & poor growth prospects. I want to avoid selling off any   more of my local index funds in a panic as I want to hold long term.   Does my portfolio balance make sense? Good question; I can't even get US banks to answer questions like this, such as ""What happens if they try to nationalize all bank accounts like in the Soviet Union?""  Response: it'll never happen. The question was what if! I think that your portfolio carries a lot of risk, but also offsets what you're worried about.  Outside of government confiscation of foreign accounts (if your foreign investments are held through a local brokerage), you should be good.  What to do about government confiscation?  Even the US government (in 1933) confiscated physical gold (and they made it illegal to own) - so even physical resources can be confiscated during hard times. Quite a large portion of my foreign investments have been bought at an   expensive time when our currency is already around historic lows,   which does concern me in the event that it strengthens in future. What   strategy should I take in the future if/when my local currency starts   the strengthen...do I hold my foreign investments through it and just   trust in cost averaging long term, or try sell them off to avoid the   devaluation? Are these foreign investments a hedge?  If so, then you shouldn't worry if your currency does strengthen; they serve the purpose of hedging the local environment.  If these investments are not a hedge, then timing will matter and you'll want to sell and buy your currency before it does strengthen.  The risk on this latter point is that your timing will be wrong." Basically you need to use a time-value-of-money equation to discount the cashflows back to today. The Wikipedia formula will likely work fine for you, then you just need to pick an effective interest rate to use in the calculation. Run each of your amounts and dates though the formula (there are various on-line calculators to pick from, and sum up the values. You did not mention your location or jurisdiction, but a useful proxy for the interest rate would be the average between the same duration mortgage rate and fixed-deposit rate at your bank; it should be close enough for your purposes - although if an actual lawsuit is involved and the sums high enough to have lawyers, it might be worth engaging an accountant as well to defend the veracity of both the calculation and the interest rates chosen. You can write industry loss warrants. This is the closest thing I’ve found since I’ve been interested in this side of the ILS trade. Hedge funds and asset managers can do this. From what I understand it’s you selling the risk.   Want to start a fund? 🤔 In the United States taxes on the sale of a principal residence are based on the difference between the sale price and the cost of the home. Assuming you meet the requirements you can shelter 250,000 or 500,000 of gains from the sale of your principal residence.  This calculation is not related to the loan balance. The basic equation is sales price minus purchase price. It get a little more complex because some costs to purchase and sell the home are included in the calculation, or if you made renovations to the house that will increase your costs and decrease your gains. Trying to decrease the loan balance just before selling the house would just be paying yourself that money at the settlement table. It could save you some money on interest between now and settlement but emptying your bank account to save a few bucks doesn't seem worth it. I would also prefer to have the money in the bank to pay for some expenses that will popup getting the house sold, you moving, and the settlement date. There's a couple issues to consider: When you sell your primary home, the IRS gives you a $500k exemption (married, filing jointly) on gain.  If you decide not to sell your current house now, and you subsequently fall outside the ownership/use tests, then you may owe taxes on any gains when you sell the house. Rather than being concerned about your net debt, you should be concerned about your monthly debt payments.  Generally speaking, you cannot have debt payments of more than 36% of your monthly income.  If you can secure a renter for your current property, then you may be able to reach this ratio for your next (third) property. Also, only 75% of your expected monthly rental income is considered for calculating your 36% number. (This is not an exhaustive list of risks you expose yourself to). The largest risk is if you or your spouse find yourself without income (e.g. lost job, accident/injury, no renter), then you may be hurting to make your monthly debt payments.   You will need to be confident that you can pay all your debts.  A good rule that I hear is having the ability to pay 6 months worth of debt.  This may not necessarily mean having 6 months worth of cash on hand, but access to that money through personal lines of credit, borrowing against assets, selling stocks/investments, etc. You also want to make sure that your insurance policies fully cover you in the event that a tenant sues you, damages property, etc.  You also don't want to face a situation where you are sued because of discrimination.  Hiring a property management company to take care of these things may be a good peace-of-mind. "Your objectives are contradictory and/or not possible. Eliminating the non-taxable objective: You could divide the $100K in 5 increments, making a ""CD ladder"" $25K in 3mo CD (or savings a/c) $25K in 6 mo CD $25K in 9mo CD $25K in 1 yr CD or similar structure (6mo also works well) Every maturing CD you are able to access cash and/or invest in another longest maturity CD, and earn a higher rate of interest. This plan also works well to plan for future interest rates hikes. If you are forced to access (sell CD's)  ALL the $$$ at any time, you will only lose accrued interest, none of the principal.  All FDIC guaranteed. If non-taxable is the highest priority, ""invest"" in a tax-free money market fund....see Vanguard Funds. You will not have FDIC guarantee." I appreciate it. I didn't operate under selling the asset year five but other than that I followed this example. I appreciate the help. These assignments are just poorly laid out. Financial management also plays on different calculation interactions  so it is difficult for me to easily identify the intent at times. Thanks again. @BlackJack does a good answer of addressing the gains and when you are taxed on them and at what kind of rate. Money held in a brokerage account will usually be in a money-market fund, so you would own taxes on the interest it earned.   There is one important consideration that must be understood for capitol Losses.  This is called the Wash Sale Rule.  This rule comes into affect if you sell a stock at a LOSS, and buy shares of the same stock within 30 days (before or after) the sale.  A common tactic used to minimize taxes paid is to 'capture losses' when they occur, since these can be used to offset gains and lower your taxes.  This is normally done by selling a stock in which you have a LOSS, and then either buying another similar stock, or waiting and buying back the stock you sold.   However, if you are intending to buy back the same stock, you must not 'trigger' the Wash Sale Rule or you are forbidden to take the loss. Examples.  Lets presume you own 1000 shares of a stock and it's trading 25% below where you bought it, and you want to capture the loss to use on your taxes. This can be a very important consideration if trading index ETF's  if you have a loss in something like a S&P500 ETF, you would likely incur a wash sale if you sold it and bought a different S&P500 ETF from another company since they are effectively the same thing.  OTOH, if you sold an S&P500 ETF and bought something like a 'viper''total stock market' ETF it should be different enough to not trigger the wash sale rule.  If you are trying to minimize the taxes you pay on stocks, there are basically two rules to follow.  1) When a gain is involved, hold things at least a year before selling, if at all possible.  2) Capture losses when they occur and use to offset gains, but be sure not to trigger the wash sale rule when doing so.