I am Financing my Startup with my 401k
blog.ezliu.com
blog.ezliu.com
The author doesn't seem to realize that he will need to pay income tax on the money that he withdraws, on top of the 10% early withdrawal. This makes the cost of acquiring capital much higher than if he took a loan or an investment. If he has $100k in his 401k, and he withdraws it all in one chunk, he will be left with maybe $45k after 10% penalty and taxes.
The upside is that if he does this properly, ie wait until the next fiscal year, and if he doesn't have any other income income, the taxes he pays might be much less than if he had a regular income.
If all he needs is $40k, if I were him, I would look into alternate methods, like taking out a loan, etc. I've gotten some credit card offers for up to $25k interest fee for about a year (2% transaction fee). If he's this confident he will make money, maybe he should investigate this and if it doesn't take off, he can pay it off with a 401k withdrawal. He would need to figure out at what point he would be making income to pay back this loan, etc.
But straight withdrawing money from the 401k seems like a waste.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollovers_as_Business_Start-Ups
This is how many people buy those Dunkin' Donuts or McDonald's franchises.
As for it being a good idea ... do you really think your 401k in mutual funds is going to give you a comfortable retirement? After your hard earned 401k savings are pillaged & plundered by the likes of GS and their HF algo's, Ben Bernanke & friends have printed so much money that your retirement fund will barely buy a new car when you retire and Congress has frittered your Social Security away on endless war ... this doesn't seem like such a bad idea!
[1] I should mention that we're a business, not a startup by PG's definition, and were bringing in revenue from day 1.
I think you have a good point about the merits of getting a loan and liquidating only if you HAD to; I thought the author's points were interesting though about paying a tax penalty now rather than an equity stake to an investor.
The 10% penalty does not count toward your tax liability, so really they only witheld 20%.
I know if I did this right now, it would be closer to 40% for me. Plus the 10% penalty, so I would only get to use 50% of what I withdrew and stash 20% for tax day.
What I do is 401k and SEP IRA (and defer) as much as I can during the high income years (and pull forward expenses), then convert it to Roth IRA during the lean years, to take advantage of differences in marginal rate. The goal being to get it all into a Roth as soon as possible at an overall decent rate.
Roth gets you forever compounding, and tax free dividends and other gains, and no taxes on distribution, which is basically ideal.
With currently-taxed contributions you don't have to worry about future taxes...but you start off with a substantially smaller base. You also take the risk that future taxes won't be lower than they are now, or that even if they are higher that retirement withdrawals will not be subject to special taxation regimes.
it boggles my mind that people presume ignorance on the part of the actor (as referenced in the blog that "everybody else is doing it wrong").
its a deliberate play against my current income that i will report and its not actually a strict withdrawal. 40k and 10% early fee were strictly an example. that's not actually what's going on in my case, but its a lot more digestable and the vanilla case and I'd do it even if that was my situation (I'm doing better than that).
i was a financial professional and think about that sort of stuff.
All you mentioned was the 10% early withdrawal fees. You also didn't adequately compare your decision with things like taking loans, credit cards, home equity line of credit, etc. Depending on what you expect your cash flow to be, taking short term loans might be a better solution.
Maybe you might know better, but based on what you wrote, it sounds like you made an ignorant decision.
There are very limited exceptions to the withdrawal penalty, and they are all hardship-based. Launching a startup is not a hardship.
Alternatively, if you are doing one of those Roll-into-Business 401ks...well, you have a fool for a financial advisor or you are being taken for a ride.
There's actually some crazy stuff you can do with a large enough 401k to use it to fund a business startup -- it's called a "Rollover as Business Startup (ROBS)". Essentially you open a new 401k plan for a new business, roll over your old 401k balance to the new plan, and have the new plan buy stock in the employer (i.e. the new company), financing it. Essentially you can get your ownership of a startup into a 401k, a huge tax savings (and complete tax savings if it is a Roth 401k). This also avoids the early distribution penalty and income tax on the 401k balance.
There are lots of issues setting it up (the IRS hates it, many of the people promoting it are scammers, so basically if there are any paperwork deficiencies in the plan, you're screwed), but it has worked, and is technically legal. It requires $50-100k 401k balance to be generally worthwhile, and is mainly used by small business or franchise people who can't otherwise get financing, but is an option.
Summary: it looks pretty good, but you are not explaining yourself front and center - pitch to landlords, get the money quote from down the bottom of the page, and please, this is a long haul business - get someone with deeper pockets behind you - you have traction, you have clients, you have committed your last penny - you hit tick every box. Go to SV, find angels. Get a longer runway. Put this on ANgelList now.
So, in the spirit of HN, a critique :
1. Explain the pitch better on the front page - "Landlords - get tenants to fill in applications online. Quicker, easier, can see status of all applicants instantly, and we conduct bank checks and update you in real time"
I had to dig around to understand that (and I may be wrong of course)
(Whats the competition like - I would guess this is something realtors offer routinely)
2. Front page again - no one rents the Golden Gate bridge. Try something that says rental please - give me subconcious cues to what you are selling. look at http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-illustration-13635470-your-... - ten second search brought up hundreds of possibilites.
3. The learn more page - the images on the right look like misaligned iframes - put think borders around them to indicate they are screenshots - try putting them at 45o angles to make it clearer
4. the online application - break it into manageable chunks - bootstrap does tabs - it was daunting on PC - in my iphone its pretty bad.
4. If there ever was a case for having people sign in with facebook or linkedin - this is it. Half of the info wanted from a tenant is in their profile.
5. and back to the front page <<< "More applications per vacancy, faster inventory turnover and rapid closings. Rocket Lease has saved me $6,000 this year!">>> - its three scrolls down ! Put in in place of the iphone image. or carousel it. sell yourself on your front page. Please.
Its pretty good - I have no idea of the market in the US, but you seem like you are on a long grind to market acceptance, rather than a viral explosion. So I thin your 40K may be a short runway but good luck - and please explain yourself in the front page. As a landlord I would have walked long before understanding or seeing the money testimonial.
This should be a profitable long haul play - build a brand around your story and the value to landlords, sure, but the bread and butter should come from white labelling to every realtor from here to Nebraska. Really, ask for some advice here on pitching to AngelList. You really do hit all the boxes, but sales to realtors is notorious (at least in UK - highly fragmented and demanding market, but they all want nice regular monthly paychecks from rentals - and you are a value add they could sell)
You may have read about Mitt Romney's IRA. It is huge. Obviously that is a guy that goes to great lengths to invest wisely and avoid taxes. When you are rich you will wish you could get more money into that account because of it's preferential tax treatment.
That said, I hope your company does great and you end up so wealthy it doesn't matter. People who are hardworking and ambitious usually end up OK even if there financial planning isn't perfect. Good luck.
And if you have enough funds to be in inheritance tax territory for children, after gift and education allowances and trusts and nepotistic employment, well then it's OK to give a little to government or charities instead of spoiling the kids to death.
That said, I wish you the best of lucks.
You also might want to check your font, on chrome windows 7 looks really bad http://i.imgur.com/vz8cZ.png
I wish you the best, but betting everything means you could lose everything, too.
I do understand your position and I share it completely. After working for 5 years at Tomtom, I had an idea. It took me half a year to refine it, hire the right people and basically be ready for some round of funding. Thus I found myself stuck with the usual hassle of producing the right material to convince eventual investors to bet on my company. I spent precious time and efforts in doing useless stuff like business plans, investor packages, etc. And I was also really skeptic about giving away equities. All in all you seek investors for... what? Counseling? Money? Contacts? Not being able to give myself a clear answer to this question I decided to become the owner of my future and I fully funded my startup with roughly $300000: beestar.eu (shamelessly self promoting here :)).
I am perfectly conscious that I might lose a lot of money, but I do need to worry about the technology I am trying to ship rather than inheriting the compromise burden that comes with investor's money (not to mention the usual equity's hemorrhage).
If everything fails, this will still be the most exciting adventure of my life.
Good luck.
What makes me nervous, and I consider to be great big red lights on this idea, is that his description of why he did it is full of emotional language about committing and investing in himself and the thrill of making it "real". These are words and approaches that make feel very cautious about anyone because I'm always unsure how much the decision is based on a cold appraisal of the facts and the risk/reward ratio, vs. rah-rah.
I doubt ezl's blog entry is even a tenth of what he went through in making the decision (at least I hope so), so I won't presume to judge. But as an outsider critiquing this idea, I want to see more cold logic, less adrenaline.
On a serious note, I'd recommend changing those.
Do be aware you may owe regular income tax on the distribution as well as the 10% penalty.
For others looking to tap retirement capital you might research self-directed IRAs and 401ks. I don't have one but considered it for a real estate deal recently.
Quick Tax Reference: http://turbotax.intuit.com/support/iq/Less-Common-Income/Wit...
Either way, please consult a CPA before taking any action.
Having been a landlord in the past, I can also very easily see the market for your product. I really needed it, in fact, and I think your major issues are going to be getting the onboarding experience just right, and letting the landlord / agency communities know about it. (In fact, it might help landlords do it without agency help, which is nicely disruptive.) Those are nice problems to have.
I would split test the single page vs. multiple page application form.
Get those early users in, get feedback, iterate. Push your main selling points. If you can get some users using this service, you can get many. I like the name too.
The power of compound interest. Every time I look at how much I need to save for a decent retirement I wish I'd started five years earlier (which I completely could have afforded).
If you want a decent return today you've got to heavily leverage or take on a lot of risk. That's probably going to be the norm for a while.
Yes, the next three years might be low but it will rise again and the question isn't just when he can start paying back into it, but how quickly can he get it back to it's current level.
Back on topic, let's assume that things stay bad for five years before they pick up some. I can get 3% risk free right now in the UK (cash investment) and five years of that is (compounded) 16%.
The question is can he get the fund back to it's current value plus 16% in five years?
Because it's not just about how quickly he can start paying into it again, it's about how quickly he can get it back to it's current value (or it's current value plus 16%), so he's got a comparable amount when the interest rates do pick up.
Even if it doesn't pick up and 3% is the new norm, that still compounds over 20 years to doubling it's current value. Is he going to be able to / be willing to make up that money in some other way during that period?
That's all a bit all over the place but the point is that low rates aren't nothing (particularly not when compounded), and even with low returns rebuilding that fund isn't going to be trivial.
The impact is a lot smaller nowadays, though, given current low returns (except with high risk of negative returns).