Treasury's Shock and Awe on AIG

According to CNN, the Treasury and Federal Reserve finalized details of the latest restructuring of the financial giant yesterday. The agreement will allow AIG to borrow funds from the Treasury to repay the federal government. This will leave the Treasury a 92% stake in the company.

"Today's announcement is a milestone in the government's long-stated efforts to exit our investments in private companies as soon as practical while protecting taxpayers," the government said. "When all is said and done, we believe taxpayers will recover every dollar invested in AIG and stand a good chance of making a profit."

That's a large chunk of stock, and the government – which is not exactly eager to be seen in the bailout business nowadays, what with all the associated bad press – would surely like to sell it sooner rather than later so it can advertise all the profits its so-called investments are making for taxpayers. This has worked wonders lately with two other bailed-out outfits, Citi (C) and GM (GM).

Thus, the Wall Street Journal reports the government wants to sell a quarter of its stake -- $15 billion worth -- in a series of deals that would ideally start early in 2011.

Continue reading at CNN.com...

Flawed New $100 Bill, $110 Billion Fed Headache

The federal government has produced over 1.1 billion new $100 bills; however the bills have a problem. These high tech bills easily crease during printing, causing blank spots. Now they all must be inspected, and the Feds are still working to find a way to mechanically separate the good bills from the flawed bills. Cost to fix this all: $110 billion.

CNN Money reports:

Originally scheduled for a February 2011 release date, the bills were the first run of a high-tech note designed to combat counterfeiting by including a 3-D security ribbon.

The Federal Reserve first acknowledged an issue with the bills in October, but did not specify the scope of the problem.

The flaw -- a problem with sporadic creasing of the paper that results in small blank spaces -- only surfaced during a part of the process that requires high pressure printing, the official said.

That made the flaw difficult to detect during the normal inspection process.

"The Bureau of Engraving and Printing did testing so they could be sure the notes would run correctly," the official said. "Unfortunately the creasing problem did not reveal during testing. It's very difficult to detect."

Read more here

TIGTA: Scammers Defraud IRS Out of $1.9 Billion Via Multiple I.D. Numbers

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration released a new report asserting that tax scammers have defrauded the federal government out of $1.9 billion by using multiple taxpayer identification numbers. You can find a summary of their report below (courtesy of The TaxProf), or click here to download a PDF of the full text.

Multiple Use of Taxpayer Identification Numbers Continues to Result in Significant Erroneous Exemptions and Credits (2010-40-117):

Individuals inappropriately received at least $380 million in personal tax exemptions and tax credits in 2007 as a result of the multiple use of Taxpayer Identification Numbers (TINs). ...These TINs were used on over 3.2 million tax returns. Over five years, erroneous exemptions and credits could exceed $1.9 billion.

Treasury Authorizes Sale of More Citigroup Stock

Earlier today it was reported that the federal government would begin a fourth round of sales of Citigroup stock. The move is part of the fed's ongoing effort to recoup costs from the financial bailouts.

ABC News reports:

The Treasury Department said Tuesday it had given Morgan Stanley, its agent for the sales, authorization to sell an additional 1.5 billion shares of Citigroup stock beginning immediately.

Citigroup received $45 billion in taxpayer support in one of the largest bank rescues by the government. The government also provided the bank with insurance against losses on a pool of $301 billion in assets.

Of the $45 billion in taxpayer support provided to Citigroup, $25 billion was converted to a government ownership stake that the Treasury has been selling off since last spring. The bank repaid the other $20 billion in December 2009.

The announcement of the new stock sales came a day after Citigroup announced that it had posted its third straight quarterly profit.

The bank, which is still 12 percent owned by the government, earned $2.15 billion, or 7 cents per share, in the three months ending in September.

Read more here

Social Security: No 2011 Increase

On Friday, the Federal Government announced that there would be no rise in Social Security benefits next year. This will mark the second year in a row nearly 60 million senior citizens will not receive an inflation adjustment on their payments. According to CNNMoney.com, inflation has been low in the past two years and the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday that prices were up only slightly over last year. The article continues:

The last Social Security inflation adjustment was in 2009: Beneficiaries got a higher-than-normal 5.8% increase because of a temporary spike in energy prices in the third quarter of 2008.

Soon after, however, energy prices plummeted. Then the bottom fell out of the economy and by the third quarter of 2009 overall price levels had fallen 2.1% from the same period a year earlier. That meant no increase in 2010 Social Security benefit checks.

This year, while there has been some inflation, prices remain lower than they were in the third quarter of 2008 -- and that's the quarter that counts.

Recovery.Gov a Model for Transparency

Recovery.com, the government funded site created to track the spending of government stimulus money, is celebrating it’s one year anniversary today. As this article from USA Today explains, the site has become a model for spending transparency and led to the creation of other sites such as USAspending.gov.

Of the $814 billion in government stimulus spending, there's $18 million that could forever change the way government spends money.

That's how much the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board spent to create Recovery.gov, the website that tracks where the government's stimulus money goes.

The website turns 1 year old today. While it's had a number of publicized flaws, the site already has become the template for how the government will collect and report on its spending.

On Friday, the federal government will begin requiring recipients of non-stimulus money to report to USAspending.gov where that money's going — just like the Recovery.gov does for stimulus funds.

"For good or bad, the needle has been moved by Recovery.gov," says Gary Bass, founder of OMB Watch, a non-profit group that tracks federal spending.

The requirement to make federal spending transparent started before the stimulus. In 2006, Congress required that the government create USAspending.gov — but efforts to get federal recipients to report where the money went fell almost two years behind schedule.

Continue reading at USAToday.com…

US to Probe Thousands More Offshore Tax Evaders

From Reuters.com:

The U.S. government expects to probe thousands more cases of wealthy individuals dodging taxes through offshore bank accounts, on top of the high profile case against UBS AG (UBS.N) (UBSN.VX), a U.S. tax attorney said on Monday.

"We expect over the next couple of years, in addition to the UBS cases, to have somewhere between 4,000 and 7,000 more cases coming to us with. These are from banks and governments cooperating," said Kevin Downing, a senior tax attorney of the U.S. Department of Justice, in a lecture in Singapore.

Some private banking clients are choosing to take cash from Swiss accounts and carry it by hand back to the United States, to avoid an electronic trail, only to be caught by U.S. law enforcement officers and penalized for tax evasion and illegal smuggling of money into the country, Downing said.

"When they go in and close their accounts, they are picking up brand new $100 bills ... that are coming in $100,000 shrink-wrapped bundles. Guess what? We can trace that money," he said, adding such cash would be forfeited.

Singapore was one stop in a tour of Asian cities also including Hong Kong, Beijing and Shanghai by Downing and his U.S. Justice Department team. The tour featured meetings with financial and tax regulatory bodies and bankers discussing cross-border tax prosecutions.

U.S. Needs to Borrow Less than Expected: Geithner

From MarketWatch.com:

The U.S. government's borrowing needs will likely be much less than originally expected, as bank have been repaying funds received during the crisis, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told news channel CNBC.

"We are likely to have to borrow substantially less than we initially anticipated to help repair the damage to our financial system," Geithner said during an interview in Singapore, where he attended a meeting of finance ministers from Asia-Pacific countries.

Geithner also repeated his stance that a strong dollar is in the U.S. interest.

The dollar rose on Thursday, after slumping to 15-month lows earlier this week on expectations that the Federal Reserve will not raise interest rates any time soon.

Geithner's comments came as finance ministers from the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation also told Geithner that the region needs a strong dollar, Dow Jones reported, citing a Russian official.

How Uncle Sam is Killing your Savings

It is always a good idea to save up a little money in case of a rainy day, because you never know when you are going to need it in an emergency. However, according to CNNMoney.com the Federal government’s programs designed to stimulate the economy are actually hurting the investments of average Americans.

What do the record-high Wall Street bonuses have in common with the record-low yields for savers?

Answer: They show yet another way that prudent people, especially those living on fixed incomes, are being screwed by the government's bailout of the imprudent.

Here's the deal. The government is spending trillions to keep interest rates down in order to support the economy and prop up housing prices, and those low rates have inflicted collateral damage on savers' incomes.

"It's a direct wealth transfer from savers and retirees to overly indebted borrowers," says Greg McBride, senior financial analyst at Bankrate.com.

Since October 2007, when government intervention in the financial system began picking up speed, yields on the ultrasafe one-year and five-year investments that many retirees favor have tanked.

Two years ago the average yield on a five-year federally insured bank CD was 3.9%, according to Bankrate.com. Now it's 2.2%, a drop of more than 40%.

Yields on one-year CDs have almost vanished: 0.92%, compared with 3.6%. On five-year Treasury securities, yield is down to 2.3% from 4.4%. On one-year maturities, you get a minuscule 0.3%, down from more than 4% in 2007.

2009 Federal Deficit Surges to $1.42 Trillion

According to the Associated Press, the U.S. Treasure released figures last Friday showing that the Federal government spent $46.6 billion more in September than it took in. To make matters worse, September is historically a month where the government’s revenue exceeds their spending. These numbers brought the fiscal year’s shortfall to $1.42 trillion. For comparison, last year's deficit was only $459 billion.

"The rudderless U.S. fiscal policy is the biggest long-term risk to the U.S. economy," says Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard professor and former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. "As we accumulate more and more debt, we leave ourselves very vulnerable."

Forecasts of more red ink mean the federal government is heading toward spending 15 percent of its money by 2019 just to pay interest on the debt, up from 5 percent this fiscal year.

President Barack Obama has pledged to reduce the deficit once the Great Recession ends and the unemployment rate starts falling, but economists worry that the government lacks the will to make the hard political choices to get control of the imbalances.

Friday's report showed that the government paid $190 billion in interest over the last 12 months on Treasury securities sold to finance the federal debt. Experts say this tab could quadruple in a decade as the size of the government's total debt rises to $17.1 trillion by 2019.

Tips on Getting Feds to Cut Your House Payment

From MSNBC.com:

If your income slumped along with the economy, you've got plenty of company these days. So much so that the government has a program meant to help you out by cutting your mortgage payments to 31 percent of your gross income. But it turns out that qualifying for this benefit will probably take some fancy footwork, a sympathetic partner and a little luck. Here are some pointers for navigating the terrain.

Get to know the program

The program in question is the Obama administration's $75 billion Making Home Affordable program.

It applies to mortgages held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two giant mortgage holders that the government took control of a year ago. Under the government's auspices, Fannie and Freddie are now cutting interest rates on mortgages they own to as little as 2 percent, with the aim of lowing payments to no more than 31 percent of a homeowner's gross income.

How do you know if Fannie or Freddie own your mortgage? The simplest way is to visit each of the lender's Web sites and type in the information requested about you and your residence. Remember: The giant home financing organizations buy loans that were originated by commercial banks and own a significant portion the nation's entire home loan assets. That means you may have taken out your mortgage through Bank of America, Wells Fargo or another private lender, and they may still be servicing your account, while ownership has actually been transferred to Fannie or Freddie (if not, you're out of luck).

If you do have a Fannie or Freddie loan, then figure out what portion of your gross monthly income your housing payment consumes. In this case, your "housing payment" means not only your mortgage costs but your PITI (principal, interest, taxes and insurance). Since you first took out your mortgage, it may have zoomed way up as a percentage of your household income, either because you and your spouse's income has fallen or because the adjustable rate of interest on the loan has ratcheted up. In either case, you should consider applying.

Continue Reading…

A Deeper Look at the Cash for Clunkers Program

The Federal government’s new “Cash for Clunkers” program has been getting a lot of attention over the past week. The phrase was trending on Twitter most of last week, and even car dealerships are beginning to use the phrase in commercials and billboards. However, with rumors of a depleted budget, and myths about qualifying, many taxpayers are getting frustrated and confused. To help readers of my blog better understand the program, and see if they qualify, I have put together the following helpful article.

What is It?

Officially known as the Car Allowance Rebate Systems – or "CARS" – the programs was signed in to law by President Obama on June 24th, 2009. Taking examples from similar programs through out Europe, the American version was designed to encourage taxpayers to trade in their high gas-mileage (less than 18 mpg) vehicles for more efficient new automobiles. Depending on how high the new vehicles mileage is the rebate is either $3,500 or $4,500.

Not a Tax Credit

Unlike the Federal incentives for first time home buyers, the Cash for Clunkers program is not a tax credit or deduction. In fact, it is being managed the U.S. Department of Transportation, not the Internal Revenue Service. When a qualifying taxpayer goes to buy a car, the dealership will automatically credit the rebate towards the purchase price. You do not need to claim it on your income tax return, you do not need to request the rebate; the dealership should handle everything.

Who Qualifies?

Qualifying for the Cash for Clunkers program actually has more to do with the car than the car owner, as it turns out. Generally speaking, to qualify your car must have a gas mileage of less than 18 mpg, and be no more than 25 years old. However, CARS has put together a list of the specific vehicles on the market that qualify for the program, click here to download it in PDF. You will also need to provide proof that you were both the registered owner and had insurance on the vehicle for one full year.

New Vehicle Restrictions

If your old vehicle is eligible for the credit, and you can provide proof of ownership and insurance, then you are now ready to begin looking for your new ride! However, remember that you new car needs to meet specific restrictions as well. It must be a new 2008-2010 model, cost no more then $45,000, and it must be a car or truck (i.e. no motorcycles, mopeds, etc.)

Tax Debate

In addition to confusion over taxpayers claiming the rebate, many dealerships have also been confused about the taxes related to the Cash for Clunkers program. In the initial bill, lawmakers apparently forgot to specify whether dealerships had to pay taxes on Cash for Clunkers car deals. Luckily, the mistake was fixed quickly, and car dealerships were disappointed to learn that Cash for Clunkers rebates would indeed need to be considered taxable income. For consumers though, the rebate does not need to be counted as taxable income.

Extension from Congress

Last week there was a lot of speculation that the program had ran out of funds only a few days after it’s launch. However, although the initial $1 billion approved by the President reportedly did not run out, congress has already added another $2 billion to the program. The decision to add more funding to this highly popular rebate system was quick, and mostly bipartisan.

Premature Car Sales

Although the sales made during the Cash for Clunkers program will stimulate car dealerships instantly, some experts warn that these sales were ones that would have been made in the coming months anyways. Meaning that auto sales would likely drop once the program expires. Some bloggers suggest that although the "adrenaline shot" of recovery is certainly useful, the sudden drop in sales a few months away could hurt the slowly recovering economy.

Stimulated Automakers

In addition to encouraging Americans to get behind the wheels of more efficient vehicles, one of the biggest purposes of the Cash for Clunkers programs was to stimulate the struggling auto industry. Thousands of American taxpayers are employed by the auto industry, and by increasing care sales the government is hoping that it will help with unemployment problems. There has been debate about which car manufacturers are being stimulated, since cars produced by Toyota and Honda (both Japanese automakers) both have vehicles making the top list of Cash for Clunkers trade-ins. However, it is important to remember that even though these companies are based out of the country they do employ thousands of American workers in assembly plans and dealerships. Furthermore, Ford and GM both made up a majority of the top 10 list.

Is it Truly Eco-Friendly?

The main goal of this program was supposedly to lower American fuel emissions by encouraging taxpayers to buy more efficient vehicles. However, many argue that it is not having the desired effect. According to CNN, private reports show that most people receiving a Cash for Clunker rebate use it to buy a truck or SUV. Additionally, research for the University of Berkeley shows that most of the “clunkers” being traded in were not being used as primary vehicles. Instead, families are trading in their secondary vehicles which they rarely use.

Little, if any Help for Low Income Americans

Although the Cash for Clunkers rebate system was designed to help low income Americans, many suggest it is having the opposite effect. When a vehicle is traded in under the program, it must be recycled and NOT resold. Therefore, the inventory of used vehicles will decline and many predict that prices of user cars will increase as a result. Since you cannot buy a new car for only $4,500, and many low income families buy used vehicles, many are worried that the program will have a negative impact on struggling Americans. Additionally, according to the Heritage Foundation found that “the average income of those purchasing new cars under the program was $57,700--only slightly below the $61,000 for all new car buyers.”

Who’s to Blame for the Housing Market Crash?

In a new article on the Wall Street Journal the Mortgage Bankers Association suggests that zero money down loans, not subprime loans, led to the recent mortgage meltdown. Their research found that negative equity was the number one cause of foreclosures during the first half of 2008, and that down payments of under 3% were also a significant contributing factor. Check out their chart below.

The article then goes on to claim that the myths about subprime loans are delaying any efforts by the government to improve the dragging economy. I’ve included a clip of their article below, but be sure to check out the full text at WSJ.com.

Many policy makers and ordinary people blame the rise of foreclosures squarely on subprime mortgage lenders who presumably misled borrowers into taking out complex loans at low initial interest rates. Those hapless individuals were then supposedly unable to make the higher monthly payments when their mortgage rates reset upwards.

But the focus on subprimes ignores the widely available industry facts (reported by the Mortgage Bankers Association) that 51% of all foreclosed homes had prime loans, not subprime, and that the foreclosure rate for prime loans grew by 488% compared to a growth rate of 200% for subprime foreclosures. (These percentages are based on the period since the steep ascent in foreclosures began -- the third quarter of 2006 -- during which more than 4.3 million homes went into foreclosure.)

Sharing the blame in the popular imagination are other loans where lenders were largely at fault -- such as "liar loans," where lenders never attempted to validate a borrower's income or assets.

This common narrative also appears to be wrong, a conclusion that is based on my analysis of loan-level data from McDash Analytics, a component of Lender Processing Services Inc. It is the largest loan-level data source available, covering more than 30 million mortgages.

Fed Sees Up to $599 Billion in Bank Losses

The Federal government has reported that they believe that 19 of the largest US banks could suffer major losses over the next year if the economy does get worse. Check out the article below courtesy of the WallStreetJournal.com.

The federal government projected that 19 of the nation's biggest banks could suffer losses of up to $599 billion through the end of next year if the economy performs worse than expected and ordered 10 of them to raise a combined $74.6 billion in capital to cushion themselves.

The much-anticipated stress-test results unleashed a scramble by the weakest banks to find money and a push by the strongest ones to escape the government shadow of taxpayer-funded rescues.

The Federal Reserve's worst-case estimates of banks' total losses and capital shortfalls were smaller than some had feared. Optimists interpreted the Fed's findings as evidence that the worst is over for the industry. But questions remain about the stress tests' rigor, in part since the Fed scaled back some projected losses in the face of pressure from banks.

The government's tests measured potential losses on mortgages, commercial loans, securities and other assets held by the stress-tested banks, ranging from giants Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc. to regional institutions such as SunTrust Banks Inc. and Fifth Third Bancorp. The government's "more adverse" scenario includes two-year cumulative losses of 9.1% on total loans, worse than the peak losses of the 1930s.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Thursday that he is "reasonably confident" that banks will be able to plug the capital holes through private infusions, alleviating the need for Washington to further enmesh itself in the banking system.

Banks also said they will consider selling businesses or issuing new stock to meet the toughened capital standards.

The information provided by the stress tests will "make it easier for banks to raise new equity from private sources," Mr. Geithner said. Still, he added, "We have a lot of work to do...in repairing the financial system."

Some of the banks told to add capital raced to accomplish that by tapping public markets. On Thursday, Wells Fargo & Co., which the Fed said needed to raise $13.7 billion, laid plans for a $6 billion common-stock offering. Morgan Stanley, facing a $1.8 billion deficit, said it will sell $2 billion of stock and $3 billion of debt that isn't guaranteed by the U.S. government.

If successful, the offerings "should be a meaningful step in restoring a modicum of confidence to the banks," said David A. Havens, a managing director at Hexagon Securities. "It indicates that even the big messy banks are able to attract private capital."

Shares of more than a dozen stress-tested banks rose in after-hours trading as the government's announcement soothed jitters about the industry's immediate capital needs. Bank of America shares climbed 3.6% to $13.99, while Citigroup was up 6.3% to $4.05. Fifth Third jumped 19% to $6.35. SunTrust fell 2.5% to $18.05, and Wells Fargo slipped 0.9% to $24.54.

Nine of the stress-tested banks -- including titans like J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wall Street's Goldman Sachs Group Inc. as well as several regional institutions -- have adequate capital. That finding essentially represents a seal of approval from the Fed.

The others need to raise anywhere from about $600 million for PNC Financial Services Group Inc. to $33.9 billion for Bank of America. In between are several other regional lenders: Fifth Third, which needs to raise $1.1 billion; KeyCorp, $1.8 billion; Regions Financial Corp., $2.5 billion; and SunTrust, $2.2 billion.

Experts warn that the tests could have a serious unintended consequence: Loans could be harder to come by for consumers and businesses. That's because the government's intense focus on thicker capital cushions might prompt banks to hoard cash and further curtail lending, said Jim Eckenrode, banking research executive at TowerGroup, a financial consulting firm. He said banks will have less room to offer consumers low interest rates, while corporate customers may have a tougher time getting financing for commercial real-estate and property development.

Feds Come After Redding Couple for Alleged Tax Scam

From SacBee.com:

A Redding couple faces felony charges for running a tax-return scheme and claiming more than $159,000 in false refunds.

A federal criminal complaint accuses Shannon Elaine Ford, 32, and Michael Joseph Ford, 31, of operating a tax return preparation business and recruiting taxpayers, promising them large returns, a news release from acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence G. Brown's office states.

The couple allegedly filed more than 34 tax returns using false tax forms relating to income from nonexistent small businesses. The couple also misdirected federal and state tax return checks to their own bank and credit union accounts, the complaint alleges.

The fraudulent tax returns claimed more than $159,000 in false refunds.

The Fords allegedly ran the scam, which involved more than 20 victims, from March 2004 to March 2007.

Shannon Ford is charged with conspiracy, 34 counts of filing false tax returns, 17 counts of bank fraud and aggravated identity theft. Michael Ford is charged with conspiracy, five counts of filing false tax returns and seven counts of bank fraud, the release states.

The couple was scheduled to appear Tuesday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd.

Video of Geithner Discussing Tax Problems

Embedded below is a video of Timothy Geithner being grilled by the Senate on his tax problems.

10 Ways to Get Free Money from the Government

One of my favorite business blogs, GetEntrepreneural.com, posted this very informative entry titled “How to Get Free Government Money 101.” In the entry the blogger gives advice on how business owners can get money form the government to help make ends meet during times of economic uncertainty. Listed below is the author’s advice broken down into 10 tips.

1) Only 12% of Gov't Money goes to the poor

Most Americans think that government money programs are for everyone else... for instance only the poor, minorities or friends of the president.

But, only 12% of Government Handouts go to the poor. And only 25% of Government Programs have income requirements

The rich and famous, including Donald Trump, H. Ross Perot, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush, all made millions as private citizens with the help of government money programs. If they're eligible, you certainly should be too.

2) Only 20% of Free Money is called "Grants"

Most free money programs are not called “grants” by the government, they’re called “direct payments.” It is very easy for someone not to know all about government jargon, but just a little research can clear up quite a few misconceptions. Don't discourage yourself by focusing only on "grants" and dismissing the other 80%.

3) 50 Million people don't even know they're eligible

This is one of the most important points to keep in mind: The Government cannot and does not advertise programs that offer free money. But it's out there, lots of it. You just have to invest time finding the programs.

4) You can't make one phone call and just get a check in the mail

Getting government money is like looking for a job. When you knock on one door and ask about a job, and they tell you that you are not qualified, you don’t go home and wait for them to change their mind.

No Way. You would never hear back. You have to be persistent and go from one office to the next until you find a good fit.

5) Free Money keeps growing no matter who is sitting in the White House

We constantly hear about government budget cuts and that makes people believe that government money is going away or will soon be gone. But every year for the past 30 years the amount of free government money given out to individuals keeps growing. It keeps increasing no matter if it’s the republicans or the democrats who are in charge. With the new Obama administration especially, we will be seeing more offered to small business and entrepreneurs in the form of government money programs.

6) You certainly don't need a professional grant writer

Nine out of ten times you will not need help in filling out an application. Most free money programs to pay for your bills, education, health care, housing and even business require just a few pages of blanks to fill in.

If you have trouble filling out an application for money, don’t hire a consultant. Go to the office that is handing out the money. The are obligated to help you fill out your application and they are in the best position to know what should be included.

7) You can apply for as many programs as you like

Don’t worry about how many programs you can apply for. If you see a program that you think might work for you, apply to it. Sure there are some programs that give money for specific reasons and if you get accepted from 2 separate places you will have to refuse one of the offers, but that's still a nice position to be in.

8) It doesn't always matter if it sounds like you don't qualify

Here's an example: “All the money is given out by August 30th”: The end of the accounting year for most government agencies September 30, but the agency can start giving out more money beginning October 1, and you can be the first in line.

In all likelihood, you can wait another 30 days for your money.

9) Information can often times be out-of-date

Every day programs come and go. Every day people change their address, phone number and websites. It is just a fact that these things happen in our modern society.

But remember, if a listing leads you to a non-working number or website, it does not necessarily mean that the program is gone. Call the agency listed in the program description and ask.

10) Don't be intimidated by the idea that the applications are all long and confusing

Getting an application that is only one-page long is not unreasonable at all. Many of the government programs that give our grants really don’t need a lot of financial information because unlike a bank they are not worried if you don’t pay the money back. They don’t want it back. It’s free money.