What are the implications of lending money to my sole member S-corp?
You can make a capital contribution, not a loan. It's not a taxable event, no interest, and you can take a distribution later when the business has the money to pay you back. So yes, transfer the money. If you use software like Quickbooks, make use of unique accounts for tracking the contribution
&gt;Bankruptcy is simply a financial tool inside our legal system, nothing more, nothing less.  So hypothetically, if I were a high net worth individual. I create a number of Corporations and put all my assets in them. I lease a car with Corp #2 - which I never have more than a few thousand $ in.  Have my House in Malibu in Corp#1  My place is Manhattan is in C#3  I am an employee of C#4, 5 and 6.  I crash my car into you and you are permanently disabled.  You can't work, you don't have much savings, lose your house or apartment.  As it turns out, there is no insurance on the car and the lease hasn't been paid in months.  You sue me.  No assets in Corp #1.  You sue me personally - yet on paper I don't own anything.  My personal net worth is effectively $0.  Assuming you can find an attorney to take this on - and you win in court and get a judgement against me.  I have no assets.  Nothing to take, nothing to garnish - nothing at all.  You on the other hand have bills piling up not to mention the $100's thousands in medical expenses.  You are ruined.  I am vacationing in the South of France.  Nothing unethical about that I guess.   *spelling miztaks "This seems to depend on what kind of corporation you have set up. If you're set up as a sole proprietor, then the Solo 401k contributions, whether employee or employer, will be deducted from your gross income.  Thus they don't reduce it. If you're set up as an S-Corp, then the employer contributions, similar to large employer contributions, will be deducted from wages, and won't show up in Box 1 on your W-2, so they would reduce your gross income.  (Note, employee contributions also would go away from Box 1, but would still be in Box 3 and 5 for FICA/payroll tax purposes). This is nicely discussed in detail here. The IRS page that discusses this in more (harder to understand) detail is here. Separately, I think a discussion of ""Gross Income"" is merited, as it has a special definition for sole proprietorships. The IRS defines it in publication 501 as: Gross income.    Gross income is all income you receive in the form of money, goods, property, and services that is not exempt from tax. If you are married and live with your spouse in a community property state, half of any income defined by state law as community income may be considered yours. For a list of community property states, see Community property states under Married Filing Separately, later. Self-employed persons.    If you are self-employed in a business that provides services (where products are not a factor), your gross income from that business is the gross receipts. If you are self-employed in a business involving manufacturing, merchandising, or mining, your gross income from that business is the total sales minus the cost of goods sold. In either case, you must add any income from investments and from incidental or outside operations or sources. So I think that regardless of 401(k) contributions, your gross income is your gross receipts (if you're a contractor, it's probably the total listed on your 1099(s))." "It is very helpful to understand that Free File is not actually ""by"" the US Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The IRS does indeed offer access to the program through their website, but Free File is actually a public-private partnership program operated and maintained by the Free File Alliance. Who is the Free File Alliance? Well, according to their members list: 1040NOW Corp., Drake Enterprises, ezTaxReturn.com, FileYourTaxes, Free Tax Returns, H&R Block, Intuit, Jackson Hewitt, Liberty Tax, OnLine Taxes, TaxACT, TaxHawk, and TaxSlayer. Why the income restriction? Well, that's part of the deal the IRS struck - the program is ""dedicated to helping 70 percent of American taxpayers prepare and e-file their federal tax returns"". Technically the member companies are offering their own software to handle tax preparation, and the rule is that 70% of American's must 'qualify' for at least one product, so this adjusted gross income limit changes periodically so that 70% of the population can use it. Why restrict it at all? This was part of the give and take involved in negotiation with the businesses involved. If the program was ""everyone files for free"", then it is presumed that many reputable businesses that make the program valuable would choose not to continue to participate. In other words, they want to be able to not give away their services for free to customers who are - at least by income definition - more than capable of paying them. The IRS has said it does not want to be in the tax prep software business, so they are not offering their own free software to do the job that private companies would otherwise charge for. However, there are other restrictions to being in the program - like the fact that no business in the program can offer ""refund anticipation loans"", offer commercial services more than a certain amount of times (so they can't hound you to upgrade), and so on. Some businesses were making a killing off these, though they are pretty much solely developed to be predatory on people with the lowest incomes (and education levels, and IQ, and with cognitive disabilities, and basically anyone they could sucker into paying what were effectively absurd rates for short term loans along with inflated filing/preparation fees). Finally, Free File was partly developed as an initiative to increase the amount of digitally filed taxes and reduce the paper-based burdens of accepting and processing turns. In other words: to cut government costs, not to be a government welfare program. Even if it were, one can generally obtain commercial software for $30-$100, so the benefit to those above gross income levels is pretty minor; yearly costs to file taxes with such software for those payers would be less than 0.001% of their yearly expenses. Compared to the benefits obtainable by households living below the poverty line, fighting to cover an extra 5-30% of the population at the potential expense of having the whole program be a failure probably seemed like a more than worthwhile trade-off." Congratulations! I would start with an attorney. As a 17 year old, you legally cannot sign contracts, so you're going to have to setup some sort of structure with your parents first. Get attorney references -- your parents can ask around at work, if you're friendly with any business owners, ask them, etc. Talk to a few and pick someone who you are comfortable with. Ask your attorney for advice re: sole proprietor/S-Corp/LLC. You have assets, and your parents presumably have some assets, so you need advice about isolating your business from the rest of your life. Do the same thing for accountant references, but ask your attorney for a reference as well. There is very little effect whatsoever of having a joint bank account--positive or negative. Positive effects: It would be very easy to send your mother money...she can just take it out of the account.  If you passed away she could get the money without having to use the legal system (or vice versa). This latter effect is why I have a bunch of joint accounts with my wife...if either of us died I wouldn't want getting access to our money to be an additional hassle. Negative effects: She is able to access money in that account without your consen, which you have pointed out is not going to happen.  The case I'm thinking of would be something like a tax lien against her.  A government agency might choose to pull money out of that joint account.  That would be a downside for you. If we were discussing credit cards, a loan, or a line of credit, there would be a number of legal and credit-rating effects from joint ownership.  Not so much with checking accounts. Ok so this is the best information I could get!  It is a guarantee from a financial institution that payment will be made for items or services once certain requirements are met.  Let me know if this helps!  I'll try to get more info in the meantime. It seems that you're complicating things quite a bit.  Why would you not create a business entity, open one or more bank accounts for it, and then have the money wired into those accounts?  If you plan on being a company then set up the appropriate structure for it. In the U.S., you can form an S-corporation or an LLC and choose pass-through taxation so that all you pay is income tax on what you receive from the business as personal income.  The business itself would not have tax liability in such a case. Co-mingling your personal banking with that of your business could create real tax headaches for you if you aren't careful, so it's not worth the trouble or risk. "I strongly doubt your numbers, but lets switch the question around anyway.   Would you borrow 10k on your house to buy stocks on leverage?  That's putting your house at risk to have the chance of a gain in the stock market (and nothing in the market is sure, especially in the short term), and I would really advise against it.  The decision you're considering making resolves down to this one. Note: It is always better to make any additional checks out as ""for principal only"", unless you will be missing a future payment."