[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Corrupt Government Title: Feds eye retirement-fund tax to cut $16 trillion-plus deficit Uncle Sam, in a desperate attempt to fix its $16 trillion-plus deficit, is leering over Americans’ retirement nest egg as its new bailout fund. Capitol Hill politicians are assessing tax changes that could let the Internal Revenue Service lay claim to a portion of the $18 trillion sitting in 401(k) accounts and other tax breaks used by middle-class workers, including cutting the mortgage tax deduction. A commission looking for ways to close the deficit, and, noting the extent of 401(k) tax breaks, recommends an examination of the system as one way to prevent government bankruptcy. Besides 401(k)s, other possibilities include the mortgage-interest deduction on second homes, as well as benefits from employer-provided health insurance, which are untaxed now. Under current 401(k) rules, total employee/employer contributions can’t exceed $50,000. In the proposed rule change, employer/employee contributions would be limited to 20 percent of the employee’s compensation, with a maximum of $20,000, the so-called 20/20 proposal. Another proposal being discussed in Congress says all tax deductions on 401(k)s and IRAs to be replaced with an 18 percent credit. The credit, according to a proposal that has been endorsed by economist William Gale, would be placed directly in a person’s retirement account. “Unlike the current system,” Gale told Congress, “workers’ and firms’ contributions to employer-based 401(k) accounts would no longer be excluded from income and would be subject to taxation, contributions to IRAs would no longer be tax-deductible and any contributions to a 401(k) plan would be treated as taxable income.” In other words, the employee and employer would no longer get a deduction under the Gale plan, they would qualify for a credit. And the credit would “increase [government] revenues by about $458 billion,” Gale says. Last week a group of retirement industry experts went to Capitol Hill to criticize these proposed changes in retirement-plan rules. “These changes could have unintended consequences,” warns Lynn Dudley of the American Benefits Council (ABC). Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee about the proposals, Randolf Hardock, of ABC’s board of directors, said, “[The idea] could seriously undermine the retirement savings system.” Jack VanDerhei, research director of Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), believes either of the two proposed 401(k) changes under review would have a “catastrophic” effect on the current retirement saving system. The 20/20 plan provisions curtailing non-taxable contributions would freeze out many higher-paid employees from signing up for a 401(k), which could lead some companies, according to critics, to question if plans would still be worth offering employees. Reducing retirement-plan contributions for those at the higher end of the wage scale will inevitably have a bad effect on those in the middle and at the bottom, ABC’s Dudley says. Poster Comment: Would someone tell that cock sucking dog eating NIGGER in the White House that it isn't his money. SPIT Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest As usual, you don't seem to understand the foundation for US failures and as a result (which is typical of all Americans) you complain about that which you see. It is though you see a skin growth and because of the "itch" you constantly scratch at the same thus exacerbating the growth while underneath the epidermis is a mammoth mass of spreading cancer. Oh sure you "feel" good after scratching yourself for the while. But you haven't repaired anything and so ... off you go on your daily venue thinking that you have solved the problem with a overly simplified and superficial understanding of the "itch" which over time, builds up again requiring your maejick solution over and over. In effect, you are a "backyard" mechanick unable to repair anything about yourself or the world around you because you don't understand "root-cause analysis" and methods of actual solution. You just replay the same old scratchy record over and over again never to alter anything in an effective manner. You are insane, therefore.
#2. To: ALL (#0) Contact them and DEMAND that they keep their fucking hands OFF of your retirement.
#3. To: All (#2) Congress Eyes 401(k)s Again online.wsj.com/article/SB...04577354024207255032.html Some of the most popular retirement-savings tools are coming under the congressional microscope. As policy makers gear up for the tax-reform effort expected after the presidential election, they are asking: Can 401(k) plans, individual retirement accounts, and other tax-deferred vehicles be streamlined while getting more traction among people with lower incomes? On Tuesday, the House Ways and Means Committee heard from several experts on the subject. At the very least, the increasing focus on retirement savings is a reminder that tax treatment of the accounts, once considered permanent, is anything but. Here's what you need to know about lawmakers' eyeing your nest egg. Q: Why are retirement accounts being scrutinized now? A: Congress is looking for ways to raise revenue. This discussion comes on the heels of the Senate Finance Committee's proposal earlier this year to take away a big tax advantage for inherited IRAs: Making heirs empty them out, and pay any income tax due, within five years of the death. The measure, estimated to raise $4.6 billion in revenue over 10 years, was abandoned, though Sen. Max Baucus (D., Mont.) suggested it might be taken up as part of tax reform. Q: It's tough to get people to save. Why would Congress tinker with the retirement plans they already have set up? A: "The proliferation of tax-favored retirement accounts has occurred as specific needs have led Congress to create new types of plans with different rules," said Rep. Dave Camp (R., Mich.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, at the Tuesday hearing. Mr. Camp acknowledged that 66% of full-time workers participate in workplace retirement plans, with almost three-quarters of them making less than $100,000 a year. But the large number of plans with different rules and eligibility criteria has led some policy makers to question whether the plans have left workers confused—and less likely to use them. Q: What proposals to increase tax revenue, or boost retirement savings, are on the table? A: There are several. • IRAs that would automatically enroll workers with no access to a workplace retirement plan, creating a means to save through regular payroll deposits. • Capping retirement-plan contributions at $20,000 a year or 20% of compensation, whichever is less—including employer contributions. Currently, the limits are 100% of compensation or $50,000 a year. • Replacing exclusions and deductions for retirement savings with an 18% tax credit, deposited directly into an individual's retirement savings account. • Accelerating "automatic enrollment" of workers in retirement-savings plans, along with their default savings rate, and automatically increasing workers' savings rates each year. • Simplifying the paperwork involved for small employers' adopting existing types of plans, with the goal of increasing access for more workers. Q: If Congress alters tax deferrals, will people still put money away? Not at the rate they do now, says Jack VanDerhei, research director at the Employee Benefit Research Institute. In the group's 2011 Retirement Confidence Survey, one in four full-time workers saving for retirement said they would reduce, or totally eliminate, their retirement-savings plan contributions if they could no longer deduct them. Doing away with tax-deferrals for workers could lead some employers to drop their plans as well. A study done for the Principal Financial Group last year found that if workers' ability to deduct any amount of their 401(k) contributions from taxable income were eliminated, 65% of the plan sponsors surveyed would have less desire to continue offering their 401(k). Q: How much do these plans cost the government in lost revenue? A. It depends on which time period you consider. The government has estimated that it will lose $136 billion this year in revenue to tax-deferred retirement plans. But "every dollar that is excluded from income this year will be included in income in a future year," says Judy Miller, retirement-policy director at the American Society of Pension Professionals and Actuaries. That future tax revenue doesn't show up in the typical five- to 10-year budget windows used by federal number-crunchers, said James Klein, the American Benefits Council's president, in a post-hearing interview. POSTER COMMENT: Q: How much do these plans cost the government in lost revenue? Do you believe that bullshit?
#4. To: A K A Stone, all (#0) Republican and Democrat voters want perpetual war to show the world who's the boss and protect Israel for Jesus, a police state to control their neighbors and protect them from those who do not agree that the US is the boss, corporate welfare, "free" healthcare, entitlements for just about anyone who isn't a white male, etc., etc. so don't bitch when you are asked to pay for it (and by "you" I mean that in a general sense, not you personally). If you don't want your taxes raised then quit voting for people who refuse to reign in spending.
#5. To: Fibr Dog (#4) (Edited) If you don't want your taxes raised then quit voting for people who refuse to reign in spending. That is an IMPOSSIBLE recommendation in America at this juncture of time. The American People still believe in the "candy man." It is though the American People are fixated with permanent world-wide success (circa ~1990) as a result of V-I-C-T-O-R-Y about WW2. Even though all of that vestige is worthless in contemporary times, it is still prevalent in political thinking. Sorry. There is no solution to the problems other than a police state unless the People get off their lazy asses and fix the [fundamental] GOD-DAMNED PROBLEMS. [This is not going to happen unless a massive blood thrilled revolution occurs.]
#6. To: buckeroo (#5) Sorry. There is no solution to the problems other than a police state unless the People get off their lazy asses and fix the [fundamental] GOD-DAMNED PROBLEMS. [This is not going to happen unless a massive blood thrilled revolution occurs.] I believe you are correct. I don't see this happening in my lifetime though. Things are going to get much, much worse in terms of living standards and governmental tyranny.
#7. To: We The People (#2) Contact them and DEMAND that they keep their fucking hands OFF of your retirement. Don't worry, the politicos bought and paid for by Wall Street won't let it happen. It's the Golden Goose holding up their pyramid scheme. Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET #8. To: Fibr Dog (#6) We have lots of problems but the budgets, the debts, the political regime, the wars, the courts, the political faces (whether incumbents or not) and the increasing police state are mere symptoms of the despair about the same American People that ties it all together. The USA is all FUCKED-UPPED because of the PEOPLE in America.
#9. To: mininggold, All (#7) Don't worry, the politicos bought and paid for by Wall Street won't let it happen. Oh, fantastic then. Everyone, stop worrying about your own money and the plans that Congress has for it, because some loonytoons on the internet has told you not to worry and that it will never happen. Forget what I said about contacting your representative government to tell them to keep their hands off your savings... your wealth is safe. Government will protect you. They won't take your wealth like they just did in the bailouts. mininggold says they won't do it. Again.
#10. To: All (#9) And they won't allow Wall Street to take your money either, ummmm, like they just did in the crash..... and bailouts.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|