Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Retirement Bill Passes House - Goes to Senate

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,846

    Default



    Senator Ted Cruz of Texas still has this retirement bill stalled in the Senate over an issue that is NOT related to retirement.

    Meanwhile, FOX Business news keeps chiding the Democrat ruled House for not passing bills... when it's the GOP ruled Senate that is now killing this important retirement bill that was passed overwhelmingly by both House Republicans and Democrat last month.


  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,846

    Default




    The main reason why many of the wealthy elite don't like this bill is because it restricts a previous loophole that allowed them to leave a huge tax-exempt legacy that would also be tax-exempt over the lifetime of any heir [including grandchildren.] So they want to kill this bill that benefits millions of average Americans.


    Here is an excellent article that explains this further:


    WSJ Attacks SECURE Act 'Pay-For'

    BY Brian Graff [CEO of the American Retirement Association]

    July 17, 2019

    Legislation

    " The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board has challenged a specific “pay for” provision in the SECURE Act. But they’re missing the big(ger) picture.

    One of the main reasons the SECURE Act passed the House of Representatives by the large margin of 417-3 was that, as the WSJ acknowledges, it was “paid for.” What that means is that the bill in totality was “scored” by congressional economists as “revenue-neutral” and as such would not increase the deficit.

    As you would surmise, provisions such as pushing back the required beginning date of minimum required distributions (to age 72) are “revenue losers” because they delay the taxation of retirement savings. This means that in order to be revenue-neutral, the bill has to include provisions that are revenue raisers to offset the revenue losers. In DC parlance, these revenue raisers are also referred to as “pay-fors.”

    Anyway, the general thing about pay-fors is that someone out there is going to dislike them because they are effectively increasing taxes on someone. As former Sen. Russell Long (D-LA) famously said during the debate on the 1986 Tax Reform Act, “Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax the guy behind the tree.”

    The political exercise generally is to find revenue raisers that impact much fewer people than the number of people who would benefit from the provisions the revenue raisers would “pay for.”

    That is certainly the case with the SECURE Act. The provisions to promote retirement savings are estimated to benefit tens of millions of working Americans. One of the main revenue raisers to pay for these provisions promoting retirement savings for working Americans is a provision to curtail something called the “Stretch IRA.” This provision is expected to impact a number of people that can be measured in tens of thousands (not tens of millions).


    The Stretch IRA is an estate planning technique used to effectively spread the taxation of an inherited IRA by choosing a grandchild as a designated beneficiary. Under current rules, when an IRA account holder dies, the inherited IRA is generally required to be distributed over the life expectancy of the beneficiary. That would obviously be a long time – or “stretched” – in the case of a grandchild beneficiary.

    The SECURE Act would change the rules so that it generally would require inherited IRAs to be distributed – and taxed – within 10 years. However, in the case of beneficiaries who are children, the 10-year period would not run until the child turns 18. So theoretically you could still “stretch” the distribution for 28 years if the grandchild is a newborn, which admittedly is much less than the child’s life expectancy. It is important to note there are broad exceptions to this rule for IRA beneficiaries who are disabled and for surviving spouses.

    At the American Retirement Association, we have nothing against estate planning and we certainly don’t have anything against anyone trying to reduce their taxes. However, to get the provisions in the SECURE Act, which we believe will help improve the retirement security of millions of Americans, Congress decided it was necessary for the legislation to be revenue-neutral. There are provisions in the bill that we don’t like – for example, there are substantial increases in the penalties for failing to file, or late filing of, certain retirement plan information returns). But ultimately, we have concluded that the enormous potential benefits of the legislation for retirement savings outweigh the “pain.” Nor are we alone in this determination – the SECURE Act is supported by just about every financial services organization in Washington.

    Getting things done in Washington, especially these days, is never easy. And when it comes to getting things done that cost money, it’s that much harder. When things have to be paid for, tough choices have to be made – because, as they say, revenue raisers don’t just grow on trees. "

    Brian H. Graff is the CEO of the American Retirement Association.


    https://www.napa-net.org/news-info/d...secure-act-pay


    Last edited by KingsX; 07-17-2019 at 04:43 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,846

    Default



    Senator Cruz is able to hold this bill hostage in the GOP-led senate because many other powerful wealthy oligarchs also want to kill it.

    This important retirement bill that would benefit multiple-millions of average Americans may go down the same black hole as the "middle-class tax cuts" that Trump promised before last year's mid-term elections.



  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central Nebraska, USA
    Posts
    2,869

    Default

    You are kidding righ? You can't honestly believe this bill benefits ANYONE other than the Feds?

    Instead of letting people with IRAs dribble out their tax payments over a long period, benefiting their family with more available money in THEIR pocket, you are actually OK with making them pay larger tax bills each of those 10 years, which just enriches the Feds that much more? Really?

    I don't give a flying fig about the whole retirement age shell game, because I know nothing will be left in another ten years, well before I even get close to retirement. I am 50 now, and know I will have to work till the day I die because of all the leeches that are sucking at the Fed Gov teat now, with more going on the dole every day.
    "Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war let it begin here." Captain John Parker, to his Minute Men on Lexington Green, April 19 , 1775.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,846

    Default




    Meanwhile... a bill to spend billions for the aid and comfort of illegal aliens was quickly passed by the House, rubber-stamped by the Senate and already signed by Trump



  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hoppalong View Post
    Sure am glad I am getting nearly 1300 in SS benefits I paid in course if I live long enough I surely will get More then IO paid in but that is why others that are working are still paying into such a thing as SS. Cool. But hen as SS goes up the Food Stamps allotment goes down. I only get 15 a month now, but that still is enough that I can enjoy a nice roast or stake once a month. LOL Like just last week I a a wonderful Newyork Strip Steak Yummmmmm.
    If that's your boat, you might want to splurge a little, while you still can....... I'm suprised to here these numbers, given the way you stand for big government and all. They seem to of hosed you.
    Educate others to grow our base of informed citizens, it's tyranny. Spread the Gospel.

    Prepare wisely individually. An army runs on it's stomach.

    Network with those who prepare wisely and take advantage of the strength in numbers and the economy of scale.

    Then, when the curtains come down and the truth is evident to an informed citizenry, we unite and fight the new world order.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central Nebraska, USA
    Posts
    2,869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KingsX View Post



    Meanwhile... a bill to spend billions for the aid and comfort of illegal aliens was quickly passed by the House, rubber-stamped by the Senate and already signed by Trump


    And this is a surprise?
    "Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war let it begin here." Captain John Parker, to his Minute Men on Lexington Green, April 19 , 1775.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Central Nebraska, USA
    Posts
    2,869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ractivist View Post
    If that's your boat, you might want to splurge a little, while you still can....... I'm suprised to here these numbers, given the way you stand for big government and all. They seem to of hosed you.
    I look at it this way. Once things head south, SS and the other Fed programs will collapse under their own weight.

    Hoppy and their kind will be the first ones impacted. I will just sit back and watch it all disintegrate in real-time.
    "Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war let it begin here." Captain John Parker, to his Minute Men on Lexington Green, April 19 , 1775.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmthomas View Post

    I will just sit back and watch it all disintegrate in real-time.


    It's been disintegrating since the end of WW2.


  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,846

    Default



    Good news !

    The Secure Retirement Act has been attached to the critical federal spending bill that should pass this week [the deadline is Dec 20.]


    It’s In! SECURE Act Included in 2020 Spending Package

    " Landmark retirement reform bill tacked onto “must-pass” FY 2020 spending package by Congress; will be voted on this week by House and Senate...

    ... The spending bill is expected to be voted on sometime Tuesday in the House, and then sent on to the Senate, where it would also be expected to pass without snags due to the looming Dec. 20 deadline to approve the spending bill and prevent a government shutdown, not to mention the fast-approaching Congressional holiday recess. It could be signed by President Trump by the end of this week. "


    more at link

    https://401kspecialistmag.com/its-in...nding-package/



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •