This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Obama Proposes Retirement Account Limit In First "Wealth Tax" Salvo
The witch-hunt against the "rich" (as defined by a random group of people) through the establishment of creeping global capital controls continues. First, it was Europe deciding that €100,000 in savings is the "fair" threshold on savings above which any haircut goes, with Cyprus demonstrating first. and next Italy making it clear local depositors above the threshold will also be impaired in the future; then a group of journalists mysteriously lands millions in top secret files exposing essentially every offshore bank account: a perfectly legal option, however when mixed in with the implication that this money is all tax-evasion gotten it provides for a combustible mix, and now it is America's turn to fire the first shot across the capital control bow, because as part of his proposed budget, Obama plans to set a limit of how much one can spend per year on retirement through tax-preferred retirement plans. As it turns out, according to the Obama administration it is only fair to spend a total of $205,000 in nominal dollars per year on retirement, but not more.
Per The Hill, "The proposal would save around $9 billion over a decade, a senior administration official said, while also bringing more fairness to the tax code." Ah yes, "fairness." This means that as a result of the artificial limit, the Budget will set a total cap on retirement plans of about $3 million. Anything above that, feel free to please spend on your peas instead of saving, or just invest in Bernanke's stock market ponzi. After all, that is the only artificial indicator Obama has to point to, when "proving" his policies are working.
Of course, once the administration's destructive policies of attempting to inflate away the debt finally funnel through to the economy, and inflation explodes, that $205,000 may or may not be enough to buy a loaf of bread. But why pretend to even think logically or ahead at this point. It's not like anyone has any real plans about the future of the country when the president is actually willing to release statements like this: “Under current rules, some wealthy individuals are able to accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving."
Why thank you Mr. President for telling the people what you consider "reasonable." Of course, it would be so much below you to simply go on the record as saying the rich (arbitrarily chosen as those who have over $1 million in assets... or $500,000... or $50,000 - who knows, it's "arbitrary") are now fair game and all those who recently received an Obama phone would be legally excused if they were to accidentally eat them. Because all is fair in hate and class warfare.
And speaking of hate, that is precisely the cover that Obama will use to pass his proposal:
The most prominent taxpayer with a multimillion-dollar IRA is Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee and co- founder of Bain Capital LLC. Romney disclosed in public filings during the campaign that his retirement account held between $18.1 million and $87.4 million. At one point, the maximum exceeded $100 million.
IRAs have evolved from a retirement-planning technique into an estate-planning tool for some wealthy families because tax laws allow the accounts to be passed on to heirs, said Ed Slott, an IRA specialist and certified public accountant based in Rockville Centre, New York.
“Over the last election it hit a critical mass when a lot of people found out that Romney had $100 million in his IRA,” Slott said. “People thought, how on earth did that happen? I think that was the tipping point.”
The Romney campaign didn’t explain how he amassed that much money in an IRA when contribution limits are much lower. Most taxpayers can contribute a maximum of $5,500 for 2013. Older workers, self-employed workers and those who save through 401(k)-style plans have higher caps and can roll those accounts into IRAs.
One possibility is that Romney included Bain investments valued at close to nothing that later grew exponentially. The value would increase tax-free in the retirement account and would be subject to taxation at ordinary income tax rates when taken out.
Of course, the outcry from those who are stupid enough to actually save cash instead of blowing it all on iPhones and other worthless gimmicks will be loud, but since they are outnumbered about 9 to 1 by those who have zero financial planning skills, zero savings but lots of debt, will be promptly drowned out.
We wonder if the administration be as forceful in limiting the net present value of public worker retirement pensions (funded by other taxpayers of course), already over $500,000/year in some cases, with the same passion as it has in going after private wealth. Or maybe because the purchasing of votes with other people's money might be impaired, Obama will just let this slide?
Finally, like everything out of the administration, there isn't actually a plan on how to do this:
The administration’s statement didn’t explain in detail how the proposal would work. The cap would apply to the total of all of an individual’s tax-favored retirement accounts.
So all up in the air and very much unknown. But what is very known is that the tax on the wealthy, which by definition has to be global in nature, is rapidly coming, and the only question is at what threshold of total taxable financial assets it will be arbitrarily set.
However since we predicted all of this in September of 2011, and did some math to go along with it, expect to hand over anywhere between 30% and 40% of your hard earned assets to whatever parasitic government happens to be your host (this of course, after being taxed on the cash flows used to generates these assets).
Because in the new socialist international normal, "it's only fair."
»
- 70307 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Caldwell Chronicles
Friday arpil 5 4:00 pm
http://archive.wbai.org/
.
Guns and Butter
Friday april 5 9:00 am
p.
earl talking eyewitness history.
Re Guns:
In the end it will be much more lucrative to pass on the tax deduction and invest after tax dollars in brass and lead.
.308, 9mm, .45, 7.62 x 39, .223. It doesnt matter. When they come to confiscate your 401k, or tell you your pension has been lost by Mr. Corzine that tax deduction you got isnt going to offer much comfort
So there is no confusion..
FUCK OBAMA.
And FUCK BEN.
Keep it up.
Step 1: Clip the rich. (The envious buy-in.)
Step 2: Redefine "rich"
Step 3: Repeat.
Otherwise known as "we are all millionaires now".
Regards,
Cooter
EDIT: While we are on the subject:
Note to ZH staff: can't link to comments on subsequent pages (i.e. I can't link to my comment directly as it is on page 2 and the ?page=2 part seems to break it)
Apparently I have an inadequate understanding of how retirement accounts work, isn't there already substantial caps on the amount you can contribute to a 401(k) or IRA each year? I always cap out at $6k or something and the a-holes won't even let me have a Roth anymore.
"America - Land of the Free" LOL,
I always wonder about the extent to which black culture of degradation, immorality, jealousy, failure and glorifying filth, would succeed in pervading American life.
the Jews didn't wonder, they knew and did a damn good job opening the gates
You're referring to all those Jews who died in Nazi concentration camps, of course...
we need to go ahead and agree *now* on what constitutes wealth
measured in dollars
let's say 200k
then we need to go ahead and agree *now* on what consitutes fair taxation on the wealthy
let's say a meager 40%
then we need to go anead an kick-start price and wage inflation so that the median individual income is higher
let's say 250k
everyone will be wealthy, to the benefit of all
Must be nice to believe you are some sort of demi-God who is the only one qualified to define "reasonable", "common sense", "fair" and "majority of americans". If you take away his ability to define those terms, his agenda becomes crystal clear to those with purple kool-aid clouded vision.
To quote Ann, "Unless you can stand in front of it and protect it with a gun, you do not own it."
Ann.barnhardt.biz
Not long now before we find out about limit exceptions granted to "Friends of Obozo"
Thanks Tyler :)
"
we need to go ahead and agree *now* on what constitutes wealth
measured in dollars
let's say 200k
then we need to go ahead and agree *now* on what consitutes fair taxation on the wealthy
let's say a meager 40%
then we need to go anead an kick-start price and wage inflation so that the median individual income is higher
let's say 250k
everyone will be wealthy, to the benefit of all"
Thats why we have the alternative minimum tax. It nets more and more people every year. Soon everyone who pays taxes will be paying the AMT. And yes, everyone will be in the highest tax bracket.
I own a wall and will stand behind it with a gun. That still counts, right?
While you are at it, make sure to include that no public worker can have a salary or a pension that exceeds the 200k limit. And throw college professors and administrators into the 200k cap as well.
I don't grasp how the government and other peices of societal shit believe they have a right to other people's money. The article states the government as saying that they will save X billions of dollars. I am not comprehending how it is "costing" the government money when people have their money in a retirement account. ???
I can guarantee you that public sector unions will be exempt from this confiscation. When they come to take our retirement money, I hope they come prepared to use force.
Few people keep their retirement funds at home, or anywhere else they can be defended. When they decide to take the retirement money, mostly 401Ks and IRAs, they will go to the companies that run those, like Fidelity, Hartford, Prudential, etc. Then it will be a simple matter of transferring digits via some network. Just like taking money from a bank account.
The only way to use force, then, would be to camp out near your representative's or senators' houses or offices, which will of course be well guarded after the first couple of attempts. That would be a fool's errand, so how do you intend keeping any retirement funds where you can guard them?
Three words:
Open Opportunity IRA
Why would they need to use force, you got it stuffed in your mattress?
LOL
Your confusing the word "cost" with "potential tax revenue"! You see, Government at EVERY level starts from the premise, "they" are entitled to X amount of the money that exists in "their juristiction"! And when I mean exists, I mean fucking exists, not spent, or circulated or invested, but exists! Now depending on the political slant of the majority that controls that govt juristiction on any given year, the % of the entitlement (taxation) fluctuates!
So you see, the mentality of Govt is......if you start from this premise that "they" are entitled to 100% of the money that exists, regardless of where it is, who has it, how it was made, etc.......the word "cost" makes perfect sense.
Example; Betty Bo and John Doe have a million dollars in total assets, total taxation on that money for 2012 was 50% and the government got $500,000 of their money! However, John and Betty discovered a LEGAL tax loophole and they lowered their tax bill to $380,000, keeping $120,000 more OF THEIR MONEY!
The local/State/Federal government officials will describe that example this way....."Even though Betty Bo and John Doe used a legal tax deduction, we need to close that "loophole", which COST us $120,000 in potential tax revenue last year"!!!!
If I hear the word "fairness" from these communist assholes one more time, I think I'll vomit.
reistence is futile, all your assets belong to us - history teaches us that communists are masters in stealing (and killing - watch out for drones if you refese to pay)
Yeah your little homie capitalist faggots have proven to be such a benefit to humanity... All u freakin cavemen.... I swear. If I had a nickel for everyone of you dumbasses who think we can just GROW our way out of this.... Well, they'd take those nickels too, eh? Our problems are MONETARISM, and ANY derivative of it.
we should go back to paying for things with chickens and goats
<<Of course, the outcry from those who are stupid enough to actually save cash instead of blowing it all on iPhones and other worthless gimmicks will be loud, but since they are outnumbered about 9 to 1 by those who have zero financial planning skills, zero savings but lots of debt, will be promptly drowned out.>>
Says it all.
Economist Yuri Maltsev called O a long time Marxist recently. Since Maltsev worked for Gorbachev in the USSR, he likely has a pretty good idea of what a communist looks like.
One Nation, Under Control.
"One Nation, Under Control."
Well, the Pledge of Alligence to the Flag was written by a communist.
There are statutory caps (based on the type of account and level of taxpayer AGI) as well as plan caps and matching caps at the corporate level. Realistically the only way he get to $100 million in an IRA would be from the ROLLOVER of a 401(k)/SEP/SIMPLE plan into the IRA.
This isn't about fairness or the rich. It's about collecting taxes from the people that are the easiest to tax. The limit will be ratcheted down until it hits what is left of the upper middle class.
IRAs and 401-Ks were set up to:
1. Allow the discontinuation of defined benefit plans
2. Have a large pool of money that cannot be easily accessed and is right out in public.
There's no collecting taxes from the rich. Forget about it. Taxes are for little people. Little people who have wealth.
They were also set up as a giveaway to big financials, where would they be without "retirement account planning" services in which they give you a stupidly limited number of lame mutual fund options that all suck and then charge you for the pleasure? At least in terms of a lot of the company plans. Essentially it's a scam to cram as much money into the big financials as possible.
As far as the tax code goes it's no different than AMT or any other "accidental" arbitrary dollar amount cutoffs; they are all pre-baked to automatically ensare more tax payers every year due to inflation. Automatic tax increases without having to pass anything! Assholes.
Only $205k a year in retirement? Really Mr. President?
If so, I guess you'll be volunteering to take a pay cut?
btw, what's the value of that lifetime Secret Service protection you just signed into law for yourself?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Presidents_Act
F***ing hypocrite...
btw, how do you figure $205,000 annual return on a mere $3 million investment?
At the current 10-year treasury yield of 1.70%, that's only $51,000 a year in interest. [Thanks for the ZIRP, Ben.]
Perfectly said PS... [12:09]
IRA's are meant to be drawn down to $0 in retirement... $205k/year from $3mil = 15 yr retirement.
so we can expect the next obamacare surprise to be annual death panel interviews for folks over 80 yrs old, who will be out of money and crippled by heath care costs... it's only fair to cull the old/sick herd. logan's run for grannies.
millions of americans still defend obama's every move. we have a long way to go yet before the restoration...
Me thinks age is not going to be a factor. They're already denying chemo based on cost to medicare patients. Ah heck, what's 15 yrs?
Or 488 years if you are Mitt Romney.
A PC version of "Logan's Run".
O is just a teleprompter reader, a complete economic dolt who would rather play golf or hoops. That was obvious when the subject got onto economics during the first election. Your anger is justified, but wasted on him.
See AMT.
Billionaires will be exempt. Hopefully many upper class and middle class CS'ers who voted Islamic and helped rig the 2008/2012 elections will get hit hard. All of TV and Hollywood will run their 24x7 propaganda saying it is the fair thing to do. Nice job by the CS'ers who voted for this. F you and F TV and Hollywood. .
and if you dont believe this, just ask the average, unconnected, Cyprus citizen or depositor, that had more then $100,000 Euro????
IMO this is about impoverishing the people so that they are eventually completely dependent, thus easily controlled. Welcome to the new global serfdom.
This "proposal" will not see the light of day -- nor shall the forthcoming White House budget proposal in whole, for that matter.
IRAs and other tax-deferred savings retirement plans have been under assault since Reagan's TRA '86 cave. This harassment is nothing new, and should not dissuade individuals from continuing to save: provide for oneself in retirement.
Agreed, better to put your money somewhere the feds can't get their filthy hands on it so easily anyway. I grudgingly participate in my 401k because of company matching, otherwise no way, I'd pay these bastards their pound of flesh through taxes and do what I want with my money from there, thanks.
Besides, the true goal is to take back the House. Democrat strategy is to propose these ridiculous bills knowing full well that they won't pass so they can call Republicans the party of the rich. They'll give this bill a fancy name like the "Protect Grandma and Grandpa Act" and then accuse Republicans of hating grandparents when it fails.
It doesn't matter...
~~~
These 'salvos' are just a way of laying down straw [mixing metaphors here] to boil frog slowly so that when the day comes to steal everything, people will behave like Cypriots...
'Dem' versus 'Repub' is a diversion, a b.s. circus act
They work for the same team - the criminals (corporate & government types at the highest levels) against the rest of us who they leech off
Agreed. I'm referring to the playbook of the alleged Red Team vs Blue Team game, performed for mass consumption.
None-the-less, if Dems take back congress, look for guns and ammo to quadruple in price. Buy bullets bitchez.
take out the biggest loan against your 401k that you can
and buy physical silver
nah, roll your 401k into IRA that allows you to buy property. Then buy a bunch of investment property with it. Setup a shell LLC and take and out loans against the property owed to LLC or have "work" done on property by LLC on credit account, thus encumbering the property. Other dirty tactic is use offshore LLC and have it win lawsuit judgement against your property pay off judgement via this shell LLC and at sametime transferring money out of country. :)
you obviously dont work for a restrictive corporation that barely lets you look at your 401k
"Reagan's TRA '86 cave"
Fredo, you know your history. You're not dumb, like the political class might say, but smart.
Thanks -- never trust "the consensus," Bike.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYabrQrXt4A&sns=em
Where can I read up on this?
Whaaatttt ?! <puzzlement>
I thought "the Dems are for the little guy" and
" the Repubs want smaller, less intrusive & costly government"
<sarc off>
Urban Redneck, The IRA accounts can become as big as whatever you are invested in. An example would be some one that bought as much apple stock at $14 share years ago etc. It does not take too many 30 or 40 baggers to make an account explode.
It is more than anyone is capable of, given the leverage and contribution constraints in an IRA, the relative infreqency of such high returns, and the fact that you can't have any significant losses along the way. Simple math dictates even at the maximum contribution since IRAs were introduced, his contributions would be in the neighborhood of $50k (distributed roughly evenly over the preceding 25 years to the disclosure controversy).
Even if one were to magically front load the $50,000 to 1986 he would then have to deliver a 200,000% return over the following 25 years.
Methinks this is the result of: a) putting his portion of deals in when they had little valus while he was at Bain, combined with, b) any other rollovers he had while working elsewhere.
He could have had great benifit packages and when he left the firms the were all rolled up into one big ball. The guy, if anything, is not stupid!
Dog
EDIT- In the early years of IRS's and 401-K's things were pretty liberal vis-a-vis contributions. Where I work we had a pension plan that was switched to a 401-K plan. It was overfunded so everyone made out like bandits.
These were also set up because the Gubbmint knew that Social Security was BS. As others have pointed out, it is the frugal who get fucked again!
Double Edit....see Fonz below. (Same point and he made it first.)
My point was that $100m was possible, particularly if there was a company-wide or executive-wide defined contribution plan with a limit much higher than a traditional IRA, and particularly if such a plan had investment options such as a captive Bain fund which could invest in projects. However, if Mitt's IRA was somehow directly investing or receiving share contributions there are a whole bunch of ways that IRS could legitimately disallow that...
If you are able to utilize a defined benefit plan you can stuff the shit out of it.
I think a lot of us have that same misunderstanding. I know I was shocked to learn that anyone could amass 10's of millions in tax deferred IRA's, as I know I have always had limits that would never allow these numbers...even if I had Bernie Madoff running my money.
I realize the consensus here will probably be government grab is bad, which I agree with normally. As someone not in the 1% club, but also someone fortunate enough to have been able to sock more away if the law had allowed me to, it's hard not to feel like these IRA's regs offer special treatment to the chosen few....like another middle class screwing.
Paying taxes is no fun, and I pay a bunch of them as a small business owner. We can debate all day about what the rates should be and how the revenue should be spent, but ultimately, there must be a government and there must be funding. As such, the "fairness" issue has to be addressed. After all, every dime that is someone's deduction is an dime that will be made up with someone else's tax increase. To me, this is one of the best arguments for a bracketed flat tax with no deductions.
"ultimately, there must be a government and there must be funding. As such, the "fairness" issue has to be addressed."
1. Ultimately there should be a lot less government.
2. The government that remains should do as instructed by the people
3. The rich do not pay taxes. They never will. So things will never be "fair".
4. Concentrate on points 1 and 2 and don't let the "rich" dictate points 1 and 2.
11b40 - Given that I acquiesce on the morality of income tax; "...one of the best arguments for a bracketed flat tax with no deductions." +1
thre was no special treatment for him to have $100 million in an IRA. It is possible for others to do the same, given the right investments. If one were to purchase stock in a startup company (or contribute shares of one that they owned when the value of the stock was sub $1, and then the stock grew by 100 or 1000X, then the IRA holding this stock would also grow by an enormous amount. But that just doesn't seem 'fair' does it? Looters always feel entitled to any large pile of money they see. No better than common thieves, I say.
Agreed. I know a guy down by the river who bought a few blocks of AAPL when Mr. Jobs returned to the company. He sold a third of the position at 500. His retirement account grew quite a bit from that trade alone.
You didn't build that IRA account ...I did !
That's two different issues.
To achieve a $100 million dollar balance in IRA account by 2011 without rollovers and using simply the maximum allowable contribution each year, would require an ANNUALIZED RETURN IN EXCESS OF 40% OVER A DURATION IN EXCESS OF OF 25 YEARS, without involving any derivative with a downside greater than the investment. (If you don't see the problem with that then I would recommend Yahoo! finance)
Furthermore, a contribution in-kind would be a prohibited transaction
That said, there are ways to legitimately have a $100,000,000 IRA balance, but the Jim Cramer school of stock-schlepping ain't one of them.
@ .." We can debate all day about what the rates should be and how the revenue should be spent, but ultimately, there must be a government and there must be funding."
.
I agree with this but this does not mean there must be taxation.
the fed has coined this meme , we need not accept it or tolerate
it.
Fair would be a one-time, transparent consumption tax on new retail goods and services. The poor can save money by buying stuff second-hand. No income tax, no payroll tax, no corporate tax, no employment tax, and no 16th amendment. No games, no hiding, no reason to offshore capital, no reason to waste time trying to hide your money, no more $billions wasted on tax compliance every year. Rich people can save as much as they want, some day someone is going to spend their money, and when they do it will be taxed.
Do something reasonable like that and you'll see the parasites on you like army ants. Lawyers and accountants don't like tax reform.
All the departments of Eternal Revenue would be involved in a move away from Income Tax. An entire bureaucracy within .gov - a whole lot of govmt workers gone and the wages saved and the paperwork savings, and postage, and on and on - next thing one knows, the budget would be balanced.
Naaah - just a passing ... war is coming, regardless.
IBTFD - did you ?
$26 and change - whatta bargain.
Our masters like the ability to grant favors through the income tax system. A flat tax, while it may be in the best interest of The People is not in the best interest of the pols so don't hold your breath on it.
Your jealousy and stupidity make you and easy sell on theft. Can you get past you slave mentality for a moment and question what the goal of this is?
The IRA limit is on your contributions only.
IRA can be used for most any investment.
So if those investments grow exponentially you could end up with millions or even billions of dollars.
that gives me an idea,
Bit-coins in your self managed IRA,
That would drive .GOV totally bonkers trying to work out how to "Tax" your benefits..
Just made my day, thanks...
You don't need to save any more than that for retirement. You are already rich. Now pay them taxes today and support your fellow patriots!
IRA contribution limit for 2012 is $17,500 with an additional $5000 for people over 50. A lot of companies provide a match 1f1 on the first 2-4%.
You can contribute to a Roth IRA up to $5000 per year. There are limits once you start making more than around 105K AGI
K
You are capped at what YOU can contribute. But what your employer can contribute is in no way capped.
Bain paid Romney and many of the other employees the largest amount of their earnings via deposits of stock shares of Bain investments placed directly into IRA accounts, tax free. When the investments exploded in value, they were sold out of the IRA, leaving cash in the IRA in their place.
It is perfectly legal.
Prophet, Sorry, your employer IS capped by the total amount limit. We have studied this at length down at the salt mine.
You can have as much as you like in a non-qualified plan that is treated as a general debt by the company,(Defered Comp Plan.)
redpill: If you're an oligarch venture capitalist you give yourself stock in a start up for pennies into your IRA. Then said stock explodes up to $1,000's in value and splits a dozen times and wa-la, you turn $6,000 into $60 million. It was worth $60 million in the first place, you just game the system by putting it into your IRA at rediculous low intial value.
IRA's are a scam anyway. It's only tax DEFERRED. They con you into never spending it, so you dont have to pay tax on it, and you keep it locked up in the "market". My 80 year old uncle is classic example. Still has not cashed in his 401k or IRA because he doesnt want to pay the tax on it .... at 80.
He may not want to cash it in, and I don't blame him. Don't give the .gov anymore money than required. And if he can pass it down to family, all the more power to him.
Although, he is required to take a minimum distribution every year once he reached 70.5 years of age.
If he is really stubborn, as a few ancient folks I knew, he didn't take the minimum and rather paid the penalty - a whopping percentage of the minimum - sent direct to the IRS. If one does not take the 'required' and at least gift it somewhere, the Taxman takes most of it direct.
Sad.
The IRA has to purchase the stock, you can't sell the stock to the IRA.
They force you to make distributions based on your life expectancy.
$200k limit on pension funds received annually?
Only class of "worker" or even business-owner who can come close to that level of income are Government Workers. Especially Congressmen, bureaucracy heads and other top-dogs in our egalitarian utiopia. Some animals are actually more equal than others, by not being subject to ERISA, insider-trading laws, or healthplan legislations that they originate and pass. Hang around Congress for a term or two and you get a minimum pension that outdoes anything Bill Gates could fund with tax-qualified programs...
The insanity run amok. Nothing like ginning up inane shit to get the troops focus distracted.
Pretty damn hard to get any decent result from self-directed investment plans of any kind unless that is your stock in trade. Very few who sell these deals ever are enrolled themselves.
At one time in America, a pension WAS a guaranteed lifetime income based on final salary and many companies of size offered defined benefit or defined contribution plans. The boomerz thought they could direct their money better, because they listened to "moneytalk" or Brucie Williams and knew all about it... The 401(k) and profit sharing plan integration gave them some carrot, but they were unable to discern the stick. Who realized back then that everything was a manipulation to fleece the crowd who believed rich-dad & uncle warren? The bargains that were out there really weren't for them. They set themselves up to be fleeced by the bargain-hunters...
Best own that copper and lead, food, tools, and AE; plus be able to use them to make a life for your family. Everything else is for chumps. If you are in the game, don't know you're the chump; just makes it that much worse... Been a longtime coming. Been a longtime gone.
You appear to have the long view. When you play in the gov't sandbox, you play by their rules which are subject to change. If you have an IRA or 401k you are in their sandbox. The gov't giveth -- and the gov't taketh away. One cannot cry and complain when in the casino about the casino house rules. I don't have either one of these "retirement vehicles" and don't intend to.
FASB 157 - It sounds to the dumb clucks like a varmit round and it is. It puts your 401k assets out of their misery.
Don't forget Richard Ney in his Rolls. "The Specialist is accumulating!".
There is a cap on contibutions to retirement accounts, not a cap on one's ability to grow the contributions. Profit sharing and 401(k) contributions could easily been made to Romney in the form of Bain Shares, Warrants on investments that later went public & on & on. When he left Bain as a full time employee the 401(K) And profit sharing can be rolled over to an IRA.
Pretty basic stuff that no one seems capapble of pointing out when describing the issue. It all boils down to jealousy. Do we attack some Joe that wins a 300 million lottery as having not "earned it"? No. And ususally incredible success of this nature is a good deal of luck.
How about we tax any body over 6 ft 4 because they are potential NBA stars?
Insider info: buy Bain capital when it is valued at next to nothing, knowing it woll eventually be worth 100 or 1000X. An IRA that can invest private companies, real estate, almost anything, but not if set up through a typical stock broker that only makes money on stock trades.
401(k)s allow 40k right? And if he invested before the 90's when the stockmarket was near DJIA of 2000-3000, and if he could also picked decent investments, and if he then put half his money into cattle futures......
Voila. 100 million
I think Billary helped him with those futures! Good one!!!
EDIT- Sorry RC. I keep skipping the line this morning.....I will now down arrow myself for not having my coffee first!
Right, then you invest that money in some investment - Like cattle futures (e.g. Hillary Clinton) where $6M becomes $600M in the blink of an eye....
Wait, did I say that out loud? I've lost my inner monoogue!
Does the same rule apply to Jay-Z and Beyonce?
I'm not joking.
do you think someone who started their fortune selling crack gives a fuck about rules on retirement accounts?
a man who obviously has the capacity to decide who lives and dies on a daily basis.....certainly has the capabilities to know what is fair for all.......plus he is married to that single mom, mooochelle...
No need to "redefine" the rich, since everyone knows what "rich" is... anyone who makes more than I do is rich! This is a debateable way to define "rich", but that will be determined at the ballot box. Currently, about 50% of the people out there will vote that anyone making more than $50K is "rich".
I almost hope it happens so O Muslim takes every penny of the rich libturds who voted for this and helped rig the elections. F them.
You mean the "O Muslim" who just celebrated a Passover Seder in the White House for the 5th year in a row?
-1 You just can't give up on the stupid Muslim shit can you Freddie?
Oblahma = Ashkenazi puppet
He's had more 13th Tribe fists up his ass than Michael Jackson ever dreamed of...
This is a non-story, because there is a 0% chance of Obama's budget passing.
For now. Liberals do everything incrementally
Bingo. Think gun grabbing.
Right ! Boner says he didn't even read it. Moar obstructionism, more headlines, more chaff in the air ...
Quick, look over here -
coupla billion over there needs cover while sneaking off into the foreign coffers.
Fergawdsake - look at the fucking numbers, willya - all charged to that biggest of all credit cards, the deficit - almost Seven Hundred BILLION fiat dollars on War and the results of war - vetern's benefits and care. Most all of it going to foreign countries and banks.
America, FUCK YEA !
* and if you don't agree, we can kill you.
@ LasVegasDave
Yes, the tax deduction looks more like a trap for the unwary.
Don't fall for it! There is no free lunch, no free "tax advantaged" plan.
***
Buying precious metals (gold, silver, platinum and lead) are good...
Like the deposit seizures in Cyprus, Obama's proposal to cap retirement accounts is a TEMPLATE.
Income tax started 100 years ago with a 7% rate on six-figure incomes; now it picks the pockets of teenaged McDonalds workers.
Retirement accounts are easy targets for similar escalating grabs, because your money can't escape without paying whatever tax they demand.
Government seizures are more avoidable with post-tax funds, since you don't have to keep them in banks which act as government agents for money grabs.
If the government can see it, it isn't yours. I lost everything valuable I had in a boating accident over the Marianna Trench a few days ago. I suggest you go have one too.
The TEMPLATE is the usurpation of STATES'S RIGHTS and the growth of the FEDERAL LEVIATHIAN.
Property (assets) in a retirement account are PERSONAL PROPERTY (not income)
Taxation of PERSONAL PROPERTY is the purview of the STATE GOVERNMENT (right or wrong)
Perhaps if the DUMB-AS-SHIT Governors and State Legislators realized this they would be up in arms over it, since it cuts into their extortion racket...
The serfs aren't going to win this battle on their own, so they need to enlist support from entities who can win it.
If you get matching funds from your company, it is hard to pass them up.
Hey you forgot .22 lr rounds. It's been going for $.20 per round on Gunbroker. That's what 9mm target rounds cost just a few months ago. And people say there's no hyperinflation...
Maybe the loading dock guys at the TSA warehouse could arrange for one crate to 'fall off a truck.'
Dammit Archer !
So, that huge DHS order of ammo was really cover for Romney trading his inside knowledge of the pending IRA changes?
Regards,
Cooter
It's coming, you know it is.
But how much money do people need to live comfortably?
$205,000 sounds like plenty to spend in one year.
Dr Kugman,
What is it about Gold/Silver that paper money does not like..........?
The only thing to like about gold and silver is its industrial use. This is why the only people who should be allowed to invest in gold/silver should be the companies that us the metals for industrial purposes.
Wow. You are such a control freak.
And, how much do you make a year esteemed Doctor?
Does it matter how much money I make?
By no means do I have Mitt Romney money.
And as for being a "control freak" I am not sure why you make such a statement. It is not about control, it is about doing what is right for the people of this country; who will be affected by this measure? How many people are living pay check to pay check and how many people have millions in an IRA?
This measure will benefit the majority of Americans and the people who have hoarded money will have to do their duty to society and help out.
ANYONE who hoards important industrial metals like gold and silver should have those "savings" confiscated at once! For the greater good. And Progressive America should jail ANYONE hoarding valuable lead, in all its forms.
Agreed.
Any money derived from a Nobel award should be confiscated immediately as the normal citizen doesn't get that. They are living paycheck to paycheck.
He earned that Nobel Prize.
What Nobel....OH you mean the the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel that isn't really a Nobel Prize at all and is sponsored by the oldest central bank on the planet? That one?
Stop being such a spoilsport! Yes, that one. Dr Krugman only has our best interests at heart. Making our America a fair place and all.
^ Hahaha, funniest thing on the web right now.
So let me get this straight, Dr. Paul Krugman.....you want to tax me at over 60% when you include federal, state, and local income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, licenses and fees. Thats at least 6 days out of every 10 that I am working for the government. Then, you want to tax that wealth again in the future in the form of confiscation? Now I am working 7 or 8 days out of 10 for the government? And then you want to take another cut when I die? What am I up to now, 9 days out of 10 that I am working for the government?
WHY WORK?
Good luck collecting from me, when I am not producing anything. I will just join the rest of the parasites like you, and suck the host dry that much quicker.
We pretend we work they pretend to pay us.
Old Soviet saying.
"from each according to his ability to each according to his need." I hate to say this but isn't that our current system? The only thing worse (better?) than savers are people who are forced to work for a living? I mean "it's easy to take from them because they have no say in the matter." and of course "all that good lovin' get's passed down the chain" and we all hold hands and sing "Beggar Thy Neighbor" and other classics from the bygone era. What's not to love folks! Next stop 0 percent financing of Zero economic activity...from a chicken in every pot to pot in every kitchen. I'm sorry but I'm going long horseback riding and free grazers as well. Let's give the entire Upper Midwest back to the Blackfoot, the land back to the Buffalo and the law back to God.
Dr. Krugman wants to take your money, then touch your money, then fondle your money, then use your money, and Dr. Krugman wants you to know he is responsible for that and he wants you to live throught the ordeal, and afterwards to thank him for the pleasure of his service to you, and to do this to everyone at the same time and have everyone smile and 'do their part' in the inflatable fiat orgy.
Kinda like the old DRE you get at the doc's office....
Who is Jon Galt?
[Deleted - Posted in Error]
What if you only have a cheap, fake, make-believe imitation, not the actual, real Nobel?
doubled
It's now official, Paul Krugman is a terrorist calling for jailing of DHS officials.
I've decided I like your jacket.
Give it to me.
It's for the good of the people.
You clearly don't need it, and I'll probably give it to a homeless person.
Stick-em-up.
Of course I have this authority -- I claim to represent, "the good of the people".
President Obama was elected by the people to make these decisions. Same with Congress. And these are their jobs - to make these decisions.
If you don't like it, move to another country.
Untrue. If there were no limits on government, you would be correct.
We have property rights in this country. Thus, these actions are both illegal and unconstitutional.
If you would like lawlessness, you are free to move to another country.
He's got you there amigo.....that damn pesky Constitution.
Deposits are loans to the depositor. If the bank goes bankrupt, like Cyprus, then the money, as the liability to the depositor, is collected.
IRAs are "for the benefit of" the account holder and held by a Broker.
We are not talking about property rights here.
my claim on my deposits and retirement funds is a property right you ignorant fuck.
When you deposit money into a bank checking or savings account it is a loan to the bank. It is your liability.
Your account is held "for the benefit of" you by your broker.
They are your liabilities.
Free Corzine!
"When you deposit money into a bank checking or savings account it is a loan to the bank. It isyour liability."
Kind-of agree with what you are saying, but your terminology is incorrect.
You deposit money. It is your asset, subject to counter-party risk. It is NOT your liability.
The bank records it as a liability. They are liable to return your money to you. Yes, this is technically a "loan" to the bank.
As depositor, you have an asset, subject to counter-party risk. The bank has a liability.
No. It is your liability and the banks asset. You have never taken a course on money and banking, finance, or worked as a banker/broker, obviously.