Posted on 10/26/2017 5:29:44 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
President Trump said he “may be willing to negotiate” with Congressional Republicans on lowering how much Americans can contribute to their 401(k) retirement accounts — just two days after promising there will be “no change.”
The comments, made on the White House lawn as he was walking to Marine One, came hours after US Rep. Kevin Brady, the majority whip and chair of the House Ways and Means committee, defied Trump’s statement from two days earlier.
Republicans are reportedly looking to lower the annual cap on 401(k) contributions to about $2,400 — down from $18,000 for most savers, and $24,000 for people over 50.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
I have an S-Corp so I can use an SEP — putting away about $40/year for now but hope to up that next year depending on how the business goes.
The worst retirement plan anyone can make is depending on SS. They already started taxing it, who knows what else they will do to keep people from actually getting it.
Trump can veto whatever they do. Don’t be hysterical.
I expected Clinton and Bush to cut my deductions and raise my taxes. I didn't expect Trump to.
You honestly believe Trump will veto a tax bill just because it cut's 401k deductions and gives the rich a tax cut? You are really kidding yourself if you do.
Frankly, I would love to see them get some money back out of the numerous and redundant “welfare” programs. There should be no free internet, free 0bamaphones, free school breakfasts and dinners to those on food stamps, no more of that earned income credit where people get back more in “taxes” than paid in....
“You honestly believe Trump will veto a tax bill just because it cut’s 401k deductions and gives the rich a tax cut? You are really kidding yourself if you do.”
No, that’s just your anti-Trump liberalism kicking in making that claim.
I have faith because we have seem him do this tactic time and time again. “I listened, then I decided.”
Dude, the POTUS ain’t king. He has to negotiate or appear to negotiate. As long as he brings an über long spoon, I’m cool with that. :-)
Lower the overall tax rates - “Yes”. Increase the personal allowances - “Yes”. Reduce and/or eliminate loopholes (targeted exemptions) - “if they apply to me - No!” Maybe the real quote should have been “It’s the stupid economy”. Everything is personal.
Thanks for this clarifying post.
Call your senators and representatives today!!!
I do not believe Congress is trying to retro your prior tax deductions from your 401k, are they?
I personally don't think they will do much with the 401k. At worst they may pull the max down from $18k something like $12k or $15k per person, which would still cover 95+% of the population today... most of the remaining 5% has access to a non-qualified deferred comp plan that can contribute 6 digits to tax deferred comp plan and/or would be happy contributing to a Roth 401k for part of their money.
I’m hoping to retire at around 45 years old, so you know I am not counting on SS at all!
Increasing my taxable income by thousands of dollars is not fine with me.
I think it ridiculous that you think you are saving money by taking the IRA contributions on your current taxes. In the future, you are going to pay a ton more. I think you are not looking forward at all. Nobody should be using a tradition IRA. I think you are actually getting welfare by deducting it from your taxes while others are paying it.....what does that sound like? A gift from the government.
Both have their place under current tax law.
The 401 for the company match, go to that level.
Roth is really good because it is less restrictive on withdrawals and no taxes on the back side.
The problem with most people is that their tax rate in retirement is higher than when they were working. I saw this with my Dad , not enough deductions to itemize.
They asked for a show of hands of people contributing to the 401k. The small number of hands that were raised was astonishing.
That is why companies took away pensions because they knew people wouldn’t save themselves. I can’t believe companies got away with it. They are flush with money due to not providing pensions. I’d love to know where all that money these companies have now that they are not paying retirement benefits. Most of them are probably in overseas shelters. What a fraud.
Hell, my wife and I never came close to maxing out our IRAs over the years and we amassed enough to be in the top 10% for net worth...it's modest but we won't have to eat Alpo....
Holy crap!
More power to ya, sonny!
I am shooting for 62 (just a few years away) — SS at 70.
Don’t forget you can get SS stating at 64 if you want fun money. You poaid into it, don’[t leave it on the table.
Good for you for not depending on it in your retirement plans. It is not part of my plans.
Agree. And not one debate on the tens of Billions of EITC that is essentially welfare, including Billions given in scam checks to illegal invaders.
So you’re saying that most people pay a higher rate after retirement? Or am I misunderstanding?
The “F” part of FIRE (financial, insurance, real estate) lobbyists will make sure there is no tampering with 401Ks.
Their livelihoods depend on it.
Much ado about nothing...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.