[quote=AN][quote=FlyerInHi]AN, you can call it whatever you want.
But it’s not like rules change overnight that you can’t plan.
Life is fluid and estate planning is a continuous process mostly because changing personal circumstances. Nothing to get riled up about.
On Obama Care, it depend what your view is. Considering that universal health care is taken for granted in the developed world, the US was bound to implement something sooner or later. In that context, Obama Care is just a patch to the old system.[/quote]I never said rules doesn’t change. In fact, that’s exactly what I said. It’s within the realm of possibility that we can get “Roth” tax free gain rule be changed retroactively. I pointed out that when you have Democrat super majority in both chamber and the presidency, it’s likely that it will happen.
If you call Obamacare a patch and incremental, then the change in Roth rules would be an even more minor patch and there’s no point in arguing that it can’t happen.[/quote]
When in the state of California has a super-majority of either party has passed a retroactive tax increase? (Please note, your previous example of Proposition 30 doesn’t qualify.)
It’s not likely it will happen. For one, there hasn’t been a super-majority in congress for decades. The likelihood of it happening any time in the next couple decades is slim. And second, I can’t recall a retroactive tax increase being suggested in the last 40 years. (It did happen once. During either late in the Reagan administration or early Bush I administration. Congress quickly fixed it.) If it’s ever happened at the federal level and stuck. Creating precedent like that is almost impossible without a super-majority.
Beyond that, nobody is even suggesting removing the current tax benefits of deferred taxes for things like 401Ks, Roths or IRA, much less the future benefits of those accounts. Nothing like that has ever happened before.
