[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=joec]
Discussion is fine, just the endless what IF, this That, ETC…on and on, etc…sounded like more freaked and worried to me.
[/quote]
It’s the same kind of wacked discussions about the likelihood of the government confiscating guns, etc…
There’s a process for things to get done. Proposals have to make it into actual legislations. Congressional leaders then to have to allow legislations to get voted on and passed by both houses. The President then needs to sign laws passed by Congress.
But still some people want to argue that just because there a proposal to change 529 that it then follows that Roth IRAs and 401ks would likely be retroactively taxed. What likelihood?[/quote]
It’s not a wacked discussion at all. We’re fine as long as we have sufficient bi-partisanship in our Congress + Executive branch to keep each other in check. But if at all one party dominates government, there’s a much bigger chance of things getting passed, for better or worse. I don’t think people really believe this would have been passed in our current balanced government. It’s more about the more lunacy of the proposal.
But you are correct, that the likelihood of a retroactive tax on the 529 was unlikely. Because I’m sure many of our politicians who contributed to this plan probably had much more money tucked away into 529’s and would probably want to be grandfathered in so that they wouldn’t have to pay for any sort of retroactive tax..And since they already had theirs, there’s nothing wrong with closing the “tax loophole” for anyone else that wanted to do it after them. Afterall, as long as I get mine, who cares about everyone else, right?
