[quote=SK in CV][quote=flu]It’s more about the more sheer lunacy of the proposal.
But you are correct, that the likelihood of a retroactive tax on the 529 was unlikely. [/quote]
I’m sure why anyone would consider the proposal “lunacy”. Redirecting tax benefits to those who need it most seems pretty logical.
The “retroactive tax” was unlikely because it was never proposed.[/quote]
The lunacy is going after a tiny savings plan that encourages individual americans to save/invest( which the last time I checked, would do many americans a good thing that traditionally does a piss-poor job of saving) instead of going after any other sort of “tax loophole” for corporations, hedge funds/private equity, or uber rich people… But I guess those people are important, since they fund campaign contributions, so they must be off limits I guess.
I’m not suggesting we should be taxing corporations, uber rich people more. But if you are going to suggest “taxing the rich more”, don’t you think they should target the actual entities that they are talking about?
