Obama targets wealthy who have “too much” money in individual retirement accounts

Class warfare continues. The Obama administration thinks too many wealthy people have been “abusing” the individual retirement account (IRA) system by following the law and maxing out their contributions. Then, they had the gaul to hire investment councilors – or make smart decisions themselves –  and actually make a profit … too much of a profit.

There are specific limits to what you can contribute to individual retirement accounts (IRAs) each year. Traditional IRAs are a government-created investment vehicle to encourage people to save for retirement. Depending on your individual situation, IRAs may be fully or partially deductible now, in exchange for tax-free growth until you start withdrawing funds upon retirement. You would think this is a good thing, you know, investing for your future so you do not have to be dependent on the state. But remember, statists do not believe your money belongs to you, it belongs to the state.

Roth IRAs are set up a bit differently, but if your tax return has an AGI above $188,000, you can not contribute anything to a Roth.

From The Hill late yesterday morning, with my emphasis in bold.

The senior administration official said that wealthy taxpayers can currently “accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.”

Under the plan, a taxpayer’s tax-preferred retirement account, like an IRA, could not finance more than $205,000 per year of retirement – or right around $3 million this year.

In short, they think too many people got lucky in life, followed the rules and now have too much money saved up for retirement. They don’t need that much, so therefore they are going to change the rules again.

Of course, the Obama administration and their sycophants say they are simply closing what they would refer to as a “loophole” in the system. In reality they are desperate to keep more of our money in their own hands to fund elaborate lifestyles and pet projects. Big government is big you see, and big government costs a lot of money to run. Don’t you understand? Maybe you don’t, but trust me they will not find nearly enough money to cover their vast expenses in coming years from the 1 percenters, and they will be going after the middle class.

Don’t feed the pigs.

Posted in ,

Steve McGough

Steve's a part-time conservative blogger. Steve grew up in Connecticut and has lived in Washington, D.C. and the Bahamas. He resides in Connecticut, where he’s comfortable six months of the year.

21 Comments

  1. Mark on April 6, 2013 at 12:21 pm

    So when will this all end???!! What will it finally take to wake America up? I don’t see an end in sight. If the conservatives don’t get on the ball, Hillary swill take over and rip this country for another 8 years. Boy do we desperately need some ‘new founding fathers’. They want to take our guns, our rights and freedoms and every penny we earn. Pretty soon there won’t be anyone left to pay for the entitlements. Disgusted in CT!



    • Lynn on April 6, 2013 at 4:21 pm

      Mark, I’m pretty sure it was a typo, that made Hillary swill, but it gave me a laugh anyway. Maybe just add an is.
      ?



  2. sammy22 on April 6, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    I, for one, cannot take advantage of the “loophole”. Only a selected group of well-to-do can take advantage of the tax-free-until-you-withdraw from the sheltered accounts. Do we really like loopholes like these?



    • Steve McGough on April 6, 2013 at 2:22 pm

      What a load. By no measurement am I rich, and I left a Fortune 50 job more than a year ago and my income was cut in half (by choice). We saved, we were able to take the steps needed to partially – not fully – funds some retirement accounts. Your claim that only a “selected group of well-to-do” people can take advantage of this is total crap. People make choices every day, and many choose not to save for retirement on their own.



    • Lynn on April 6, 2013 at 4:46 pm

      OK, Steve already has responded, but as usual chatty Lynn can’t let it go. IRAs are not loopholes. They were set up by the government to encourage saving for retirement and had very specific rules. People followed the rules and they made money lawfully to fund their retirement. I am tired of the jealousy and class warfare. Who in blazes can get to decide how ?much is too much for retirement? Do these govt pigs understand that it is expensive to pay for nursing homes, Independent Living centers, Hospice and Alzheimer’s Homes? No one has a crystal ball to know what future illnesses they will have or how long they will live. Healthcare for Sr. Citizens can be extraordinarily expensive and no one wants to burden their children to pay for it. That is what IRAs can provide, peace of mind and independent security for their old age, and darn it the Government is not entitled to take it.



    • sammy22 on April 6, 2013 at 5:04 pm

      We “all” know that IRAs and 401(k) plans? are the thing to do for retirement. We also know that IRAs and 401(k) plans for employees have rather low limits for tax free contributions. What has been glossed over (maybe not deliberately by Steve) is that instruments like solo 401(k) plans for self-employed people have much more generous limits. Check it out!



    • Lynn on April 6, 2013 at 5:27 pm

      Who cares if “401(k) plans for self-employed people have more generous limits”. Self-employed people, in many cases do not have pensions or their businesses may have gone bust, because of this lousy economy and they have retired early. The rules are the rules, they followed them and have planned their future with them. My statement above still stands. No one knows their future costs and they can be expensive. Govt has done nothing to bring down the cost of healthcare, no tort reform, no selling insurance across state lines, and no portability. Just stop the class warfare, if their was a budget and intelligent cuts were made we could survive this crises with dignity and independence.



    • Linda Mae on April 8, 2013 at 4:15 pm

      Sammy – I told my niece to put in at least $25 per paycheck into a 401 – it usually is taken out prior to taxes which means you are taxed on less.? She told me that her husband has the 401 in her family – I reminded her that husbands go – divorce or death – and she needed to focus on herself.? to date – she’s not done so.? Perhaps wisdom comes with age – bottom line – we all have to save for the future but allow our instant gratifications get in the way.? That is not anyone’s fault be ours.? I played the ant so the grasshopper could play – sorry – I don’t want to share? the efforts of my sacrificing with anyone else.? No excuses…We forget that Social Security was developed as a safety net – NOT a pension plan.? Too bad we have so many immature adults who don’t try to care for their futures….Of course other countries don’t have to worry – they tax their people 60% and then return it as services.? Sorry – don’t trust them – too many horror stories.? I’m getting up on years – don’t want to get sick and have our hospitals get a kickback if I die – like they do in England!? (but, of course, most people who watch main stream media will never hear about this…)
      Sammy – It;s never too late – unless you’re retired…



    • sammy22 on April 8, 2013 at 4:41 pm

      I took care of myself as soon as 401(k) plans were available. My only point had to do with the fact that 401(k) plans for individuals (read self-employed) have have much higher limits ($51,000 in 2013) for tax deferred contributions (plus other goodies). Why such goodies for self-employed? They have lots of other benefits (for taking risks etc.)



    • Steve McGough on April 8, 2013 at 7:50 pm

      Don’t worry about the fact the limit is up to 25% of income, or a max of $51k. (Details, details…) Plus of course, there is self-employment tax, the fact they have to BUY their own health insurance, they don’t get employer matching funds towards retirement, no paid vacation, no paid holidays, no bereavement days, no paid training … In the end – and I’ve researched it since I’m doing it – it’s barely a wash and the risks ARE much higher. Want to make it more fair? Fine … Fair Tax … and get the feds out of the income tax racket completely.



    • Tim-in-Alabama on April 12, 2013 at 1:05 am

      It’s obvious to me sammy22’s been gaming the system at the expense of others by legally investing in retirement savings plans. I want some of that money.



  3. Vizionmusic on April 7, 2013 at 8:07 am

    Well Mark, Hillary IS ‘swill’ and you know what?? I seriously doubt the United States will ‘be’much longer…. At this point, only a full scale revolution would set things straight, and unfortunately.. there aren’t enough true ( brave ) Patriots left to do such…



  4. Dimsdale on April 8, 2013 at 10:44 am

    Anything self reliant and responsible people do is anathema to liberals.?
    ?
    You didn’t save for your retirement, believing the Dem screed that Social “Security” would be enough (or even there) for? you?? No problem!! ? They will take it from those who did!? To be fair! ?
    ?
    Didn’t buy a house you could afford and scrimped to pay your mortgage in full and on time?? No problem!! ? They will give you a break from the contract you signed!? To be fair!?
    ?
    Didn’t study hard in school to get a good job that offered healthcare perks or that paid? you enough to buy your own as you see fit?? No problem!! ? They will make a government plan that will take it from those who did!? To be fair!?
    ?
    Voted for an economic neanderthal in 2008 and can’t find a job?? No problem!! ? They will extend unemployment compensation, taking money from working stiffs instead of fixing the economy!? To be fair!



  5. Dimsdale on April 8, 2013 at 11:11 am

    “…reasonable levels of retirement saving.??? Funny that the ones deciding that will never allow themselves to live at those levels.?? Let ?bama and his administration live by the rules they set for us: retire at the income levels they deem to be “sufficient”.



    • stinkfoot on April 8, 2013 at 11:39 am

      Who determines what qualifies as “reasonable”?



  6. yeah on April 8, 2013 at 2:52 pm

    lol, there goes sammy running on a third of available information again.
    hey sammy, ya know that little thing called THE EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION???
    who’s “the employer” for someone that owns their own business???
    cmon back, set ’em up and we’ll shoot ’em down like tin cans.?



    • sammy22 on April 8, 2013 at 4:06 pm

      LOL, yeah. Check it out yourself (on the solo 401(k)). It’s another “special consideration” not available to the common folk.



    • Linda Mae on April 8, 2013 at 4:20 pm

      I? worked in a job that had NO employer match…so what else is new?? You need to study your options—if it’s too late for you, then get your childr3en and grandchildren into the mind set that we should be responsible to save for our futures….
      The “poor me” cry won’t get any sympathy from me…I did 2 or 3 jobs while going to college and continued with some of them when I found a job…
      ?



    • Dimsdale on April 10, 2013 at 10:33 am

      And yet, nothing anyone has mentioned gives any right to ?bama to seize anybody’s savings simply on the basis of “they have too much”.



  7. PatRiot on April 8, 2013 at 9:10 pm

    My mattress is looking better all the time.



    • PatRiot on April 8, 2013 at 9:13 pm

      Oh, and when a politician says ” don’t threaten me about working to get me out of office”.? Politely say, “It is not a threat, it is self defense.? I have been threatened by my government one too many times.”



square-dollar-puzzel

The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.