America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 9 years ago by teedubbya. 34 replies replies.
More broken promises
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Obama Tax Hike on College Savings Plans Breaks Middle Class Tax Pledge

Posted by Ryan Ellis, John Kartch on Tuesday, January 20th, 2015, 11:56 AM PERMALINK
Send to Kindle


Tonight, in his State of the Union address, President Obama will propose a series of tax increases on the American people. One of these tax increases is indisputably an income tax hike on middle class families with children.

Under Obama’s plan, earnings in “Section 529” (named for its location in the Internal Revenue Code) college savings plans will face full income taxation upon withdrawal.

Under current law, earnings growth in 529 plans is tax-free if account distributions are used to pay for college tuition and fees. The Obama plan will tax earnings in these accounts even if they are used to pay for college tuition and fees.

These accounts are commonly used by middle class families. There are about 12 million 529 accounts open today, and they have an average account balance of approximately $21,000. Most 529 plans permit monthly contributions as low as $25 per month.

This middle class income tax increase is a clear violation of President Obama's “firm pledge” against “any form of tax increase” on any family making less than $250,000. This promise to the American people is documented below:

Speaking in Dover, New Hampshire on Sept. 12, 2008, candidate Obama said:

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

During a nationally televised Vice-Presidential debate in St. Louis on Oct. 3, 2008, candidate Joe Biden said:

“No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama’s plan will see one single penny of their tax raised whether it’s their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax.”

In an address to a joint session of Congress on Feb. 24, 2009, President Obama restated the promise in forceful terms:

“If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.”

"Rather than raise taxes on middle class families trying to save for their children’s education, Obama should abolish the seven tax increases in Obamacare that directly hit middle-income Americans,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform.


https://www.atr.org/obama-tax-hike-college-savings-plans-breaks-middle-class-tax-pledge
DrafterX Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
That Bassard..!! Mad
TMCTLT Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
ANYONE really surprised??? How else you gonna pay for two years of FREE community college......
Abrignac Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
It's free so it don't cost nobody nothing.
teedubbya Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
First two years of cc are free in mo for hs kids with proper grades and classes. Excellent program.
teedubbya Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
We also can have open container in the car as long as the driver isn't drinking.

The rest of the country is fucked up on that one.
Brewha Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
Good new on the proposed college funding. Bad news is the Republicans will kill themselves to block it. They think free education is bad and toll roads are good.

More sad still is that a lot of people buy the crap in the OP.
ZRX1200 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,615
Free eh?
herfidore Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 02-21-2008
Posts: 4,031
Edumacation is bad, mmkay. After all, we don't want "them" getting too smart now do we? fog d'oh!
ZRX1200 Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,615
Them? Who's them buddy?

Do I want my tax dollars incresed to pay for some kid to get a "free" degree in some useless field that they'll never get a real job in? No
Brewha Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
ZRX1200 wrote:
Free eh?

It used to bother me that I had to pay taxes to fund the local public schools - I didn't have kids, so they shouldn't tax me, right? But then it occurred to me that the "free" education I got from the public schools was paid for by someone. And that it is our duty to educate the young.

So "free" like the air? No.
More like "free" corporate welfare.
M1220 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 01-11-2015
Posts: 81
I know and see what your saying every day ZRX, my wife works with a lot of college kids here from UGA, and I am shocked at times of the "degree" they are going for, I knew there were some but not the number of useless degree's they offer, clearly it's to just get the numbers up in our colleges today. I listen to them talk almost everyday and the things they believe is astonishing, and these kids are going to be our future leaders........God help us.
Brewha Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
ZRX1200 wrote:
Them? Who's them buddy?

Do I want my tax dollars incresed to pay for some kid to get a "free" degree in some useless field that they'll never get a real job in? No

I do agree with your point.

But no worries. With Republicans in control of the House and Senate, they will be hunting for ways to pull more funding out of education. Cut school lunches and the like. After all, they believe that education should only be for those who can afford it.
Abrignac Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Brewha wrote:
Good new on the proposed college funding. Bad news is the Republicans will kill themselves to block it. They think free education is bad and toll roads are good.

More sad still is that a lot of people buy the crap in the OP.


Please set the record straight for us. What is incorrect in regards to the op.
Brewha Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,182
The original post predicts what the president will say. Please post what he did say.
Abrignac Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Brewha wrote:
The original post predicts what the president will say. Please post what he did say.


Why, when his lips are moving he's usually lying.

But, since you brought it up:

Obamas Pump Up College Savings
Parents Make Big Upfront '529' Investment for Their Daughters' Tuition
By
Jane J. Kim
Updated April 18, 2009 12:01 a.m. ET

Malia and Sasha Obama's college education appears to be taken care of in a massive contribution that the president and first lady made to a "529" college-savings plan in 2007.

But like everyone else, they have likely suffered big losses.

According to their 2008 tax returns, the Obamas took advantage of a unique feature of 529 plans that allows account owners to front-load five years' worth of contributions, $240,000 in total for the two girls. They did so without triggering gift taxes -- now levied on any gift exceeding $13,000 a year. Form 709, the federal gift-tax form, shows that Barack and Michelle Obama made equal contributions of $120,000 each, or $60,000 to each of the two children in 2007.

Senate disclosure forms released last year show that the contributions were made to Illinois's adviser-sold Bright Directions College Savings Program, in two age-based growth portfolios, which are designed to become more conservative the closer the child is to attending college. Assuming that the Obamas haven't changed their investments, one of those portfolios has lost roughly 35% in the past year through March, while the other one is down about 27%.

The filings offer a peek into how the Obamas are planning to pay for college for their daughters, Malia, now 10, and Sasha, seven. College tuition has soared in recent years, with average tuition and fees at private four-year colleges hitting $25,143 for the 2008-2009 academic year, according to the College Board. Meanwhile, average in-state tuition and fees at four-year public universities jumped to $6,585, up 6.4% from the previous year.

In recent years, tax-advantaged 529 plans have become a popular college-savings vehicle for many parents. In a 529 plan, savers put after-tax dollars into an account that typically offers a wide range of mutual funds.

Distributions and earnings are tax-free as long as they are used for higher education. Investors can invest in any plan, although they may get an additional state tax break if they invest in their own state's plan. The Illinois 529 plan, for example, offers a state-tax deduction for contributions.

A spokesman for the White House confirms that a payment was made in 2007 and that the payment, for reporting purposes, will be prorated over five years.

By front-loading five years' worth of contributions, the Obamas also are cutting possible future taxes on their estate since they have gotten $240,000 -- and any future appreciation on that amount -- out of their estate, says Tom Ochsenschlager, vice president of taxation at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, or AICPA.

To be sure, not every family has the means to sock away as much money into 529 plans. The five-year gift election is typically used by wealthy individuals or grandparents who want to help pay for college while reducing their taxable estates, says Joe Hurley, founder of Savingforcollege.com. "Most parents don't have that kind of money to put in all at once."

While the Obamas' investments are down with the bear market, there is a silver lining for investors in these plans. Investors who are underwater can liquidate the plan without penalties or taxes. Losses can be claimed as a miscellaneous itemized deduction, which can help reduce investors' taxes to the extent those deductions exceed 2% of their adjusted gross income, Mr. Hurley notes. Those who are in the alternative minimum tax, however, are out of luck since miscellaneous itemized deductions aren't usable under the AMT.

Abrignac Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
From:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/17/fact-sheet-simpler-fairer-tax-code-responsibly-invests-middle-class-fami

Quote:
Limit upside-down education savings incentives and consolidate them into a single benefit. The President’s plan would consolidate education savings incentives into one vehicle and redirect the savings into the better targeted AOTC. Specifically, the President’s plan will roll back expanded tax cuts for 529 education savings plans that were enacted in 2001 for new contributions, and – like Chairman Camp’s tax reform plan – repeal tax incentives going forward for the much smaller Coverdell education savings program.


From:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/20918/

Quote:
According to the Investment Company Institute (the trade association for the mutual fund industry), there was $245 billion accumulated in 529 plans in 2014. With just south of 12 million accounts open, that means there’s an average balance of about $21,000 in these plans. This is not a mechanism for rich Democrats like the Kennedys or the Gates to shelter wealth.



So I guess we are to believe this is not another middle class tax increase? Kinda like if you like you health insurance you can keep it, or if like your doctor, you can keep him?
stogiefan Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-23-2012
Posts: 80
M1220 wrote:
I know and see what your saying every day ZRX, my wife works with a lot of college kids here from UGA, and I am shocked at times of the "degree" they are going for, I knew there were some but not the number of useless degree's they offer, clearly it's to just get the numbers up in our colleges today. I listen to them talk almost everyday and the things they believe is astonishing, and these kids are going to be our future leaders........God help us.


For many kids college is just a big scam. Yes there are legitimate fields where college is the best place to go to get a proper education and credentials. You want to be a doctor, lawyer, teacher, engineer, scientist, etc absolutely go to college. However, there is no seperation in college between degrees for career advancement and degrees for personal fulfillment. The kids that graduate with what I would consider the personal fulfillment degrees have two options. One is go to work in field that requires no degree or continue their education and get a masters degree in something more relevant. Unfortunately most do not have the financial resources and/or the brains to consider option #2.

MACS Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,791
Honestly, I think we should scrap the whole damn IRS and go to a federal sales tax. Instead of loopholes for the rich to jump through, and pages upon pages of stuff the rest of us don't understand, we tax purchases.

Poor people do not buy a lot of stuff. They will pay much less. Rich people buy more stuff, and more expensive stuff... so they will pay more. This way EVERYONE will have to pay. Including the folks working under the table and illegally... they'll pay their taxes when they buy stuff.

It's fair, they'll generate more revenue, and folks who like to live thrifty will keep more of their own money.
Buckwheat Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
stogiefan wrote:
For many kids college is just a big scam. Yes there are legitimate fields where college is the best place to go to get a proper education and credentials. You want to be a doctor, lawyer, teacher, engineer, scientist, etc absolutely go to college. However, there is no seperation in college between degrees for career advancement and degrees for personal fulfillment. The kids that graduate with what I would consider the personal fulfillment degrees have two options. One is go to work in field that requires no degree or continue their education and get a masters degree in something more relevant. Unfortunately most do not have the financial resources and/or the brains to consider option #2.



My wife graduated from a liberal arts school with a BA in English Literature and she currently makes more than me (BS in Electrical Engineering). Certainly not every case fits into such a nice box as "you got a BA in basket weaving so you won't be financially successful". fog

College is not for everyone. I think the secondary education system in this country is fundamentally flawed. There should be a better network of trade schools that give people marketable skills beyond a high school education.

If they push this Tax change through they are beyond stupid. ram27bat

Abrignac Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
MACS wrote:
Honestly, I think we should scrap the whole damn IRS and go to a federal sales tax. Instead of loopholes for the rich to jump through, and pages upon pages of stuff the rest of us don't understand, we tax purchases.

Poor people do not buy a lot of stuff. They will pay much less. Rich people buy more stuff, and more expensive stuff... so they will pay more. This way EVERYONE will have to pay. Including the folks working under the table and illegally... they'll pay their taxes when they buy stuff.

It's fair, they'll generate more revenue, and folks who like to live thrifty will keep more of their own money.


Not a novel idea. But, it will vastly be disproportionate in terms of tax as a % of income. The median household income in the US per household for 2012 was $51,371. Down from $55,030 in 2000. A family with a household income of around $50,000 is going to spend most if not all of their income on necessities. As a result, the national sales tax will be a percentage of their entire income.

Here's a link to one such chart:
http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-savings-rate-by-income-level-2013-3

If one were to extrapolate from that it's easy to see that the least wealthy would pay taxes at an overall higher % of income than the those at the higher end of the wage spectrum. This is why the flat tax proposed by Steve Forbes in his failed Presidential bid was championed by only the very wealthy.

Based on the chart above and assuming a sales tax rate of 10% the top 1% would pay 5.1% of their income in taxes.
Conversely, the average household would pay in the neighborhood of 10% of their income in taxes.

Not sure about anyone else, but I sure as hell don't want to pay damn near twice the % as say the CEO of HP.
stogiefan Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-23-2012
Posts: 80
Buckwheat wrote:
My wife graduated from a liberal arts school with a BA in English Literature and she currently makes more than me (BS in Electrical Engineering). Certainly not every case fits into such a nice box as "you got a BA in basket weaving so you won't be financially successful". fog

College is not for everyone. I think the secondary education system in this country is fundamentally flawed. There should be a better network of trade schools that give people marketable skills beyond a high school education.

If they push this Tax change through they are beyond stupid. ram27bat



I was speaking very generally and yes there are exceptions to every rule, however, based on the cost of college today I wouldn't suggest everyone go all in that they will be the exception in a less than marketable degree program. People with natural talent or entrepreneurial ability will be financially successful regardless of college.

I totally agree that the secondary education system is flawed. Unfortunately there is also a stigma placed on going to trade/technical school. Many kids also shy away from that path because they won't get the full college experience of partying and girls. I didn't want my post to come across that I am anti college. However, I do believe that colleges prey on naive students and parents and promise them that college is this great one sized fit all solution to a secure financial future. Quite frankly we have too many students in college. 1/2 of college graduates today are taking jobs in field that requires no degree. There simply isn't the job demand to justify the number of bachelor degree programs that colleges offer today. This will all be fully exposed when the student loan bubble bursts in the coming years.
MACS Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,791
Abrignac wrote:
Not a novel idea. But, it will vastly be disproportionate in terms of tax as a % of income. The median household income in the US per household for 2012 was $51,371. Down from $55,030 in 2000. A family with a household income of around $50,000 is going to spend most if not all of their income on necessities. As a result, the national sales tax will be a percentage of their entire income.

Here's a link to one such chart:
http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-savings-rate-by-income-level-2013-3

If one were to extrapolate from that it's easy to see that the least wealthy would pay taxes at an overall higher % of income than the those at the higher end of the wage spectrum. This is why the flat tax proposed by Steve Forbes in his failed Presidential bid was championed by only the very wealthy.

Based on the chart above and assuming a sales tax rate of 10% the top 1% would pay 5.1% of their income in taxes.
Conversely, the average household would pay in the neighborhood of 10% of their income in taxes.

Not sure about anyone else, but I sure as hell don't want to pay damn near twice the % as say the CEO of HP.


I'd be willing to bet, with all the loopholes for rich people, you already are. I'm already getting yelled at by my tax lady to put more money in deferred comp because I am just a red hair below the next higher tax bracket... and I ain't nowhere NEAR fuggin rich.
Abrignac Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
MACS wrote:
I'd be willing to bet, with all the loopholes for rich people, you already are. I'm already getting yelled at by my tax lady to put more money in deferred comp because I am just a red hair below the next higher tax bracket... and I ain't nowhere NEAR fuggin rich.



If you have some disposable income you really ought to consider listening to her. Also, see about setting it up as a Roth. Been doing that for years. FWIW, my DC is up 73.64% for the past 3 years.
MACS Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,791
^I was not liking the up and down. I moved my whole can of worms to a fixed account. d'oh!
DrafterX Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
I used to move money around in the 401 but decided they prolly no best so I leave it alone now... i started dumping some funds in an IRA that I play with a little bit but not much.... Mellow
Abrignac Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
MACS wrote:
^I was not liking the up and down. I moved my whole can of worms to a fixed account. d'oh!



That's a big hurdle one must overcome. I've had a few o'**** days since I have always invested in high-risk, high-return securities. Even with them though I'm way better off than had I put my savings in a more "conservative" investment.

I figure I've got about 15 more years of growth before I have to worry about withdrawals. If I can get the same return over next 15 years as I've had over the last 15 years I should have about 6-8 times as much then as I have now. If I continue making monthly contributions that amount should be even higher.
MACS Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,791
I was in a managed account that wasn't doing any better than the 3.5% I am guaranteed right now, and was costing me 1%. Our deferred comp choices are Valic and Nationwide. I started with the former, and moved it to the latter.

Had I left it the hell alone (when the market was at 13,000 or so) it would be doing very well (at 17,000) but I'd be worrying about the bottom falling out.

I'll be fine at 55 if I keep doing what I am doing. But I guess if I wanted to risk things I could be doing a lot better (or a lot worse). Since I am happy with where I'll be... I'm going to let it ride in the fixed account and not worry.
DrafterX Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
You're still young so to speak.. gotta gamble a little bit... but im no expert... Mellow
Abrignac Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
MACS wrote:
I was in a managed account that wasn't doing any better than the 3.5% I am guaranteed right now, and was costing me 1%. Our deferred comp choices are Valic and Nationwide. I started with the former, and moved it to the latter.

Had I left it the hell alone (when the market was at 13,000 or so) it would be doing very well (at 17,000) but I'd be worrying about the bottom falling out.

I'll be fine at 55 if I keep doing what I am doing. But I guess if I wanted to risk things I could be doing a lot better (or a lot worse). Since I am happy with where I'll be... I'm going to let it ride in the fixed account and not worry.



Not sure what types of investments they allow. I'm pretty lucky. We have tons of choices. Within the plan itself, there are about 30 different investment choices which include a handful of proprietary funds as well as institutional versions of publicly available mutual funds.

If you have more than $2500 you can open a TD Amritrade account. Anything above that amount can go into the TD account where one can invest in just about any publicly traded security from stocks, bonds, commodities futures, mutual funds you name it. I keep the bare minimum in the base plan split between a few decent mutual funds. The rest is in the brokerage account.
DrafterX Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
Who was that dude a couple years ago that got the job driving an armoured car..?? Wasn't he supposed to give us tips and stufff..?? Huh
Abrignac Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
DrafterX wrote:
Who was that dude a couple years ago that got the job driving an armoured car..?? Wasn't he supposed to give us tips and stufff..?? Huh



Wasn't that CROS?
DrafterX Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,555
No..... poor CROS..... Sad
teedubbya Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Drafter always has fallen for that just the tip line.
Users browsing this topic
Guest