'Transformative' retirement reform package passes the House and heads to the Senate

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: Yahoo Finance

A retirement reform plan known as “SECURE 2.0” is finally on the move again on Capitol Hill.

The bill, known formally as the Securing a Strong Retirement Act of 2022, was passed by the House of Representatives Tuesday in an overwhelming 414 to 5 vote.

“Oftentimes in this chamber you will hear the phrase transformative,” said Ways and Means committee chairman Richard Neal (D-MA) as the bill neared passage. “Sometimes it’s hyperbolic but on this occasion, this is transformative legislation.”

Expanding on a landmark 2019 retirement bill, the bill aims to further expand Americans' ability to save for retirement and increase their options for doing so. If it passes the Senate, SECURE 2.0 could be a boon for savers from people still paying student loans to retirees behind on their bills.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/personalfinance/transformative-retirement-reform-package-passes-the-house-and-heads-to-the-senate/ar-AAVBqEa

[LudwigPastorius]

1. Great, but...

I don't have an extra $10K to sock away because my wages haven't even kept up with inflation.

[TimeToGo]

2. Steady is the answer

But that’s not alway easy or possible

[onecaliberal]

3. This does zero for most.

This does nothing for 80% of Americans who struggle to afford Medicine, food and gas. They can’t save let alone save more.

[question everything]

9. More than 80 % take more than the RMD because they need the money

https://democraticunderground.com/11213818

[onecaliberal]

10. We already do not have money. This is not a good idea.

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Yeah, it's about the next generation of retirees

and about those with good jobs. It won't do beans for low income people, and almost nothing for those already retired. What happened to linking Federal Poverty level to Social Security minimums?

[TeamProg]

5. But, "the RENT is STILL too damn HIGH!"

and it's true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_McMillan

[Sherman A1]

6. Excellent

I see benefits for a great many in this legislation. Pushing the RMD age back to 75 is helpful to me.

[Farmer-Rick]

7. It only helps people who already have money

Basically it opens up a few ways, tax free, to invest excess capital. But who has excess capital to invest into retirement?

Most people have to decide between paying for something 20 years away or car repairs, or food or baby diapers. The immediate necessity takes precident over future savings.

Seems to me this will help the already wealthy, not the people who need help.

And that weird caveat about getting your work place to pay your student loans. Seems it's a way to shackle workers to corporations, like with healthcare. And a way of saying see we did do something about outrageous interest rates on student loans....while just making things worse.

It's a bandaid for a broken leg.

We need to go back to defined benefits pensions but with stricter laws and federal controls over how workers' pensions funds can be used.

"The roots of this crisis took hold two decades ago, when corporate pension plans, by and large, were well funded, thanks in large part to rules enacted in the 1970s that required employers to fund the plans adequately and laws adopted in the 1980s that made it tougher for companies to raid the plans or use the assets for their own benefit. Thanks to these rules, and to the long-running bull market that pumped up assets, by the end of the 1990s pension plans at many large companies had such massive surpluses that the companies could have fully paid their current and future retirees’ pensions, even if all of them lived to be 99 and the companies never contributed another dime."

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/retirement/06/demiseofdbplan.asp

But then laws were changed and raiding pensions became a blood sport. But only middle class and poor workers were left bleeding.

[forthemiddle]

8. You want defined benefit pensions back

Yet you decry the provision of getting your work place to pay your student loans because "It's a way to shackle workers to corporations"

Don't pensions do the same thing? At least with 401Ks (with all of the warts) are portable. Very few people stay at the same workplace throughout their whole careers.

[TexasBushwhacker]

11. For God's sake, adjust the amount you can make before your Social Security is taxed!

That would help the people at the bottom the most! The original amount you could earn while receiving Social Security Retirement Income was set during the REAGAN ADMINISTRATION and has NEVER BEEN CHANGED! Single earners can making between $25K and $34K will be taxed on 50% of their Social Security. Income over $34K means that 85% of your Social Security is taxable. There have been no COLAs in almost 40 years!

It's even worse for married couples. The limits don't double. Married couples making between $32K and $44K get half of their SS taxed. Above $44K subjects them to 85% of it being taxed. WHAT THE FUCK???