I'd recommend reading the proposed provisions themselves directly from the Ways & Means Committee instead of the main article urging action: <a href="https://www.advantaira.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/WM-Tax-Title-Section-by-Section-Explanation-9.13.21-002.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.advantaira.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/WM-Tax...</a><p>Highlights:<p>1. You can't add new contributions to tax-advantaged accounts if their total value exceeds $10 million and you make over $400K for single filers, amounts indexed to inflation.<p>2. There are required minimum distributions if you have tax-advantaged accounts over $10M and make over $400k. There's a more rapid drain if you have over $20M.<p>3. Closes the backdoor Roth IRA (<a href="https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Backdoor_Roth" rel="nofollow">https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Backdoor_Roth</a>) only for people making over $400k. Closes the mega backdoor (<a href="https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Mega-backdoor_Roth" rel="nofollow">https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Mega-backdoor_Roth</a>) for everybody.<p>4. Prohibits you from using a tax advantaged account to invest in securities that require "accredited investor" status (hedge funds, etc). You also can't use the tax advantaged account to invest in businesses where you have 50% or more of an interest.<p>Unless you're super rich, were using a tax advantaged account to invest in your business, or were using the mega backdoor, which isn't available to everyone and still does require a pretty high income (investing more than ~$20k/year in a 401k), this doesn't really impact you. You can also still do whatever you want in a taxable account, so to me this just seems like a roundabout way of increasing taxes on wealthy people's investments.<p>I do wonder how much revenue this will raise, though. I can't imagine there are a <i>ton</i> of people with retirement balances over $10M. Maybe the expectation is that revenue will compound over time as more and more assets are held in taxable accounts.<p>EDIT: I think I was wrong about the backdoor Roth still being available to folks making under $400k (point 3) since you can't convert any after tax funds to a Roth with the proposal. So, this does affect people above the Roth ceiling ($140K single income, $208K married), if you were maxing out pretax contributions and making after-tax conversions to a Roth. I think pretax contributions to a traditional IRA for 401k can still get converted to a Roth.
Presumably meant to address high net worth individuals completely dodging taxation on huge gains by using their IRAs for investments like exercising early-stage stock options.[1]<p>I kind of wish they'd go with just capping the gains, but would I still say that if I wasn't planning to use mine to "fund" high-return cryptocurrency arbitrages?<p>1) <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2021/06/24/peter-thiel-has-accumulated-5-billion-in-a-tax-free-roth-ira-designed-to-help-the-middle-class-save-for-retirement-according-to-new-report/?sh=1fccbadf2627" rel="nofollow">https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahhansen/2021/06/24/peter-th...</a>
>Under these provisions, you would no longer be allowed to invest your IRA into private placements and single-member LLCs, regardless of your level of income or wealth.<p>Huh. So under current law, you can take your IRA money and "invest" it in a single-member LLC? Wild. Does that let you circumvent the proscription against living in properties you own through your IRA? Since in that case, the "owner" would be the LLC, rather than yourself per se?
Self directed IRAs are commonly used with a wholly owned single member LLC to invest IRA funds into real estate related investments such as rental properties or many other types of private investments. The new proposed tax bill seems to remove the ability of the IRA owner to manage that LLC and effectively end the use of checkbook control IRAs.
So, progressively since probably the 1980s (maybe earlier?) Australia has introduced a system called "superannuation" (or just "super" for short). There are two parts to this:<p>1. Mandatory contributions: currently 10% of your income; and<p>2. Voluntary contributions: you can contribute more and get a lower tax rate for doing so. By comparison, 401k contributions are tax free. Voluntary super contributions are not.<p>This is intended to fund people's retirements to alleviate the upcoming strain on the Aged Pension just like the issues with Social Security. That is, in 10-20 years there'll be <3 working people per retired person.<p>Australia's super requirements are stricter (eg currently you cannot withdraw before 65; 401k is 59.5). There are other differences.<p>Anyway, super is generally in mutual funds and the like. But there is an option for Self-Managed Super Funds (SMSFs).<p>This is where you can basically run your own fund. You need to get audited, pay fees, have an investment strategy, etc. Generally these are used to invest in things you can't through mutual funds. And this is abused to invest in residential real estate (because, you know, it always goes up).<p>I generally think this system has been a disaster and shouldn't be allowed. It's to protect people from themselves, basically.<p>For example, super investments can't be leveraged but through SMSF shenanigans I've seen balances wiped out by effective leveraging.<p>Also, you'll see marriages where one spouse's super balance is used by another in a bad manner and then the marriage breaks down and this just adds to the financial disadvantage and stress of that spouse. I imagine this is particularly an issue in the case of psychologically abusive marriages.<p>So I'm for any reform that restricts IRAs and 401ks from these one man shops.
The whole article is predicated on the lie that low and middle income earners are buying private placements and LLCs in their IRAs. They are not. Full stop.
They should remove the ability to invest self-directed IRAs into options. This socializes the risk (i.e. someone with little or no supplementary retirement income is going to be a burden on the rest of us) while privatizing the gains.
I really hope this doesn’t go away. My self directed IRA in Bitcoin has led me to prosperity. There was no other way to do it with my retirement funds really.
This rule is directed at a single prominent individual who put founding shares of their company (Paypal) into a IRA, which then let them be an early investor in Facebook and a long list of other well known companies, so that IRA is now worth billions
This will force hundreds of thousands of people who own shares of small businesses within their retirement accounts to disgorge them.<p>They can't sell them to themselves because that's against the rules. If they distribute them then they have to pay a 10% tax penalty in addition to any income tax.<p>These are small thinly traded assets. What will very likely happen in practice is big wall street firms will come in and buy up thousands of American small businesses (retirees best assets) at a major discount similar to what Blackstone is currently doing with single family homes.
One of my more controversial opinions is that tax advantaged retirement accounts should be eliminated entirely.<p>Almost all of the advantages of them accrue to the top decile of income earners. Why should we have exceptions in the tax code just to help richer people amass more money?
this change effects literally zero people who aren't millionaires many times over. The change effects high net worth individuals who are trying to game the system and not pay taxes. This is not even complicated.
The income has already been taxed. The economics are identical to other qualified retirement plans. This is simply more about restricting freedoms and making excuses for targeting Peter Thiel personally.
> Under these provisions, you would no longer be allowed to invest your IRA into private placements and single-member LLCs, regardless of your level of income or wealth.<p>> This will result in significant tax consequences for many people, including low and middle-income investors.<p>BS! In order to legally invest in private placements, you must be a "accredited investor" which means you earn over $200k individually or $300k jointly. If you're making over $200k, you're not middle class AT ALL. You're solidly in the top 10% of the country and likely much higher. This provision will have almost zero impact on middle class America
Just so people are aware, high income individuals can’t use IRAs. This is a direct action against middle to low income individuals.<p><a href="https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/new-income-ranges-for-ira-eligibility-in-2021" rel="nofollow">https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/new-income-ranges-for-ira-eligi...</a>
Hey everyone: stop talking about your compliant tax strategies!<p>It’s been nice to want to help people but now, obviously, too many people know of some and their representatives are changing the laws.<p>It’s back to the way it’s always been: if you can afford good lawyers then you get to know of obscure tax codes. Lets leave it that way.