Retirement Bill Passes House - Goes to Senate

KingsX

KingsX

Senior Member
Location
Texas


Alert!


House passed a bipartisan retirement bill Thursday that raises the RMD age two years to age 72 [effective 12-31-2019.]

Now it goes to the Senate who have their own version of the bill. But the Senate version delays increasing the RMD age to year 2023, thereby denying millions of seniors [born in 1950, 51 and 52] that benefit that the House version would give them.

Oh btw... the Senator who wrote the Senate version was born in 1955... which means he still gets that benefit delayed when he included his 2023 arbitrary date. How convenient !


 

KingsX said:
House passed a bipartisan retirement bill Thursday that raises the RMD age two years to age 72 [effective 12-31-2019.]

Now it goes to the Senate who have their own version of the bill. But the Senate version delays increasing the RMD age to year 2023, thereby denying millions of seniors [born in 1950, 51 and 52] that benefit that the House version would give them.

Oh btw... the Senator who wrote the Senate version was born in 1955... which means he still gets that benefit delayed when he included his 2023 arbitrary date. How convenient !
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm missing something here . . .

Currently a person MUST start withdrawing a minimum amount of money each year from their Individual Retirement Account (IRA) when they reach age 70. They can start taking money out earlier, but by age 70 it's required. If they don't need the money at the time they withdraw it, they can just turn around and reinvest it elsewhere.

Now, the congress is proposing to raise the age for required minimum withdrawals to 72. I don't see the downside for the investor. The upside, if there is one, is that the investor gets to keep their funds in a tax-deferred status for a couple more years. This may or may not be a benefit depending on what happens with the markets and tax rates over the next few years.

For the Senator who was born in 1955 to be impacted by the date of the change, the effective date of the legislation would have to be 2027 or later - a ridiculously long time for such a change to take effect.

What did I miss?
 

Tommy said:



Maybe I'm missing something here . . .

Currently a person MUST start withdrawing a minimum amount of money each year from their Individual Retirement Account (IRA) when they reach age 70. They can start taking money out earlier, but by age 70 it's required. If they don't need the money at the time they withdraw it, they can just turn around and reinvest it elsewhere.

Now, the congress is proposing to raise the age for required minimum withdrawals to 72. I don't see the downside for the investor. The upside, if there is one, is that the investor gets to keep their funds in a tax-deferred status for a couple more years. This may or may not be a benefit depending on what happens with the markets and tax rates over the next few years.

For the Senator who was born in 1955 to be impacted by the date of the change, the effective date of the legislation would have to be 2027 or later - a ridiculously long time for such a change to take effect.

What did I miss?
Click to expand...





The change is a BENEFIT to seniors. Under the House bill that benefit begins next year, 2020.

The downside is that the Senate bill DELAYS the BENEFIT to year 2023, which means seniors born in 50, 51 abnd 52 do NOT get that benefit under the Senate version of the bill.

The House has passed its bill. But the Senate will not vote until after June 3. We don't know what the Senate will do yet. So, if anyone else is concerned about the Senate's 2023 date delay, now is the time to tell your senators.


 
Chucktin said:
What, do you really expect a Senator to share the same economic circumstances that the voters experience? When Hell Central freezes over.
Click to expand...


The House overwhelmingly bipartisanly passed its version which makes that age 72 benefit available beginning with seniors who turn 70 in 2020.

Why the Senate would intentionally delay that age 72 benefit to year 2023 shutting out millions of seniors born in 50, 51 and 52 from that benefit right before an election year is beyond me.

 
I'm also not understanding this issue, as above. The year of birth thing totally escapes me. Can you clarify, here? I was born in 1952. What's wrong with that, when it comes to these bills?
 
treeguy64 said:
I'm also not understanding this issue, as above. The year of birth thing totally escapes me. Can you clarify, here? I was born in 1952. What's wrong with that, when it comes to these bills?
Click to expand...
Do you have investments that will be subject to RMD's when you turn 70 1/2 years old? If not, it means nothing. If you do, then if the new law is passed it will allow you to wait until you are 72 to make the distribution (and pay taxes). So depending on your age now, you may be able to wait longer to withdraw from those accounts and pay those taxes.

If the Senate changes the effective date to 2023, people born in those 3 years (50, 51, 52) are subject to the existing rule of 70 1/2.
 
C'est Moi said:
Do you have investments that will be subject to RMD's when you turn 70 1/2 years old? If not, it means nothing. If you do, then if the new law is passed it will allow you to wait until you are 72 to make the distribution (and pay taxes). So depending on your age now, you may be able to wait longer to withdraw from those accounts and pay those taxes.

If the Senate changes the effective date to 2023, people born in those 3 years (50, 51, 52) are subject to the existing rule of 70 1/2.
Click to expand...


Thank you !

I just now saw the question and your excellent answer.

 
Retirement. Members of Congress become eligible to receive a pension at the age of 62 if they have completed a total of 5 years of service. Members who have completed a total of 20 years of service are eligible for a pension at age 50, are at any age after completing a total of 25 years of service.
[h=2]Salaries and Benefits of US Congress Members: The Truth[/h]
www.thoughtco.com/salaries-and-benefits-of-congress-members-3322282
​
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top