Ol Jock 99 said:

---

Quote:

---

An American child born after December 31, 2024 and before January 1, 2029 for whom a Trump Account is established will receive an initial $1,000 deposit from the government

---

Bolded the important part for you comrade.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Trump-Accounts-Give-the-Next-Generation-a-Jump-Start-on-Saving.pdf

---

How is this any different than a $1,000 increase to the child tax credit?

Not sure how good this is, TBH. It's post tax contribution for parents, and growth is taxed as ordinary income when withdrawn for qualified distributions and ordinary income with a 10% penalty for all other withdrawals. Might as well just start a brokerage account for your kids if you don't get the free money.

The government already gives away too much money and wastes too much money as well. We are already way overdrawn. Stupid idea.

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

This was my first thought the first time I heard Ted Cruz taking about this on his podcast MONTHS ago.

Well we're done with Trump now. I'm ready to go back and vote democrat/communist/socialist, open up the border to unvetted 3rd worlders, allow the flow of drugs to continue into the country, go back DEI policies for everyone, etc.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

This was my first thought the first time I heard Ted Cruz taking about this on his podcast MONTHS ago.

---

It's the only way it can make sense in my mind. For this to be the beginning of something much bigger.

Get time value of money working for you. Allow parents and others to make recurring contributions into children's retirement accounts without earned income. I'd even be open to some kind of federal "match" similar to corporate 401Ks only if it was a way to end SS.

But we know how this will go…

normalhorn said:

---

I can't remember what year it was (and frankly I don't care to look it up), but I clearly remember Obama saying he was going to do the same thing (or at least very similar) in one of his SOTU speeches. Obviously, he never followed through with it. But, that won't stop the liberal hive mind from whining and moaning about what a horrible idea it is.
As long as it's being partially funded by wealthy philanthropists and has strict guidelines on when the money can be accessed, who cares?

---

If Sotero did the exact same thing they'd be hailing him as king of America. He was just so dreamy...

1) when I replied to a comment on page 1 I didn't realize this had gone to 3 pages.
2) 3 pages mostly of ignorant snark and drivel. Never change F16... Never change'
3) It seems that ALL of y'all have forgotten talking about this earlier in the year when it was pitched. IIRC it is eligible for annual contributions from parents. I can't recall if it's $1000 or if it's capped at $5000. Both would be game changing along the lines of either giving kids access to cash at 18 to either pay for school/trade school, down payment on a first home, or continue saving for retirement.

• Unlike the current SS program, this is going into an investment account. What I'm not certain on, is where the money is put. Hopefully some broad index and not left sitting in a 1.2% APY money market fund.
• This could undo SS in the long run as it's savings that gives money and compounding time to do its long term thing. Where SS is a merry-go-round of rob from the young to give to the old, there's no end to that ride without structural change.
• The final thing this does is that eliminates the argument that the market is only for the rich. It puts an entire generation in the markets from day 1.
• It's an investment in the American economy.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Not sure how good this is, TBH. It's post tax contribution for parents, and growth is taxed as ordinary income when withdrawn for qualified distributions and ordinary income with a 10% penalty for all other withdrawals. Might as well just start a brokerage account for your kids if you don't get the free money.

---

I agree, putting money into a brokerage account and investing it in low fee etf would generate a small tax drag as it grew, but those dividends would likely be qualified and subject to lower long term capital gains tax rates. Then when the money is taken out in the future it will also get the favorable tax rates vs ordinary income the Trump account would be subject to.

Parents might as well take the free seed money and invest it and see what it can do in 18 years, but they would be better off funding a custodial brokerage account vs adding their own money to a Trump account.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

1) when I replied to a comment on page 1 I didn't realize this had gone to 3 pages.
2) 3 pages mostly of ignorant snark and drivel. Never change F16... Never change'
3) It seems that ALL of y'all have forgotten talking about this earlier in the year when it was pitched. IIRC it is eligible for annual contributions from parents. I can't recall if it's $1000 or if it's capped at $5000. Both would be game changing along the lines of either giving kids access to cash at 18 to either pay for school/trade school, down payment on a first home, or continue saving for retirement.

• Unlike the current SS program, this is going into an investment account. What I'm not certain on, is where the money is put. Hopefully some broad index and not left sitting in a 1.2% APY money market fund.
• This could undo SS in the long run as it's savings that gives money and compounding time to do its long term thing. Where SS is a merry-go-round of rob from the young to give to the old, there's no end to that ride without structural change.
• The final thing this does is that eliminates the argument that the market is only for the rich. It puts an entire generation in the markets from day 1.
• It's an investment in the American economy.

---

Outside the seed the money parents could already do that for their kids and pay less taxes with a custodial brokerage account.

Assuming parent A got the Trump account with $1000 and put $5000 a year in at 7% after 18 years it would be worth about 173k

Parent B instead opened a brokerage account for their child and invested in $5000 a year but no seed money they would have about $170k

The difference is if the child had no other income at age 18 and liquidated the account, using today's tax rates they would owe about $10k in taxes on the trump account and only about $3k in taxes on the brokerage account.

Yes 529s which you can only use for education or penalties are involved. Just now, you can roll them into Ira's but there's a cap on what you can roll over.

You can open Roth IRAs for your kids but you have to have a business and them on payroll, so basically no one can use this.

Other than that, there is no taxed advantaged accounts for kids that I know of unless I'm missing something?

You can also contribute to a custodial brokerage account for your kids and get better tax treatment than the Trump account.

Since your money goes in post tax anyway you are trading "tax free growth" for switching from LTCG rates to ordinary rates which isn't a good trade.

I didn't think these are traditional brokerage accounts.
Need to see the text of the BBB, but I think they were supposed to be more like 529 or 401k.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

I didn't think these are rational brokerage accounts.
Need to see the text of the BBB, but I think they were supposed to be more like 529 or 401k.

---

They have restrictions like a 401k but since the money goes in after tax instead of pre tax you give up the biggest advantage. You get all the down side of a 401k (contribution limits, penalties for early withdrawal, and treated as ordinary income on the way out) for only a small benifit of "tax free growth" which is very overrated when you structure your investments to only kick off small dividends that are qualified so will be taxed at the lowest possible rates anyway.

Look up the tax brackets for ordinary income vs long term capital gains and you will instantly see the table you would rather be using.

Ordinary income stats at 10% and caps at 37%
Long term capital gains start at 0% and caps at 20%

Tax free growth is overrated??? Assume you max out these accounts for 60 years. For 60 years the growth in the accounts will be 21 million vs 350k of contributions.

🤯@SenTedCruz lays out HOW the TRUMP ACCOUNT Investments will work:

"Take a little girl born next year—the accounts open, $1k is automatically seeded, her parents, her family, her employer puts $5,000 each year.

Assuming growth of S&P 500, which is 7% a year, by the time that… pic.twitter.com/wGosIzpV2B

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) December 2, 2025

Quote:

---

We're talking the kids of a single mom waiting tables who could have $700,000 saved by the time she is 35.

---

It's only game changing for the markets that the digital assets are held in. $700K is useless to the kid for 35 years unless they can borrow against it or tap into it when it's most needed in their lifetime.

Here's a better idea.

Cut income tax rates by 10% across the board today for EVERYONE. Allow people to keep the money they earn and invest where they see fit.

Isn't this pretty much a 401k that can be started for our children? And it'll have the same benefits to the child at retirement? That seems huge on a compounding basis. Sure, if the kid withdraws it early they're going to incur taxes, but I'd think you'd want to teach your child the importance of not touching the money and allowing it to compound.

I believe i read the money can be converted to an IRA at 18. That money in an IRA for 45-50 years is a great jump start to retirement.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

• The final thing this does is that eliminates the argument that the market is only for the rich. It puts an entire generation in the markets from day 1.

---

And that is why many here hate it. Because it does something for the poor. Here we only love rich-friendly schemes because we are "capitalists" and "conservatives".

FTAC2011 said:

---

Tax free growth is overrated??? Assume you max out these accounts for 60 years. For 60 years the growth in the accounts will be 21 million vs 350k of contributions.

---

What do you mean by "tax free growth?" Capital appreciation is almost always tax free.
A large majority of people dont max out their retirement accounts now. A married couple can gift $38,000 ($19k x 2) to each of their kids right now, and yet many people don't do it.

I've known hundreds if not thousands of trust fund babies. In my experience, for many, when they know they have a large pool of $$ coming into their life during their 40s and 50s, they treat their 20s and 30s differently than your typical upper middle-class person.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Not sure how good this is, TBH. It's post tax contribution for parents, and growth is taxed as ordinary income when withdrawn for qualified distributions and ordinary income with a 10% penalty for all other withdrawals. Might as well just start a brokerage account for your kids if you don't get the free money.

---

Employer's can add up to $2500 in these accounts, pre tax. Ted Cruz wrote a letter to Fortune 1000 CEO's encouraging them to participate.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

1) when I replied to a comment on page 1 I didn't realize this had gone to 3 pages.
2) 3 pages mostly of ignorant snark and drivel. Never change F16... Never change'
3) It seems that ALL of y'all have forgotten talking about this earlier in the year when it was pitched. IIRC it is eligible for annual contributions from parents. I can't recall if it's $1000 or if it's capped at $5000. Both would be game changing along the lines of either giving kids access to cash at 18 to either pay for school/trade school, down payment on a first home, or continue saving for retirement.

• Unlike the current SS program, this is going into an investment account. What I'm not certain on, is where the money is put. Hopefully some broad index and not left sitting in a 1.2% APY money market fund.
• This could undo SS in the long run as it's savings that gives money and compounding time to do its long term thing. Where SS is a merry-go-round of rob from the young to give to the old, there's no end to that ride without structural change.
• The final thing this does is that eliminates the argument that the market is only for the rich. It puts an entire generation in the markets from day 1.
• It's an investment in the American economy.

---

Its going to be invested in an S&P 500 index fund from what I read.

Tax free growth is when you pull the money out, it is not taxed

Texag5324 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Not sure how good this is, TBH. It's post tax contribution for parents, and growth is taxed as ordinary income when withdrawn for qualified distributions and ordinary income with a 10% penalty for all other withdrawals. Might as well just start a brokerage account for your kids if you don't get the free money.

---

Employer's can add up to $2500 in these accounts, pre tax. Ted Cruz wrote a letter to Fortune 1000 CEO's encouraging them to participate.

---

Wages stagnant but compensation (wages + benefits) increase.
Current labor participation rate is below 65% and less than 50% of those are employed by large firms. Will small firms and mom and pop business be able to provide this benefit to its employees?

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

As long as I still get mine.

torrid said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

As long as I still get mine.

---

I'm with you but for that to happen one generation of Americans is going to get royally screwed and have to pay into SS knowing they will never receive a dime of benefits.

torrid said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

As long as I still get mine.

---

We should.

I can see something similar to this being instituted for retirement and then phase out OASDI taxes as we die off.

This account is eerily close to the sovereign citizen concept that we are not free men of the land but corporate entities owned by the government, and the fruits of our labor actually go to secrets accounts that benefit the likes of the Clintons, Obamas, and Pelosis.

bonfarr said:

---

torrid said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

As long as I still get mine.

---

I'm with you but for that to happen one generation of Americans is going to get royally screwed and have to pay into SS knowing they will never receive a dime of benefits.

---

I know many GenXers who did not expect to receive any SS when they got old. It actually motivated many of us to obtain college degrees and create at least a little bit of financial independence.

I think the younger generations have been gaslit into believing government money will be there for them.

fc2112 said:

---

I will commend Michael Dell in that he's stayed with the original wife he married back in the day instead of upgrading to some plastic woman like so many other rich dudes do.

---

From my perspective, Michael is a real one.

And while I'm not gay, he looks pretty damn good for 60.

Also, my hat is off to Michael for never personally promoting the DEI insanity last decade.

tysker said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

torrid said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

As long as I still get mine.

---

I'm with you but for that to happen one generation of Americans is going to get royally screwed and have to pay into SS knowing they will never receive a dime of benefits.

---

I know many GenXers who did not expect to receive any SS when they got old. It actually motivated many of us to obtain college degrees and create at least a little bit of financial independence.

I think the younger generations have been gaslit into believing government money will be there for them.

---

That is one reason I'm debating starting to draw SS at age 62 even at greatly reduced amounts. I figure it would be harder to take a away a benefit I am already receiving.

edit - **** if I start drawing at 62 instead of 67, it looks like the benefit is reduced 30%. I think I could live with that.

Dungeon Crawler Carl said:

---

🤯@SenTedCruz lays out HOW the TRUMP ACCOUNT Investments will work:

"Take a little girl born next year—the accounts open, $1k is automatically seeded, her parents, her family, her employer puts $5,000 each year.

Assuming growth of S&P 500, which is 7% a year, by the time that… pic.twitter.com/wGosIzpV2B

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) December 2, 2025

Quote:

---

We're talking the kids of a single mom waiting tables who could have $700,000 saved by the time she is 35.

---

It's only game changing for the markets that the digital assets are held in. $700K is useless to the kid for 35 years unless they can borrow against it or tap into it when it's most needed in their lifetime.

---

Quote:

---

"Take a little girl born next yearthe accounts open, $1k is automatically seeded, her parents, her family, her employer puts $5,000 each year.

---

This is the part I'm doubting. Where is that $5,000/yr investment coming from?

Quote:

---

Assuming growth of S&P 500, which is 7% a year, by the time that little girl is 18, she will have $170,000 in that account.

---

I wonder what inflation is going to do over that time period?

Quote:

---

We're talking the kids of a single mom waiting tables who could have $700,000 saved by the time she is 35.

---

Assuming that the $170k at 18 didn't get spent on a new Escalade, some tattoos and a girls trip to Cancun.

And 35 years from now, I'm guessing that $700k will be almost enough to get into a starter home.

It's a very nice gesture by Michael and Susan but I doubt many will take full advantage of the opportunity. More likely the $250 is spent on one day at Disney World.

bonfarr said:

---

torrid said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Is this a first step to cut Soc Security for anyone born after a certain date?

---

As long as I still get mine.

---

I'm with you but for that to happen one generation of Americans is going to get royally screwed and have to pay into SS knowing they will never receive a dime of benefits.

---

Not to derail... But there will need to be a way to step/phase that out without completely shafting a generation.

tysker said:

---

FTAC2011 said:

---

Tax free growth is overrated??? Assume you max out these accounts for 60 years. For 60 years the growth in the accounts will be 21 million vs 350k of contributions.

---

What do you mean by "tax free growth?" Capital appreciation is almost always tax free.
A large majority of people dont max out their retirement accounts now. A married couple can gift $38,000 ($19k x 2) to each of their kids right now, and yet many people don't do it.

I've known hundreds if not thousands of trust fund babies. In my experience, for many, when they know they have a large pool of $$ coming into their life during their 40s and 50s, they treat their 20s and 30s differently than your typical upper middle-class person.

---

Tax-Free growth because this will be invested. It's after tax dollars from the parents, as well as potential for parents employers to contribute.

Regardless the fund will not have capital gains taxes on it since it's sitting in the markets.

Prior to this, there are two ways to transfer (outside of a trusts) money to minors. There is, as you mentioned, the annual $19k (per person) gift that can be done tax free. If that money is then invested it will grow and capital gains will be owed when the investments are sold. The other way is via UTMA (Universal Transfer to Minors Act) where a parent can transfer investments to the minor at the parents original basis.

What trust fund babies do with their money is a them problem. It's not a me problem.
Again my understanding is these accounts can be rolled out of for certain qualified expenditures at 18. They can go into an IRA, they can be used for college or trade school, or they can be used to purchase a home. I haven't heard specifics, only generalizations though.

HollywoodBQ said:

---

Dungeon Crawler Carl said:

---

🤯@SenTedCruz lays out HOW the TRUMP ACCOUNT Investments will work:

"Take a little girl born next year—the accounts open, $1k is automatically seeded, her parents, her family, her employer puts $5,000 each year.

Assuming growth of S&P 500, which is 7% a year, by the time that… pic.twitter.com/wGosIzpV2B

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) December 2, 2025

Quote:

---

We're talking the kids of a single mom waiting tables who could have $700,000 saved by the time she is 35.

---

It's only game changing for the markets that the digital assets are held in. $700K is useless to the kid for 35 years unless they can borrow against it or tap into it when it's most needed in their lifetime.

---

Quote:

---

"Take a little girl born next yearthe accounts open, $1k is automatically seeded, her parents, her family, her employer puts $5,000 each year.

---

This is the part I'm doubting. Where is that $5,000/yr investment coming from?

Quote:

---

Assuming growth of S&P 500, which is 7% a year, by the time that little girl is 18, she will have $170,000 in that account.

---

I wonder what inflation is going to do over that time period?

Quote:

---

We're talking the kids of a single mom waiting tables who could have $700,000 saved by the time she is 35.

---

Assuming that the $170k at 18 didn't get spent on a new Escalade, some tattoos and a girls trip to Cancun.

And 35 years from now, I'm guessing that $700k will be almost enough to get into a starter home.

It's a very nice gesture by Michael and Susan but I doubt many will take full advantage of the opportunity. More likely the $250 is spent on one day at Disney World.

---

This is the part I'm doubting. Where is that $5,000/yr investment coming from?
Parents are allowed, under this program to contribute up to $5000/year to the account. Will most? No. But it's there if they wish to participate. Same goes for mom & dad's employer which can contribute up to $2500. I know some small business owners that are chomping at the bit to do this.

I wonder what inflation is going to do over that time period?
It's going to do whatever it is going to do regardless of this. The stock market as never been out-paced by inflation though.

Assuming that the $170k at 18 didn't get spent on a new Escalade, some tattoos and a girls trip to Cancun.
How someone else chooses to spend their money is a them problem, not a me problem. But for that account to grow to 170k in 18 years there will have been contribution by parents and others. The $1000 one time seed money will not do that on it's own. If mom and dad wish to contribute then watch their spawn blow it, that's on them, not me.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

tysker said:

---

FTAC2011 said:

---

Tax free growth is overrated??? Assume you max out these accounts for 60 years. For 60 years the growth in the accounts will be 21 million vs 350k of contributions.

---

What do you mean by "tax free growth?" Capital appreciation is almost always tax free.
A large majority of people dont max out their retirement accounts now. A married couple can gift $38,000 ($19k x 2) to each of their kids right now, and yet many people don't do it.

I've known hundreds if not thousands of trust fund babies. In my experience, for many, when they know they have a large pool of $$ coming into their life during their 40s and 50s, they treat their 20s and 30s differently than your typical upper middle-class person.

---

Tax-Free growth because this will be invested. It's after tax dollars from the parents, as well as potential for parents employers to contribute.

Regardless the fund will not have capital gains taxes on it since it's sitting in the markets.

Prior to this, there are two ways to transfer (outside of a trusts) money to minors. There is, as you mentioned, the annual $19k (per person) gift that can be done tax free. If that money is then invested it will grow and capital gains will be owed when the investments are sold. The other way is via UTMA (Universal Transfer to Minors Act) where a parent can transfer investments to the minor at the parents original basis.

What trust fund babies do with their money is a them problem. It's not a me problem.
Again my understanding is these accounts can be rolled out of for certain qualified expenditures at 18. They can go into an IRA, they can be used for college or trade school, or they can be used to purchase a home. I haven't heard specifics, only generalizations though.

---

If the contributions, go into a Trump Account post-tax, I'm not sure how you will be allowed to convert them into a Traditional IRA or 401(k) which require pre-tax contributions (or tax deductible contributions up to a point). I would think, however, the assets could be rolled over into a Roth IRA, on a post-tax basis.

So the beneficiary doesnt really have control over the funds at age 18 and distributions have to meet qualifying events? Its still not clear to me, how is this any better than a simple UTMA or Trust account except that an employer can make a contribution into an employees kids' fund. Are employers really going to contribute to this program in addition to allocating funds to healthcare premiums for those same children?