Not sure how much of this is beefing up anything


I don't like the idea of after 50 contributions being a forced roth after tax money because that could impact gross adjusted income to a point that causes people to go over the max to contribute to a ROTH IRA outside of the 401K

https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/retirement/retirement-planning-rules-congress-weighs-upgrades/

My understanding from the article is that forcing the catch up portion to be Roth was a compromise for increasing the catch up amount. Also it doesn't sound like all of the 50 plus contributions have to be Roth, just the extra catch up portions.

The only thing listed in those proposals likely to effect me much is the increase in RMD age which I am all for raising it higher and higher or getting rid of it all together.

Allowing a 401K match to be made without an employee contribution for those paying off student loans is a good idea, raising the catch up after a certain age is too. I would add that allowing both 401K and IRA contributions after say, 50, regardless of compensation may help, as would increasing the contribution limits for old farts. Once I passed 50 I could afford to put away way more than I was putting away but had no way to do that other than a normal cash account somewhere. As a result I have this huge IRA, a sizable cash savings, but minimal Roth as my company didn't offer a Roth 401. And the average worker doesn't understand savings anyway, that's evident by some of the threads on this page.

I'm not really sure we need a law to do all that. There are companies that already do the automatic deposits regardless of the individuals withholding and the student loan thing. I guess the law would make every 401k plan allow that?

hypeiv said:

---

My understanding from the article is that forcing the catch up portion to be Roth was a compromise for increasing the catch up amount. Also it doesn't sound like all of the 50 plus contributions have to be Roth, just the extra catch up portions.

The only thing listed in those proposals likely to effect me much is the increase in RMD age which I am all for raising it higher and higher or getting rid of it all together.

---

You also want the life expectancy, or actuarial table, to adjust RMD percentages accordingly. If you do not get this component adjusted, you'll pay more in tax if you are a savvy investor then if they would have left it as is. It took those yahoo's almost 2 years to draft a new table after raising the RMD age for the SECURE Act.