The editorial makes some very valid points concerning the effectiveness, overall, of ending, or lessening, the tax on military retirements. Property taxes have been eliminated for homes and a primary vehicle for 100% disabled vets. It had to be done via Constitutional amendment, so I don’t know if changing retirement taxation can be done through straight legislative action. I hope this is the case.
I wish there had been more coverage of this in Youngkin’s campaign then the culture war garbage that was the at forefront.
If he can get this done, I COULD possibly consider voting for him next time.
A 24 year Navy vet, cancer survivor, father, grandfather, assistant caregiver for my live-in mother-in-law. Enjoys golf, football (real and fantasy), being the best grandfather I can, supporting the endeavors of my children (both involved in the education of our younger generations) and tormenting my wife of 34 years. Also prefer bourbon over scotch, but will drink both, just not at the same time. Discovering craft beers and trying trying hard to get to a consistent golf swing.
View all posts by Adam Green
Published
20 thoughts on “I’m ALMOST sorry I missed this”
In general, I oppose selective tax relief, no matter how worthy the recipient.
It is a bad idea to create a constituency for spending that has no consequence for demanding more.
It isn’t just about the worthiness. It is about the veteran “brain drain” that occurs because talented, experienced, professional technicians and leaders can find good paying jobs elsewhere and not have their retirement taxed. Would you feel the same way if the targeted group for tax relief were retired dentists? (Probably. But I am jut making the point that if you are the one getting the savings, you tend to be in favor of it. 😇)
A boost for the economy based on a tax cut? Go figure.
Especially retirement income, much of which is due to gains resulting from inflation that government monetary policy created.
It amounts to taxing the money twice, or in deferred tax accounts, taxing money at a higher rate than it would have been subject to when invested due to inflation.
Roths have their advantages if you have enough after tax income when you are young to fund them.
But at the time I was putting money aside, you could only put in $1500 a year between your traditional and Roth. It made more sense to put $1500 before tax in the traditional and then as much as possible into an non-deferred account.
OK, but what about when you become a little more solvent. Wouldn’t a Roth conversion be beneficial? Pay the taxes when you can to convert over and then the remainder of the time you are using post-tax income and growing without tax?
It would depend on how much income you had above your living expenses, your mortgage payments and other things.
We set up a Roth for my wife later in life because we had been able to fund her 401K far more than my IRA, Her balance got to the point where the Required Distributions were going to be excessive.
By then the allowed amounts for contributions had been rasied.
I see your point. I started way too late investing for retirement (post age 67.5). And circumstances beyond my control caused me to lose out on the ROTH 401(k) I had at BAE. Not to mention having to cash out TSP AFTER 2008 (lost 45% before I could protect it…my fault, no one else’s.)
I try to guide my kids but they make the decisions. Even if I disagree with them, I just say “Your call”, and hope it works in their favor.
We set up an investment account for each of our 5 grandchildren, seeded with $10K. By the time they are in their mid 50s. they’ll be constant dollar millionaires even if they don’t add a dime.
“Taxation is difficult to justify in the first place.”
How are your roads? How about police and fire protection? You like having the freedom to do and say what you want (within legal bounds of course) because we have a military to protect us from foreign invaders? (I would ask about schools, but I know better with you.😉😇 )
Not to mention research money from the government to get the market to make better things.
Not entirely. I like roads and the military as much as the next guy, but every dollar spent to provide them is a dollar NOT spent on something else I might like more.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
In general, I oppose selective tax relief, no matter how worthy the recipient.
It is a bad idea to create a constituency for spending that has no consequence for demanding more.
LikeLike
It isn’t just about the worthiness. It is about the veteran “brain drain” that occurs because talented, experienced, professional technicians and leaders can find good paying jobs elsewhere and not have their retirement taxed. Would you feel the same way if the targeted group for tax relief were retired dentists? (Probably. But I am jut making the point that if you are the one getting the savings, you tend to be in favor of it. 😇)
A boost for the economy based on a tax cut? Go figure.
LikeLike
Either exempt everyone’s retirement income, or no one’s.
LikeLike
Exempt everyone’s. Taxation is difficult to justify in the first place.
LikeLike
Especially retirement income, much of which is due to gains resulting from inflation that government monetary policy created.
It amounts to taxing the money twice, or in deferred tax accounts, taxing money at a higher rate than it would have been subject to when invested due to inflation.
LikeLike
One word for investment retirement accounts: ROTH.
LikeLike
Roths have their advantages if you have enough after tax income when you are young to fund them.
But at the time I was putting money aside, you could only put in $1500 a year between your traditional and Roth. It made more sense to put $1500 before tax in the traditional and then as much as possible into an non-deferred account.
LikeLike
OK, but what about when you become a little more solvent. Wouldn’t a Roth conversion be beneficial? Pay the taxes when you can to convert over and then the remainder of the time you are using post-tax income and growing without tax?
Just sayin’.
LikeLike
It would depend on how much income you had above your living expenses, your mortgage payments and other things.
We set up a Roth for my wife later in life because we had been able to fund her 401K far more than my IRA, Her balance got to the point where the Required Distributions were going to be excessive.
By then the allowed amounts for contributions had been rasied.
LikeLike
You know that RMD rules have changed a bit.
I see your point. I started way too late investing for retirement (post age 67.5). And circumstances beyond my control caused me to lose out on the ROTH 401(k) I had at BAE. Not to mention having to cash out TSP AFTER 2008 (lost 45% before I could protect it…my fault, no one else’s.)
I try to guide my kids but they make the decisions. Even if I disagree with them, I just say “Your call”, and hope it works in their favor.
LikeLike
Starting early makes a difference.
We set up an investment account for each of our 5 grandchildren, seeded with $10K. By the time they are in their mid 50s. they’ll be constant dollar millionaires even if they don’t add a dime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The joys of compounded interest!
LikeLike
Unless you’re paying it.
LikeLike
You forgot to smile when you said that.
LikeLike
“Taxation is difficult to justify in the first place.”
How are your roads? How about police and fire protection? You like having the freedom to do and say what you want (within legal bounds of course) because we have a military to protect us from foreign invaders? (I would ask about schools, but I know better with you.😉😇 )
Not to mention research money from the government to get the market to make better things.
There. Taxes justified.
LikeLike
RE: “There. Taxes justified.”
Not entirely. I like roads and the military as much as the next guy, but every dollar spent to provide them is a dollar NOT spent on something else I might like more.
LikeLike
So you don’t like freedom and you want to spend more on car repairs (or hay to feed the horses you’ll end up needing to use to get around).
Yes the defense budget is bloated, but you have advocated for that in the past. Or st least been ok with it.
I notice that public safety isn’t mentioned in your reply. Anarchists like that idea. Makes one wonder just a little bit.
LikeLike
Here’s the point: All the benefits that result from tax spending have to be measured against the losses that result from tax collection.
LikeLike
So weigh them for us and prove your point.
LikeLike
“Either exempt everyone’s retirement income, or no one’s.”
I can get onboard with that. But I am onboard, for obviously selfish reasons, with Youngkin’s idea.
LikeLike