Emac's Stock Watch | Fox Business
  • October 31, 2008 02:40 PM EDT by Elizabeth MacDonald

    Beware of Congress's Threat to Tax 401Ks

    With the bear market red in the claw, with an equal opportunity bear market taking out solid stocks right and left, with panicked investors feeling like every headline is an explosion, comes this impenetrable stupidity:

    Some Democrats in Congress have held hearings that included discussions of new proposals to tax 401K money. Specifically, the idea would be to eliminate most of the $80 bn in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive. Which means a nearly $80 bn tax hike.

    Heavy Retirement Losses

    The idea to tax 401K funds comes at a time when the Social Security trust fund is deep in the red and investors have lost nearly half of their retirement savings--$2 tn--over the past 15 months, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Retirement accounts known as 401Ks had held nearly $5 tn in savings at the start of the year.

    Democrats are expected to gain seats in both the House and the Senate in the coming election. A filibuster-proof 60-seat majority is a strong possibility in the Senate, which has historically been less receptive than the House to taxing retiree funds.

    In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a "unified budget," which effectively let government use Social Security funds for its overall budget needs.

    Gut-clenching Volatility

    The Democrats' move comes as investor fear is rampant, as investors have been experiencing increasing acid reflux ever since the subprime crisis went viral in August 2007.

    Wall Street is witnessing gigantic swings never before seen in the history of the stock market, with the S&P 500 Options Volatility Index (the VIX) repeatedly breaking through the unheard of 80 barrier, twice the 40 levels that were unthinkable even when oil hit $147 a barrel this past summer-making a VIX 50 the new VIX 40.

    Congress's Support of Taxing 401Ks

    House Democrats several weeks ago invited Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor at the New School of Social Research in New York City, to testify before Congress on her plan to eliminate the preferential tax treatment of 401K plans.

    Specifically, Ghilarducci testified before the House Education and Labor Committee, chaired by Rep. George Miller, (D-Calif.), about her plan.

    "We've invested $80 bn into subsidizing this activity," Miller reportedly  said in testimony, referring to tax breaks allowed for 401K contributions and savings.

    With savings rates going down, "what do we have to start to think about in Congress of whether or not we want to continue and invest that $80 bn for a policy that is not generating what we ... say it should?" Miller reportedly said.

    House Education and Labor committee spokesman Aaron Albright emailed to say that the notion that Rep. Miller wants to tax 401K money is "absolutely ridiculous," adding "chairman Miller wants to preserve and strengthen 401K plans, not tax them." 

    Albright noted that the committee has called 11 witnesses, including retirement experts and advisors, over the last couple of weeks to assess the impact of the market's downturn on 401Ks. He added that the committee is looking at disclosure of fees that eat into savings, as well as other measures to strengthen 401Ks.

    Rep. Jim McDermott, (D-Wash.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, has reportedly said that since "the savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 bn [in 401K tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 bn for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."

    The idea being that, despite their tax-deferred status, 401K funds are not doing much to add to the nation's savings rate.

    Government Data Flawed

    However, the government's measure of the US savings rate does not include stock market gains or real estate gains, which of course have been smacked hard during the credit crisis and economic downturn. And that means the government does not count in its official savings rate the $5 tn that was invested in 401K accounts at the start of the year.

    The Expert's Tax Plan

    The idea is to redirect 401K tax breaks to a new government system of guaranteed retirement accounts into which all US workers would be have to contribute.

    Specifically, under Ghilarducci's plan, the tax breaks on 401K contributions and earnings would be eliminated.

    Instead, all workers would get a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government. The sum would be inflation-indexed. Workers then would be forced to invest 5% of their pay in a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration.

    That money in turn would then be invested in government bonds that would pay a teensy 3% a year, adjusted for inflation, less than half the inflation-adjusted 7% return the stock market has delivered.

    "I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401Ks," Ghilarducci has said, adding, "401Ks can continue to exist, but they won't have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break."

    Tax Cuts Set to Expire

    The idea to tax 401K accounts comes as a potential Obama Administration would let the Bush income tax cuts expire across the board.

    That means even small businesses earning less than $250,000 a year would also see their taxes go up. The capital gains and dividend tax rates would also rise as well. Obama might also impose Social Security taxes on a higher level of wages and self-employment income.

    Lower Taxes Help the Deficit?

    As the US applies the paddles to the economy with record bailouts, a member of Congress during a recent hearing posed the question to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke whether raising taxes during a downturn as a good idea. Bernanke's answer: No.

    And experts say lower taxes actually help the deficit. Between 2004 and 2007, when the Bush tax cuts were in full flower, the budget deficit narrowed from $413 bn to $162 bn in large part thanks to rapid growth in tax revenue, the Economist Magazine notes.

    This was caused not just by rising incomes, but also by a shift in the distribution of incomes to the wealthy, who pay the highest tax rates, the magazine says. Much of that wealth came from the credit boom which drove up financial profits, salaries and bonuses as well as property and stock values and related capital gains, it adds.

    The US has added the equivalent of the gross domestic product of Great Britain and something like two Canadas and five Saudi Arabias since 2003. Between year-end 2002 and year-end 2007 U.S. growth exceeded the entire size of China's economy, Steve Forbes has noted.

    However, Congress has virtually spent the amount in its bid to build a Supersize Me Government, spending that now sits squarely on the backs of taxpayers and entrepreneurs and which does not include the trillions of dollars in extra spending for the housing bailout and the bailout of Wall Street.

    All proof positive that Congress has no more sense than a flock of geese.

     

JMoore

As one of our forefathers said, "A little revolution is good for the soul". Well, maybe he didn't quite phrase it that way but, gee whiz folks. When are we going to learn that it's not the President that's the problem. Congress has treated the american public like we are a bottomless trough of money for so long that they no longer have ANY concept of how the common man lives. When you can't buy a house or a car because the banks won't lend (despite the 350 billion handed out) and Congress says they don't dare 'offend' the bankers......Well, maybe it's time to see if our founding father was right. Not violent overthrow but the ballot box. It's next Tuesday....make your vote count.

November 1, 2008 at 3:49 am

Randall Jorgensen

not hard to believe that the DEMS would be looking for every conceivable way to tax everything possible and to let tax cuts expire that will automatically cause TAX INCREASES to the exact people OBAMA promised no tax increases, and even promised tax cuts. The bottom line that McCain should be pushing is, Buyer Beware!!!!! Obama and the DEMS are scamming the American voters.

October 31, 2008 at 5:46 pm

6ftrabbit

"All proof positive that Congress has no more sense than a flock of geese." Stop insulting geese. Congress has a lot less sense than geese.

October 31, 2008 at 5:35 pm

Working too hard in California

How insulting to geese!

October 31, 2008 at 5:02 pm

Working too hard in California

This is so disturbing. I don't need to see a scary movie this Halloween. I only need read the headlines about congress' bonehead maneuvers and I'm terrified. And the tax break is only a deferral...but obviously congress can't wait to get their hands on our money and spend..spend..spend! It looks like they are getting a head start on Obama.

October 31, 2008 at 4:53 pm

Brad Poppe

This should broadcast over all forms of media. The comrads in the Democratic Party are not going to be happy until they get all our income, and what kind of school is the New School of Social research? and will the 5% that we will be forced to give to Social Security, be on top of the Social Security taxes we already pay. These Democrats have to be Stopped.

October 31, 2008 at 4:50 pm

Jeff Morse

The utter stupidity of our elected representitives amazes me. Only to be outdown by the very people that have given them power. Socialism does not work.

October 31, 2008 at 4:47 pm

Scott

the dems continue to build on their socialistic theme by taking from EVERYONE to pay for the congress's inability or desire to balance their thirst for special interests!!!!!! at some point the public will wake up to smell the dead roses

October 31, 2008 at 4:47 pm

bill

I already pay 7% into Social Security. My Employerr pays another 7% and now they want another 5% for another fund. If I had the 15% that has been sent to social security in my life time, I could have retired at 55 with a hell of a lot more money(even with the current bust in the market) then I will ever see from Social Security.

October 31, 2008 at 4:42 pm

John

Is anyone really surprised by this? If the Dems get their 60 seats in the Senate, this is only the start. I am quite sure we are going to see the elimination of tax deductions, increases in existing taxes, and some altogether new taxes. I am equally sure that we will also see an exponential increase in spending.

October 31, 2008 at 4:32 pm

crash

Here we go again, just one more clue as to just what we can expect from a liberal supermajority in the legislative branch. All of a sudden people with 401k's, (the true middle class) who go to work every day and try to put aside money for retirement, are now going to have to bail out Social Security. This is nothing short of confiscation of wealth for the purpose of redistribution. SOCIALISM=GUARANTEED MEDIOCRITY, MISERY, AND GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF EVERY ASPECT OF OUR LIFE

October 31, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Redenbaccher

Liz You should be ashamed of yourself for this fearmongering piece. I always thought you were a solid reporter and not a Fox stooge. As the spokesperson for the House committee says in your only offsetting quote “It’s absolutely ridiculous, we’re looking to protect 401(k)s, not tax them.” Take a poll of House Dems, Senate Dems, Obama and his entire economic team - Volcker, Summers, Rubin etc. You'd find minimal support for such nonsense in the House, and none in the Senate, or amongst the next president or any of his candidates for Treasury Secretary.

October 31, 2008 at 3:53 pm

Aaron Albright

If you really want to know how George Miller feels about this, he was on Cavuto last week. http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3161716&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/yourworld

October 31, 2008 at 3:47 pm

Gary

Unbelievable. Can I just go down to the nearest Democratic Party office and just hand over my assets? It would save me future tax preparation fees.

October 31, 2008 at 3:44 pm

TimBarton

The idea the government is subsiding by deferring taxes on 401(k) s is ridiculous. We will all pay taxes on this money when we retire and the taxes will be larger then. Yeah, right a subsidy. It is the fact we exercise a little freedom in these accounts. Hey, politicians it is our money not the governments.

October 31, 2008 at 3:39 pm

Charlie Barker

What's ours is theirs, and what's theirs ain't ours.

October 31, 2008 at 3:28 pm

MIKE CARRANO

CONGRESS MUST LEAVE OUR 401K ALONE. DO NOT TOUCH, THIS IS OUR INVESTMENTS FOR OUR RETIREMENTS. MY SUGGESTION IS, DO NOT GIVE THE CONGRESSMEN A SALARY, THEY REALLY DO NOTHING FOR US ANYWAY. MOST WORRY ABOUT THEIR OWN POCKETS. CONGRESS, STAY OUT OF MY RETIREMENT FUND.

October 31, 2008 at 3:23 pm

Dennis

THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO VOTE REPUBLICAN ON TUESDAY!!!!! Except for our military, I defy anyone to name 1 well run Gov't Agency. Social Security is a joke - it's broke ( literally and figuratively ) Do we really want 1 less choice? Can't the American people be given any credit for having a brain and directing their future WITHOUT Gov't intervention!!! Or, are we too stupid to figure things out like the dems would want us to believe and make us believe gov't is the ONLY answer to Any question. IT IS NOT! The dems are feeding on fear. Come on people, this election isn't over - don't listen to the media. I know our choices aren't our necessarily our first choice, but it one heck of a lot better than the alternative. Vote Republican locally and nationally.

October 31, 2008 at 3:22 pm

Larry

When will the Democrats ever accept the reality that when taxes are cut revenue to the U. S. Treasury goes up? This has been proven time and again even before JFK. Both parties have been spending too much for that reality to be clearly evident. Forced saving by the government. Social Security was to be a safety net and not a primary retirement plan. We will all get to pay for those who weren't responsible enough to save if the Democrats have their way.

October 31, 2008 at 3:17 pm

about this blog

  • Elizabeth MacDonald is the stocks editor for Fox Business Network. She is recognized as one of the top prize-winning business journalists in the country, and has received 14 awards, including the top prize in business journalism, the Gerald Loeb Award for Distinguished Business Journalism, and the Newswomen's Club of New York Front Page Award for Excellence in Investigative Journalism.