U.S. Government needs the (future) Tax revenue from New children born in the U.S.
14 replies (most recent on top)
@mw You are correct regarding the Act, however, I stand by the rest of my comment that these accounts are just another tax-advantaged account for wealthier people who can afford to contribute to them. It's political branding, not a meaningful benefit considering all that has been taken away from the American people by this administration.
Watching leadership chase access this hard, lose anyway, and then pretend it was worth it is hard to stomach.
If this is what “values” look like now, it’s no wonder trust is gone
@b2 exactly! Schwab ignored SECURE 2.0, which could have helped a large portion of employees struggling with student loans, but suddenly finds enthusiasm & money for a politically branded program that benefits a narrow few while aligning with leadership optics.
This isn't about employees. It’s about access, influence, and being seen in the right rooms. The same values on display when attending at a dinner honoring MBS.
@k5 you really need to read the act. It's really easy to find. It says that for children born between 2025 - 8 the government will fund $1000 per child into the Trump account as long as they are US citizens and have a valid SSN. I was part of the project at Schwab and that's what we were told to expect.
@b7 ???? It's just yet another tax-advantaged account after the wealthy have maxed out 401Ks, IRAs, 529s. There has been no law or binding commitment from the government that these will actually be funded. They are meant to only benefit wealthy households. If there's no public funding, there's no matching and it's just another 529 to justify removing even more social supports.
There is no enacted law or binding commitment that the federal government will fund $1000 into these “Trump accounts.” It will likely just be a voluntary custodial account with zero public money (meaning no matching), which is functionally meaningless for most families. These accounts only benefit the upper middle class and wealthy households as yet another tax shelter who have maxed out 401(k)s, IRAs, 529s. They will not benefit working class families living paycheck to paycheck, who can’t afford to regularly contribute. A real alternative that would in fact make a difference would be baby bonds which are government funded at birth, progressive vs. regressive, locked until adulthood. It’s all optics and branding and will essentially makes it easier to justify removing essential social support programs.
Sounds like Charles Schwab is one sided. That’s the point the person is making
Bruh, be happy this is a benefit that can be used by young families. I'm disappointed I can't benefit from it, but damn, take advantage of what's in front of you and quit being so one sided.
@b2 Wow.. I love how your TDS has erased your memory of the benefit email that came out in 2022....
@b2 That would be an insane benefit for so many!
in 2022 the SECURE 2.0 Act passed by Biden which allows companies to match student loan payments made by employees into a 401k plan, all I heard was crickets from Schwab
I'm tired about how political this is. Its like Chuck got something under his sleeve to gain favor from Trump
I was turned off by this. We wasted a lot of money trying to land the exclusive rights to the Trump Accounts and did not win the contract. Disgusting we even tried and wasted money on something that would be a financial drain and only served to su-k up to Trump. Yet here we are doubling down. For employees who have kids in a 3 year window, and only as long as the government actually gets their plan accomplished. How exciting indeed.