Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill Would Help Retirees Get a 'Paycheck for Life' (Sen Gordon Smith, OR)
Cybercast News Service ^ | May 8, 2007 | Melanie Hunter

Posted on 05/08/2007 11:01:27 PM PDT by CutePuppy

Bill Would Help Retirees Get a 'Paycheck for Life'

(CNSNews.com) - Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) has re-introduced a bill intended to help middle-class Americans make their retirement income last for their rest of their lives. The Retirement Security for Life Act of 2007 (S. 1010) amends the tax code to encourage the purchase of annuities - investment vehicles that provide guaranteed lifetime income.

Under the proposal, individuals would get a federal tax break on up to $20,000 of the annual income generated by annuities that promise lifetime payments. An average taxpayer in the 25 percent tax bracket would get a maximum $5,000 tax benefit each year. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has sent a letter to Smith, thanking him on behalf of the three million businesses and organizations it represents. "As the nation's 77 million baby boomers begin to retire, they will start to draw down their retirement savings," the Chamber said in its letter. "The Retirement Security for Life Act would encourage taxpayers to convert these savings into lifetime income annuities. These products provide steady payments for the remainder of the purchaser's life and help reduce the risk of losing one's investments in a market downturn or outliving one's nest egg."

A similar bill introduced in 2005 had bipartisan support.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; US: District of Columbia; US: Oregon
KEYWORDS: annuity; boomers; gordonsmith
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
Should government be doing this? Encourage conversion of savings to annuity? How tight is Gordon Smith with insurance industry?
1 posted on 05/08/2007 11:01:30 PM PDT by CutePuppy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Here’s the same Senator Gordon Smith (OR) on Iraq issue :


September Could Be Key Deadline in Iraq War

(CNSNews.com) - Congressional leaders from both political parties are giving President Bush a few more months to prove that his troop surge plan is working in Iraq, and it looks like they’ll want some definitive answers by September, the Washington Post reported. “Many of my Republican colleagues have been promised they will get a straight story on the surge by September,” said Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.). “I won’t be the only Republican, or one of two Republicans, demanding a change in our disposition of troops in Iraq at that point,” the newspaper quoted him as saying.

“September is the key,” agreed Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.). House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), said on Sunday, “By the time we get to September, October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn’t, what’s Plan B.”


Is Gordon Smith like Chuck Hagel (the other “one of two Republicans” he refers to about his vote about funding troops in Iraq) ? If so, when is his Senate “expiration date”?


2 posted on 05/08/2007 11:06:27 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy; Dave in Eugene of all places
How tight is Gordon Smith with insurance industry?

I don't know, but annuities are decried by just about all investment advisors as the last way to invest. Smith is a lamebrain who needs to get defeated in the next primary, IMHO.

3 posted on 05/08/2007 11:13:25 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

HA....I’ll bet he’s Really, REALLY tight with the “insurance industry.” Wonder what “KIND” of annuity these are? Some annuities are NOT worth it....depends upon your age, when you die, how you structure it, etc.....there are others here who probably know a lot more than me about them....but, I smell something fishy.


4 posted on 05/08/2007 11:14:20 PM PDT by goodnesswins (We need to cure Academentia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Yeah, we wouldn’t want our Ponzi Scheme, ur, I mean Social Security payments going into investments vs. Gore’s “lock box”, now would we? But annuities, that’s okay. What mental midgets!


5 posted on 05/08/2007 11:41:54 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Nancy Pelosi: The Babbling Bolshevik Babushka from the City by the Bay.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
FWIW, Clark Howard's take on annuities.
6 posted on 05/09/2007 12:14:13 AM PDT by upchuck (Who will support Fred Thompson? Anyone who enjoys a dose of common sense not wrapped in doublespeak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upchuck; All

Yes, annuities “are sold, not bought” because they generate big commissions and fees to insurance companies and money managers.

Also, generally it’s a lousy idea to mix insurance and investment in the same instrument (returns are usually paltry or negative) compared to separating term insurance and investing the rest.

Social Security, of course, is “sold” to us as an “insurance program” - and it shows. Now this Gordon Smith comes up with what - “Son of Social Security”, instead of liberating people to provide as many choices for tax-free investment of their own money?

It’s like a race :
Democrats keep coming up with the new idiotic tax schemes (including Global Warming), and take over private industry under government control and funding (Healthcare funding / Insurance).

Republicans, instead of challenging them directly, are trying to counteract by coming up with some silly tax shelter schemes (like these annuities, or numerous separate tax-deferred accounts), or administer government-mandated programs through large private corporations (like Medicare Part D Drug Program).


7 posted on 05/09/2007 12:44:16 AM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Looks like the proposal applies to “annuitized” policies, those that have been converted into lifetime payments. I smell an industry campaign contribution


8 posted on 05/09/2007 1:04:55 AM PDT by stan_sipple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

Uh, my company sells these. They’re called “annuities.” KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY BUSINESS PLEASE!


9 posted on 05/09/2007 1:06:17 AM PDT by Clemenza (Rudy Giuliani, like Pesto and Seattle, belongs in the scrap heap of '90s Culture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upchuck
The only decent annuity is one that’s called an “immediate payout annuity.” This is a product you would buy if you think you’re going to outlive your money. You might take 25 percent of your retirement money and buy an IPA. Then, every month you automatically get a check. (snip) But if you live a while, you will make money off the insurance company because the company has to keep paying you as long as you live. In addition, these products have very small commissions.

I think this is the type of annuity that he is talking about. In earlier times, retirees could count on a pension, or a defined benefit plan. Now, workers save for their own retirement, but what do you do with the pile of money you have when you do retire? By buying this type of annuity you can create your own 'defined benefit' plan. I think this should be encouraged. My grandfather was approached by someone from his church when he retired who sold him a trailer park as a 'retirement investment.' Took all of his retirement savings. I think many retirees would be better off if they had their money safely in a annuity for a steady stream of income they can live off when they retire. It would also help keep it away from people who prey on elderly.

10 posted on 05/09/2007 3:23:19 AM PDT by sportutegrl (Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: upchuck
“Now, you don’t want to put all of your money in an IPA because your family would have nothing to inherit if you died. And, if you die next week, all of your money is gone. But if you live a while, you make money off the insurance company...”

I like this part of Clark’s take on annuities. Makes you wonder why the government would want to force retirement money into these when you can loose everything if you die. hmmm.....

11 posted on 05/09/2007 3:33:07 AM PDT by poobear (Capitalism is judged by its flaws and worst examples, Socialism by promises and good intentions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: poobear
MORE importantly, if these investments become tax free or reduced, What do you think will happen to the rate of interest? RIGGHHHT! It will fall to equalize with other investments. The insurance companies will reap the benefits not the investor.(see rates on municipal investments)

A better plan would be reduce or eliminate ALL taxes on retirees or persons over a retirement age. Of course, with the aging of america, they'll probably have to increase taxes on the aged to keep funding all the other give aways.......as long as it lasts.(see gm, ford, chrysler)

12 posted on 05/09/2007 4:45:58 AM PDT by cb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cb

The government is scrambling now that their fat cow is aging. They won’t be happy until they tax everything their once ‘golden goose’ has managed to save and invest. They knew this was coming for decades and cried, “nothing is going to affect SS”. BS!


13 posted on 05/09/2007 4:54:40 AM PDT by poobear (Capitalism is judged by its flaws and worst examples, Socialism by promises and good intentions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

No educated investor buys annuities.


14 posted on 05/09/2007 4:59:53 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Annuities “may” or “may not” be a good retirement investment. All one needs to know is the “date certain” of your death. If you know you’ll live longer than the actuarial average, you come out to the good. Otherwise...


15 posted on 05/09/2007 5:00:32 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

What a stupid idea. So, if I give my money to some big business, and they pay me, I get a $20,000 deduction. But if I decide to manage my OWN investments, I don’t.

Thus they are not helping me, but subsidizing the annuity industry.

BTW, I’m fine if we exempt the first $20,000 of retirement income from taxes, so long as the exemption applies no matter where you get the money from.


16 posted on 05/09/2007 6:23:41 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Let’s make the tax code even more complex and loophole filled.
Yeah that’s the right stuff!

NOT


17 posted on 05/09/2007 6:26:42 AM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Are defined benefit pensions subject to income tax? Are there special loopholes for certain classes of pension income, say teachers, military or government workers? I believe in some states there are. What about in the fed tax code?


18 posted on 05/09/2007 7:52:24 AM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

“No educated investor buys annuities.”

Imagine its 1929..You had an opportuity to invest $100K in the market in 1928 or buy an anuity that would pay you $400 a month for the rest of your and your wife’s life.

Now imagine its 1932 and that $100K stock market investment is gone with the wind but you are still getting the $400 a month..

Who was the ‘educated investor’?


19 posted on 05/09/2007 8:15:06 AM PDT by Jim Verdolini
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
Go here and poke around: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/sector.asp?CID=N00007815&cycle=2006

Go to www.investmentnews.com. They have been having stories about this for a while. So many tweaks to the code, Roth 401k's auto enrollment etc, being proposed/implemented that I have lost track.

I think the annuity sales folks and their lobbies want a bigger part of the pie now that more people understand them, and need an incentive (tax) to sell them.

This is not advice, but it is to bad we have an inverted yield curve. As an alternative, advisers would sometimes recommend a "Bond Ladder" but again with the yield curve the way it is, that is tough to do right now.

20 posted on 05/09/2007 8:15:16 AM PDT by taildragger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson