|
|
|
|
|
by indymike
1709 days ago
|
|
This is an effective deterrent, and would likely be enforced with a tax penalty. edit: By not allowing me to have the tax benefit, you effectively reduce the incentive to invest in my own business. This seems like a law that is aimed at fat cats that will miss, largely because fat cats aren't going to be investing out of their own retirement. On the other had, my neighbor just used $80K of his 401K to buy three vans for a new HVAC repair company. Had that been taxed, he would have had enough for one, maybe two vans, and been on a much worse cash flow trajectory. |
|
Your theory is that for 250 years America's entrepreneur class has been primarily driven by raiding their own tax-advantaged retirement accounts?
Also if your neighbor story is for real what happened there is he took a loan against his retirement account or did some kind of ROBS transaction. It's already illegal for him to interact with plan assets as part of a self-directed IRA, so he didn't use one to invest in his own business and buy vehicles. Hence this story has nothing to do with the topic at hand.