The Roth IRA, not exactly a "fiscal Frankenstein"

In what universe could the following possibly be true?

Roths drive up the federal deficit and cause other pain.

 

According to liberal tax happy Gerald E. Scorse the US Government is trading temporary revenue gains now for "100 Billion" a year in lost revenues down the line...  How something can be contributing to tax revenue NOW but also driving up the Federal Deficit NOW is beyond me.  I guess the mark of a good Leftist is how many contradictory ideas they can fit in their head at a single moment (or in a single Op-Ed piece for the LATimes).  Either Gerrie doesn't understand the concept of "tense" (as in past, present, or future as opposed to being tight or wound up).

He also claims that "Roth IRAs are tax shelters for the mega-wealthy."  (No really, I couldn't make this shit up if I tried, seriously) I almost hate to tell him that the amount of money you can put into an IRA doesn't even ping on the "Mega-Wealthy Radar of Greed" (patent pending) that every mega-wealthy tax shelter seeking plutocrat has as an accessory this season.

What Gerrie boy fails to fully articulate is exactly how 5,000 dollars (up to 12,000 a year for couples over 50) a year into a tax free account is such a bad thing.  Look Georgie, the money isn't "sitting idle" when it is in an account, it is "invested."  Setting that money aside, and if it really does grow over the course of SOMEONE'S LIFE to be maybe 1.2 million dollars, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  A good investment pays off.

What, not familiar with the term?  Ok, investing is where you take some money X, and let someone else use it for a while and maybe they make some money and pay you back with interest (your initial money X plus some added to it) or they go broke and you lose it all.  The difference between "investing" and "gambling" is really the amount of fun involved and comp'd drinks (/joke).

Gerrie then laments that someone could turn 70 years old and "not withdraw" money from their Roth IRA.  Here is a hint George, when someone dies, all accounts become part of an estate and someone else gets to deal with the crap of paying the death tax and then if the money doesn't go to someone designated, Uncle Sam happily steps in and takes the cash.  Death and taxes are like Rule 34, you can't escape them even if you try.

Short of withdrawing all the money from an IRA and then literally burning it, there is no way to keep Uncle Sam from getting some of it back.  People withdraw from their IRA to pay for things like property taxes, presents for the grandkids (sin tax on candy and sales tax on toys), food, services (lap dances are a service!) and even internet access.

So could there be a large sum of wealth that the Uncle Sam can't (for now) tax?  Yes, and that is the purpose of a Roth IRA.  Because Uncle Sam knows that the money it can't touch (for now) is still circulating in the system, being invested, and eventually it will find its way back into a taxable state (through sales tax or death tax).  And because the money going IN to a Roth is taxed at someones CURRENT tax rate it increases revenue NOW.  It may not get taxed on WITHDRAWAL, but it will be taxed once it is SPENT on those previously mentioned lap dances (single mom working her way through college, tragic really but we all have to do our part, for the children's sake).