Originally Posted by
Tailhookah
I would recommend you talk to your reps. We need more than just a higher DC percentage. It’s because we make a lot. So the MBCBP allows us high earners to have a secondary tax haven to protect our money. There are rules and the MBCBP is that vehicle. It’s naive to read where some of you say you want the money and you’ll do what you want. That’s fiscally irresponsible and ignorant. You’ll not be able to outpace the taxes and return that the MBCBP will provide.
And the way this this country is going, I expect our 401k max contributions will someday soon be lowered to something around 40k from the current 58k due to our esteemed Reps in the DC swamp thinking we make too much and they enact a tax on the rich. That’s us. That hidden tax will lower our tax savings under current 401k rules. Most of America won’t care because they don’t get close to their limits.
When that hat happens our MBCBP will absorb our money above the new lower limit and protect us from our own swamp rats that are trying to hose us in DC.
The MBCBP is a great vehicle for those who are smart and get it.
I would humbly suggest that before using terms like “Deltoids” and casting other aspersions towards pilots that don’t see things the way out do, that you put some efforts towards reading comprehension. Denny Crane sets a great example of being balanced and respectful, even when disagreeing. All would do well to aspire to be so well regarded.
My post started with a summary of my interaction with my representatives (thank you for the reminder to do what I had just said I had done), and that the lack of details and transparency about our ask, especially with respect to the MBCBP, was a problem that bothers me. I’m not interested in a sell job. I am interested in details that I can rationally evaluate. I am less trusting of anyone that attempts to sell me something and simultaneously suggests I don’t need or couldn’t comprehend the details and that I should support my reps.
Furthermore, as a number of posters have pointed out, details about “voluntary” participation, IRS approval of a notional plan, notional rates of return (and inadequate or outright dishonest numbers to use as comparisons), and the confusion over MBCBP and minimum balance details being separate issues, even when mentioned in conjunction with one another, all raise rational and reasonable questions that ought to be more transparently explained before expecting any pilot, regardless of their proximity to retirement age, to support. My interaction with my reps (via email and in person), has not been reassuring when I ask these questions, not merely because there were many unknowns or non-answers, but because there was a presumption that I ought to support the union, with or without answers, and I just don’t think that’s how it ought to work.