FedEx pension
#31
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
Posts: 3,655
I think you'd see a revolution before that happened. As unlikely as it is, if it did happen, I would think the same thing would apply to pensions (read: the accounts that fund them). If that were to happen, we'd be better served to expend that negotiating capital on money/benefits now, rather than waste it on maintaining a pension. That said, I do agree that we all have no idea what the future holds, it's all a crapshoot and life isn't fair.
From the inter webs:
"The Revenue Act of 1916 began the practice of adjusting tax rates and income scales. The original income tax was 1% for the bottom bracket, which was comprised of income up to $20,000, and 7% for the top bracket which was comprised of income over $500,000."
As we all know, it quickly went up from there. The appetite of the have-not's will severely out weigh the legal protections of the have's once the right people are finally in charge.
If you don't think having $3million in savings isn't like a buck with a bullseye birthmark, just wait until the government finally gets hungry enough to come for the taking.
Right now the feds fund much of our government with debt, when the day arrives where people won't lend anymore, it will be either DEEP cuts/ massive taxes, and most likely BOTH.
The last option will be like every other govt that gets in too deep, depreciate your currency, which means that savings just evaporated.
Good luck to us all.
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 2,987
At least 2 of the top 5 Dem President Candidates are calling for a "wealth tax". If you think that will stay confined to those who have over $10million or $Billions if implemented, your delusional. Keep in mind:
From the inter webs:
"The Revenue Act of 1916 began the practice of adjusting tax rates and income scales. The original income tax was 1% for the bottom bracket, which was comprised of income up to $20,000, and 7% for the top bracket which was comprised of income over $500,000."
As we all know, it quickly went up from there. The appetite of the have-not's will severely out weigh the legal protections of the have's once the right people are finally in charge.
If you don't think having $3million in savings isn't like a buck with a bullseye birthmark, just wait until the government finally gets hungry enough to come for the taking.
Right now the feds fund much of our government with debt, when the day arrives where people won't lend anymore, it will be either DEEP cuts/ massive taxes, and most likely BOTH.
The last option will be like every other govt that gets in too deep, depreciate your currency, which means that savings just evaporated.
Good luck to us all.
From the inter webs:
"The Revenue Act of 1916 began the practice of adjusting tax rates and income scales. The original income tax was 1% for the bottom bracket, which was comprised of income up to $20,000, and 7% for the top bracket which was comprised of income over $500,000."
As we all know, it quickly went up from there. The appetite of the have-not's will severely out weigh the legal protections of the have's once the right people are finally in charge.
If you don't think having $3million in savings isn't like a buck with a bullseye birthmark, just wait until the government finally gets hungry enough to come for the taking.
Right now the feds fund much of our government with debt, when the day arrives where people won't lend anymore, it will be either DEEP cuts/ massive taxes, and most likely BOTH.
The last option will be like every other govt that gets in too deep, depreciate your currency, which means that savings just evaporated.
Good luck to us all.
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Position: Hoping for any position
Posts: 2,504
I won’t argue with any of the above. I will throw in that just about any financial advisor or company I’ve read about or talked with recommend using any type of guaranteed retirement income for essential expenses first and any investment money above that if needed.
My only point is having guaranteed income from a pension is not necessarily a bad thing.
Denny
My only point is having guaranteed income from a pension is not necessarily a bad thing.
Denny
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 2,987
Exactly, nothing is guaranteed. And a pension is also an investment. The real crux of the matter is do you want your investments managed by someone else and not fully in your name (pension), or do you want to manage your investments yourself and have them fully in your name and inheritable by your heirs in the event of your death?
I know this discussion is mostly academic for deadzoners though and I do truly feel for you. My generation of pilots has the history of what happened to you guys and a lot more financial information at our fingertips than you guys had at the time. But I'm sure it won't all go perfectly for us either!
I know this discussion is mostly academic for deadzoners though and I do truly feel for you. My generation of pilots has the history of what happened to you guys and a lot more financial information at our fingertips than you guys had at the time. But I'm sure it won't all go perfectly for us either!
#35
Ya, I guess I was thinking the worst case, as in they just empty your account and say you'll just get what we give you. If that were the case, i believe you'd see a massive backlash but a vast majority of Americans. I have zero doubt that what we have today may not be the same when we retire.
#36
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Just a couple facts presented by ALPA National’s contract comparison folks.
FedEx and UPS Pension+DC is equal to a 23% DC only plan. The next closes plan is a 16% DC plan found at other majors. So if you like a DC only plan that’s the number to shoot for to gain equality.
Now the next problem is those pesky IRS limits. So, if your making 400$/hour after these next rounds of bargaining, can you imagine how large a portion of a DC only plan would be over the IRS cap? That means it will be taxed as income their fore reducing the portion over the cap by around 33%(tax rate at that income level). So if you had a 16% DC only plan and made 400k you would have $18,400 of the DC money over the cap(285k is the 2020 cap). After taxes your left with around 12k which reduces your 16% DC plan to around 13% investable dollars. The more you make over 400k the bigger this problem gets.
This is why many other major airlines are trying to get a DB style plan back. The numbers don’t lie when it comes to retirement currently. It’s FedEx and UPS and everyone else way behind.
FedEx and UPS Pension+DC is equal to a 23% DC only plan. The next closes plan is a 16% DC plan found at other majors. So if you like a DC only plan that’s the number to shoot for to gain equality.
Now the next problem is those pesky IRS limits. So, if your making 400$/hour after these next rounds of bargaining, can you imagine how large a portion of a DC only plan would be over the IRS cap? That means it will be taxed as income their fore reducing the portion over the cap by around 33%(tax rate at that income level). So if you had a 16% DC only plan and made 400k you would have $18,400 of the DC money over the cap(285k is the 2020 cap). After taxes your left with around 12k which reduces your 16% DC plan to around 13% investable dollars. The more you make over 400k the bigger this problem gets.
This is why many other major airlines are trying to get a DB style plan back. The numbers don’t lie when it comes to retirement currently. It’s FedEx and UPS and everyone else way behind.
Last edited by Noworkallplay; 11-20-2019 at 06:07 PM.
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Posts: 903
“So, if your making 400$/hour after these next rounds of bargaining, can you imagine how large a portion of a DC only plan would be over the IRS cap? That means it will be taxed as income their fore reducing the portion over the cap by around 33%(tax rate at that income level).”
Give me that problem.
Give me that problem.
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 893
“So, if your making 400$/hour after these next rounds of bargaining, can you imagine how large a portion of a DC only plan would be over the IRS cap? That means it will be taxed as income their fore reducing the portion over the cap by around 33%(tax rate at that income level).”
Give me that problem.
Give me that problem.
No kidding. I will gladly take that after tax money to keep it in my name in an investment vehicle I control.
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Left seat of a little plane
Posts: 2,397
#40
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2009
Position: Narrow/Left Wide/Right
Posts: 3,655
Every industry/corp is trying to get out of the DB business (except the government) and even the military has evolved into a TSP/pension scheme for new entrants.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post