David Kirkpatrick

August 27, 2009

401(k) cap may drop next year

Filed under: Business, Politics — Tags: , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 4:27 pm

Only by $500, but it sure seems counterproductive to long-term fiscal sanity for individuals. I’m guessing Congress will pass something to prevent this forcing of the IRS’s hand on the issue.

From the link:

Low inflation has made food and gas more affordable during the recession, but there’s a downside: Social Security beneficiaries probably won’t get a raise next year, and the IRS may reduce the amount workers can contribute to their 401(k) plans.The IRS will announce 2010 contribution limits for 401(k) plans in October, based on a formula tied to the inflation rate in the third quarter vs. the year-ago quarter. For 2009, most workers can contribute up to $16,500 to their 401(k) plans, plus an additional $5,500 if they’re 50 or older. Unless inflation picks up in August and September, the IRS could be forced to reduce the cutoff to $16,000 in 2010, according to an analysis by Mercer, a human resources consultant. The threshold for catch-up contributions could be reduced to $5,000. This would mark the first time the IRS has reduced 401(k) contribution limits.

March 19, 2009

The Fed’s printing money

This move could really hurt the dollar, and is seen by many (most?) economists as a true “nuclear option.” Make sure you’re belted in — this ride ain’t over yet.

From the link:

Expectations of Fed buying raised the prices, and consequently pushed down the interest rate yields, on mortgage-backed securities as well as Treasury bonds, which were included in the deal. Stocks rose slightly as well, while the dollar fell on inflation worries. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note plummeted one-half percentage point, to around 2.5%.

“The good news is that the Fed is clearly being a lot more aggressive,” said Desmond Lachman, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. “The bad news is that I think it reflects their assessment that the economy is a whole lot weaker than they thought it would be.”

The Fed did not cut short-term interest rates because it can’t—they’re already at virtually zero. The post-meeting statement said the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee “anticipates that economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period.”

The FOMC statement was full of surprises, albeit in the Fed’s typical bland language. The Fed committed itself to buying another $750 billion this year in mortgage-backed securities issued by “agencies” like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, on top of the $500 billion it had already committed to buying. It doubled to $200 billion the amount of agency debt it will buy this year.

And in a surprising change of direction, the Fed said it will buy $300 billion of longer-term Treasury securities. Up until now, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke had said there was no need for the Fed to buy Treasuries since there was a strong market for them already. The Fed’s new thinking seems to be that it can’t hurt to try a little Treasury buying in hopes that the money will trickle down to non-Treasury securities. It said the goal of the Treasury purchases is “to help improve conditions in private credit markets.”