OBBBA_GRD_Season 4_Audio ===

[00:00:00] Welcome everybody to the latest edition of Special Edition of The Great Retirement Debate with Jeff Levine. I'm Ed Slott and I'm going to turn it over to Jeff Levine. To tell us why this is such a special edition that you'll wanna replay probably several times. Well, ed, uh, we're talking here about the One Big Beautiful Bill act, or, uh, I believe you, you told me, uh, before we were getting on here, you're starting to, to think of it as abba, right?

You're hearing people talk about it as abba. Yeah. And they have a song called Money, money, money. All right, well hopefully people take a chance and listen to our episode here. So with that said, right, let's think about what we're going to do because this is such a, a big deal, right? It is the One Big Beautiful Bill.

We're [00:01:00] actually going to have five separate questions. Normally we just have one question we discuss for our full episode, but we're gonna break it down into five different questions. All about the One Big Beautiful Bill act that was recently. Enacted into law that is currently law. As we sit here today and Ed, we're gonna start with, you know, the big picture and it's what to you is the most impactful thing that we can take away from the One Big Beautiful Bill act.

What do you think is the most impactful provision or set of provisions? Well, staying away, which we will from all the healthcare provisions and things like that. Mainly the tax provisions. I think the idea that. Is the way I see it. Virtually anyone who pays tax will pretty much pay less tax there.

There's a little something in here for everyone from top to bottom and in between. So I think that's, uh, it's a pretty widespread bill from estate tax to no tax, well, I don't wanna call it no tax on tips, but the tip deduction and overtime deduction and things like that. [00:02:00] So it's pretty well-rounded. Yeah, I, you know, for me, I think the biggest impact is the fact that for a lot of people there was, there was no real big impact, right?

There's all this talk about massive tax cuts or a massive tax increase. It was all relative to if the tax cut in Jobs Act expired and ultimately the tax cut in Jobs Act did not expire. Now, as you said, there is a little bit of something for everybody in this. Bill, if you will. But a lot of what is being talked about is relative to if we went back to a pre TCJA world, so when people think like, what's the impact versus my 2025 return to my 2026 return?

For a lot of people it's not going to be this huge difference that maybe they're contemplating because they're thinking about all these tax cuts. Because again, it's large. The, the biggest thing is it's an extension of the tax cut in Jobs Act permanently. You know, the tax brackets, those are going to be.

Continued in in permanence, right? The the 10, the 12, the 22, [00:03:00] the 24, the 32, the 35, the 37% top rate. Those are our continued tax brackets. The roughly doubling of the standard deduction that stays in place. Now, it's a little bit different. There's some. Some fine tuning around the edges, but those are sort of the big things.

Things like a MT for a lot of taxpayers, right? That is still going to be a, a non-issue for most, more than it was maybe in 2025, but for most people still a non-issue. So for me, the big impact is sort of business as usual for most individuals. Alright. You used the word there. You used the word I want you to define.

Okay. And I looked it up on artificial intelligence, ai. You used the word called permanent, and it's permanent means lasting or intended to last or remain unchanged indefinitely. What do you think of that? The things that are called permanent in the tax code? That's a, that's a really [00:04:00] good point, and I'm glad you brought that up.

So that is the definition, right, is intended to last, and I think that's a good word in that definition. It's intended to last indefinitely. Those who just passed this law intended to last indefinitely. But of course, as we know. We've got a two party system in this country. I dunno, maybe a third if Elon gets his way at some point.

But we have a, a multi-party system here, meaning not everybody agrees on everything. And certainly there are different views on tax policy. So permanent from a tax planning parlance simply means. It's the rule until a future Congress changes the rule, which a future Congress can do at any time and sort of override the previous Congress.

So, uh, you know, ed, I've heard you speak over the years and effectively say that, you know, the tax code is not written in ink. It's written in pencil. I often say it's not chiseled in stone, but they're all flavors of the same thing. In other words, permanent is this is the rule until someone else says otherwise.

And that's different from something that [00:05:00] has what's called a sunset in the law. Where it's sort of a scheduled termination date of that rule, and for the most part, the tax cut and Jobs Act provisions were permanently extended. Some of the new things that are introduced by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the, uh, the no tax on tips, the no tax on.

Um, the no tax on overtime, the extended deduction for, uh, seniors, et cetera. These are all things that have, uh, temporary or a, uh, a sunset as associated with them. So those are not permanent, but most, again, of the tax cut and jobs act, the rules that we have to today, those are largely extended permanently.

It's a good point. I'm glad you brought that up. The reason I say it is even for the ones that are permanent, the planning you should do is get it while it's here. Now, that's right, like in Roth conversions, if your tax rates are low, you know, don't think you have all these years out. Get it. While, while these, uh, tax reductions, especially the reduced rates that are going to be [00:06:00] extended are here.

So like order while supplies last is what you're saying? Yeah. Yeah. That's a good one, right? Yeah. Alright, so number two on our list, ed, what was the most surprising thing to you? In the One Big Beautiful Bill? We had different versions. We had, you know, a house version, then a Senate version, then another Senate version that went back to the house and ultimately passed.

But in the final version of this bill, what was ultimately enacted into law? What is the most surprising thing to you? Well, the surprising, I think, game changer for those in high, uh, tax states was the acceleration, the bump up on the salt state and local tax deduction from 10,000 to 40,000. For most taxpayers, since most, there is a limit of $500,000.

Income limit and phases out after that, but most people are under that, and that could be a big game changer. You may see a lot more people in the high tax states switching over from standard deduction to [00:07:00] itemized deductions, which would open up the itemized deductions, not only the, in other words, the large amount, the 40,000 gets you into the arena, then you compile on your charitable mortgage interest and everything else.

That would change. I was surprised they did that because that was a big debate right up till the last minute. Yeah, that was probably one of the most hotly contested things. And you know, I think for me, one of the, the most surprising elements of it was that they actually left alone those so-called pass through entity taxes.

The sort of work around Oh yeah. Both The house bill. You know, it was really interesting. The house bill said we wanna eliminate it or at least reduce its impact. And they had one way. And the Senate had said, we wanna reduce it and or eliminate its impact. And they had another way. And then when they compromised.

There was no impact whatsoever. So these are those workarounds for like small business owners? Yes. A full proprietorship, a partnership, a S corporation where you can effectively pay your state and local taxes through your [00:08:00] business and then get a sort of personal income tax benefit of some kind, whether it's an income exclusion or a.

Credited the rules vary from state to state, but they left that alone. The other thing I thought that was really surprising in that salt arena was, you know, I had, um, before the, the final bill was passed, maybe a month or two ago, I, I put out a, a, a question on both, uh, Twitter or X as it's called now, and LinkedIn saying, you know, what do you think the final.

Uh, salt provisions will look like, you know, just as a, a kind of, yeah. You know, let's see where we all stand. And my thought was that we'd have a $40,000 limit for single filers. That was correct. Right, right. That's a big, but I also thought we'd have a $80,000 limit. Maybe double that for joint filers, you know, a.

Uh, an elimination of the so-called marriage penalty 'cause that's been a real sticking point for folks. In other words, one person, or excuse me, two people while they're separate, can have much higher salt deductions than they can once they're married. And not [00:09:00] only did they not get rid of the marriage penalty in the final bill, they actually made it worse in a lot of ways because the final one, big beautiful bill act.

Has a $40,000 cap until you get to $500,000 of income, and that applies for everyone except. Uh, married filing separate individuals. Right? Like it, it's half of that for those individuals. Yeah. But that means a married couple and a single couple both have the same $40,000 maximum deduction on their personal tax returns.

And they both begin to phase out that maximum $40,000 amount at the same $500,000 of income. And married couples tend to have more income 'cause there's two people. So they're going to phase out the same lower total. Faster, which to me was a surprise. So if you have a married couple, two high tax, uh, taxpayer, high income taxpayers, uh, as a married couple, are you saying they should divorce [00:10:00] over this?

I, that's, that's be not a, I'm not a divorce attorney yet. I wouldn't wanna provide legal advice. This call. Well, there's money in it. You know what I would say though, is this, it, it does raise an interesting discussion, right, ed? At what point, if I told you you've gotta work to make another a hundred thousand dollars, at what point would it no longer pay to, to earn that extra a hundred thousand dollars if you had to give X amount back in the form of taxes?

It's funny you say that. Isn't that what Ronald Reagan said when he stopped making movies? Uh, you probably know better than me before my time. Yes. He said, I'm not making any. Well, back then the top rate was 90%. He says, I'm, I'm losing money on this. And he stopped making movies once he hit a certain amount.

'cause it just wasn't worth. Right, and I mean, even if you get something like your time is valuable, and you know, the reason I bring that up is that jump from $500,000 of income to $600,000 of income, where that $40,000 salt deduction can get phased out [00:11:00] to 10,000. That creates a really large spike in marginal rates on that 30,000.

Ignore everything. What's that on that 30,000? Well, right. Well, it's on the a hundred thousand dollars of additional income, you're losing $30,000 of deductions, right? So effectively, for every $1 you make, you're paying tax on $1 and 30 cents, which once you're in the 30% rate, we're talking about nearly a 45% federal marginal tax rate, and that's ignoring anything else that you may be phased in or phased out of, and ignoring any state income tax impacts.

So you might easily be. North of 50 or even 55% of that additional a hundred thousand dollars of income, leaving your hands in the form of taxes, which I think is pretty big deal too. Yeah, there are a lot of planning in that one provision. Yeah, for sure. Alright, ed, question number three here on our One Big Beautiful Bill act special episode.

What's the biggest misconception to you [00:12:00] that arises from this bill? What's the biggest misconception? What's the thing that you've heard people say or maybe have seen even an article somewhere that's not quite what, uh, what is actually in the final bill? Yeah, well, this whole business of below the line and above the line, and what I mean is things that reduce adjusted gross income, a deduction to get to a key number on the tax return.

Adjusted gross income determines your, uh, your, uh. Tax on net investment income, Medicare surcharges, all of those things versus deductions that don't reduce a GI adjusted gross income, but just taxable income. And the big one, I think the big misconception is that $6,000, which is a great provision. Extra Stan extra, the senior deduction for those 65 or over.

So a lot of it, if you go online and things, it's marketed on as, uh, no tax on social Security. That's [00:13:00] absolutely not the case. You, uh, your adjusted gross income is what it is. Whatever the taxable amount of your social security benefits are on the return is still the taxable amount. Now when you get down and take the $6,000 deduction, if you qualify, there are income limits.

It reduces the tax on all income, even if you don't get social security income. Even those who collect social security earlier, say at 62 or 63 or something, they don't get this deduction. So how could it be a deduction? Because they're not 65, how could it be a deduction that's targeted to, uh, saying your social security's not taxable?

In fact, you get the de deduct if you qualify for the judge, uh, for the deduction. It does not reduce your Irma charges, those Medicare charges for parts B and T, B and D, because that's locked in based on your adjusted or modified adjusted gross income. [00:14:00] Really the, the misconception you're saying is that Well, the, like, it, it, it the, tell me what I meant to say, saying most people won't pay tax on their social security, but it's not necessarily because there is no tax on social security, it's because there are some other deductions in there that in the end make taxable income, uh, make, make it more likely that you're not going to pay income tax, period.

Right. I mean, I think it's fair to say that before. The OBBA, the before, this One Big Beautiful Bill act. Most people still didn't pay tax on their social security because they didn't have enough income in retirement. That's true to pay tax on social security. So for them there's really no impact. But for those who had a little bit more income, but not too much, they now have a tax free.

I think, uh, the statistics I've seen largely Ed say that we go from about. You know, two thirds of people maybe not paying income tax on their, that's what on social security before to about maybe three quarters or 80% of folks. So more people won't pay tax on their social security, but it's not everyone and it's [00:15:00] not, again, because it's directly at Social Security.

And Ed, I'm actually gonna follow along with what you have there. Uh, there are two provisions in the bill that, uh, to me, when we talk about biggest misconceptions, and you already mentioned them, I think I did too earlier, the no tax on tips and the no tax on overtime provisions. Uh, those are like, those are the names of the provisions in the bill.

Right. And you and I, we, we, we try to, uh, walk the fine line at, especially on these things when a tax law is passed. It's always a, a politically divisive issue. You know, some people look at the One Big Beautiful Bill act, and they do think it's big and beautiful, and others look at it and they say it's big, but maybe not so beautiful.

That's a, that's a personal choice, right? And, and I can understand people on either side of that, uh, situation, but when it comes to, you know, the black and white, the provisions of the bill, if you look at the actual bill tax, it says no tax on tips, no tax on overtime. Right? I think those are two big misconceptions.

A more. [00:16:00] Appropriate way to have frame that is no income tax on some tips and no income tax on some overtime. And the reason I, I make that, uh, distinction is for one, there are income limits to both of those provisions. So if you make enough money, you're not gonna get any benefit, all your tips and all your overtime.

Are still going to be taxable to you in the same way they were before the bill. Now admittedly, a lot of people who have tips, they work in a job where they're, uh, you know, maybe a waiter or a waitress or some other profession where they're not gonna be making hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in phased out.

So let's go to the second part of that. Let's say you actually benefit from this provision. The no tax on tips or the no tax on overtime eliminate the income tax on those amounts, right? But they don't impact fica, right? Or employment taxes. Yeah, things like your Social security and Medicare taxes, or your self-employment taxes if you're self-employed.[00:17:00]

So again, it's not a. Uh, I'm not saying these provisions are good or bad. I'm simply saying the letter of the law where it literally says, is a header to these sections. No tax on tips and no tax on overtime. Are a little bit, um, are, are, are not quite accurate in and of themselves, right? Right. A more accurate title would've been no income tax on some tips, no income tax on some, uh, over time.

But of course that doesn't roll off the tongue quite as easily as no tax on tips or over time. That's my something is biggest, even though something as simple as a, a deduction for tips, uh, income or deduction for overtime. Yes. That would've been, I think, a more accurate way to maybe have, have, have, have phrased that.

Yep. But of course, you know, in the 11th hour when you're writing this bill, you, you, you get what you can in there and, and the provisions, the titling ultimately is irrelevant other than when it comes to perhaps like we're saying, people being confused by what is actually in there. Alright, ed, let's go into our [00:18:00] fourth topic here.

And, you know, for, for years, you know, you've been known as, uh, you know, the the guy to go to when it comes to IRAs. And while we don't really have any direct changes to IRAs, we do have a new sort of account, the Trump account built on the IRA chassis, so to speak, right. It effectively Trump accounts are going to be IRA accounts.

That, uh, have some special provisions in there and they'll be called Trump accounts. That is the name for them, once again under the bill. So Ed, uh, just real quick, you know, what are your thoughts, what are your high level thoughts on Trump accounts? Everybody's going to want them because the big, the big incentive is they're going to be seeded with free money for qualifying children born at a certain time at a certain age.

So you better, you know, if you're new parents work around the bill, it's all about that. That's right. And, uh, everybody gets a thousand dollars. So to seed the account once and then, uh, even in the bill, as you said, if you look at, and that's for kids born [00:19:00] from 2025 this year through 2028. Right. Uh, I'm checking 'cause there's so many different, uh, uh, see yeah.

Just say, right, it's right. 25 to 28. Yeah. I have to look it up myself. And that's another thing with this bill. You've gotta check the effective dates like we talked about. Some are permanent until Congress says otherwise, but let's call 'em permanent. Some, uh, are, uh. Like here, the senior deduction we talked about only for 25 to 28.

The Trump thing is of the thousand dollars, 25 to 28, the tips, the accounts themselves are permanent. But that little government seeding of here's a thousand dollars. 'cause you had a baby, right? A baby gift from the Uncle Sam. So there's a lot of talk about it and as you said, if you look in the law, it says Trump accounts will be defined as individual retirement accounts, but they go one step further and say, but not Roth accounts.

They make it very clear. Yeah, not Roth individual retirement. So once they child turns 18, they will function as [00:20:00] IRAs. So I think it's a tre. There's a big advantage. First of all, it incentivizes people, parents, uh. Instead of eyes as a 5-year-old to finally get a job instead of watching TV all day. But you don't need a job, unlike an IRA, these mu, these funds, let's say you put in $5,000, a grandparent or parent puts that in, uh, they can put that in for a child, even though they have no wages, no, uh, wages or self-employment income, you know, qualifying it.

No compensation, right compensation to support an IRA contribution. Yeah, which you would need to do an IRA. Uh, this is, I think, a big sleeper, a big benefit in the bill because for right up to 18, uh, that's a lot of money that can be put in, plus employers can put in. So, uh, there's a lot of ways that this money can be put in there.

It goes in obviously non-deductible. If the employer puts it in, it is. Taxable, uh, because you [00:21:00] got that for free. Same thing with the 1000. But, uh, at 18 it becomes an IRA. It could be, and I think, I'm not sure about this, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe, uh, once they turn into IRAs, or maybe even before, they can be converted to Roth IRAs for the children.

Yeah. I think that's one of the areas of the bill ed that, uh. That we're gonna need some IRS regulations to really flesh out. One of the interesting things was that they said was. No. Um, that, that the, the pro-rata rule for IRAs won't coordinate with the pro-rata rule for Trump accounts, so, right. I don't know.

Like, I, I, honestly, I don't know the answer to that question. I, I think, um, I don't have a firm opinion on that. Well, it's one of the questions I have that I hope the IRS will answer at some point. If you could indeed do that, I think that would lend a lot more credence to maybe funding these Trump accounts earlier in life.

If you can't, for me, they may end up as not that big of a deal because. You can put $5,000 [00:22:00] into those accounts per year, which is nice. But you could also put $5,000 into, let's say an UTMA or an UGMA account. And I know UTMA and UGMA accounts don't have much in the way of tax benefits. Right? Like there really, there really is none.

For, uh, for those accounts, they're taxable to the ch uh, to the child and usually the child is subject to kitty tax, uh, on anything north of about 2000 or $2,500 or so. So there, there may be some consideration there, but. If you look at the, the text of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, one of the thing it requires is basically you've gotta invest those dollars, right?

In a mutual fund or an ETF that tracks a a us, uh, stock index. And if it's gonna track a US stock index, it's probably not gonna have a lot in the way of, uh, dividends and whatnot. And if you just hold it, like think of something very simple, like I'm gonna buy an s and p 500 index fund and hold onto it for.

18 years until the kid reaches age 18, there's not a lot of [00:23:00] tax drag. In other words, you're not paying a lot of income tax. The value of the IRA wrapper, if you will, is minimal. If you're just holding an index fund and you're taking the future income and you're taking it from what could be capital gain income, and you're turning it into ordinary income, if it comes outta one of these Trump accounts.

So I'm not sure how much value it will actually add to folks now, once the kid is 18. If they now become like a day trader, right, and they're buying and selling and wheeling and dealing, then that tax deferral might be really, really valuable to them from 18 through. Their retirement or the end of their life.

But if that child is actually gonna use the money somewhat earlier for things like college or buying a home, I'm not sure how much ultimate value will be provided from these accounts. And I think it's worth noting that unlike, um, the earlier provisions of the, the accounts, uh, back when they were first known or referred to as even like MAGA accounts, there's no.

Uh, there's no tax incentive really, other [00:24:00] than the IRA wrapper. Initially, there was talks about having certain income come out at capital gain rates and so forth. Oh, no, none. None of that really applies here. It's just gonna be like an IRA, so it's gonna be ordinary income when it comes out. So that to me, really, um, took what.

Could have been a much more valuable provision for young folks and really diluted it again, especially with the requirement to go into what are generally pretty tax efficient investments in and of themselves. Right. But all of that said, I don't think anybody's gonna walk away from a $3,000 seed. No, no.

I'm not planning on any more kids here, ed, but I, I promise you that if for whatever reason, uh, there one comes between now and 2025 and 2028, uh, I, I will make sure to open up my account 'cause I will take whatever. $3,000 I can get for sure. Right. That's the point. And I think, again, back to the Roth thing, let's say it's available at, say age 18, which sounds like it could be, 'cause it's supposed to function as an IRA, uh, that would be unbelievable for [00:25:00] these kids.

'cause chances are they're still in very low rates. They could convert it all to Roth. Uh uh, this could be an amazing thing. I think, I think for a lot of those kids, like the timing would be wait until you're just out of college or for whatever reason, no longer a subject to the kitty tax. Right. And then make that conversion then.

Absolutely. Alright, ed, that brings us to our, our final question here for today, which is maybe the most important question of all of our five questions here, based on the one big, beautiful bill. And the, and I realize, you know, it's very hard to to say what any one person should do or everybody should do because there's so much in the bill and it's different for each person.

But what are some of the actions that people should think about taking today in light of the One Big Beautiful Bill act? Well, you know what I'm gonna say, put the pedal to the metal on Roth. Conversions, take advantage of these low rates. Uh, you also have, we didn't mention it much, the extension of the 20% qualified business income deduction.

Sure. That's not something that you have to say, take adv, [00:26:00] do something. Just have to earn for that. But that's a great provision and it could work in tandem with the Roth conversion planning because of income levels. But, uh, Roth conversions are here for a, for a while. Hopefully, you know, if these tax cuts are.

Permanent for some period of time, whatever that is. Uh, you know, people were saying at the end of 25, you got a me too, doing all your conversions before the rates go up, but now they're extended. I wouldn't stop that train from going because you still can take advantage every year. You take advantage of low brackets or put it the other way.

Every year you don't take advantage of low brackets, you blew your tax. Planning. So if, if there's one big item for retirees, start moving money to Roth IRAs while the rates are low. Yeah, I think about some of the other things that have, uh, like definitive timelines on this. That's a good point. You know, and that, that's like great long-term advice for folks, because that's gonna be the rule no matter how long it lasts.

But as you've said, you know, how long will [00:27:00] it last? We don't know. But for me it's, it's maybe things like. Um, if you're looking at buying an electric vehicle, you've got only a really limited period of time in which to do that or to, to update your house, right? Tho those credits are supposed to be wiped out or eliminated under this bill at much faster periods than it was going to be before.

So, for instance, you know, buying a car, you may want to do that maybe before the end of September. If you're doing home improvements, you may want to have those completed before the end of the year, accelerating timelines on some other actions. If you were thinking about making. Charitable contributions and you make deductions or you take an itemized deduction on your tax return, there may be some incentives to giving sooner rather than later.

Uh, because beginning next year, individuals who itemize will have to exceed one half. That's 0.5% of their AGI. In order to claim a charitable deduction on their tax return, whereas this year that doesn't exist. Uh, if you are, don't itemized though, you may wanna wait until next year to [00:28:00] make your charitable contributions because this year there is no, uh, deduction available for charitable contributions to non itemize.

But beginning next year on a quote unquote permanent basis, individuals who are married and file a joint return can take up to $2,000 of deductions for charitable contributions made in cash, even if they don't itemize. And single filers can do half of that. So there are a lot of these little intricacies here based on the fine tuning and the timing of this bill.

But I think for me, ed, the biggest action that people should take is. Reach out to a qualified professional who haven't already and understand what this looks like for you. Everyone's situation is different. It is so hard. You know, every once in a while someone says like, what does this mean for me? It's like, well, even just for you, you could look at one provision of the law and say, this isn't good, but what about all the other 17,000 provisions that also impact you?

You've gotta look at that and [00:29:00] you know, ed, I know even for someone like you or myself, it's very difficult to even eyeball a potential impact to someone when there are so many. It's like a pinball machine, right? Yeah. There's so many different things that can happen on the tax return that you really want to make sure you're getting proper advice.

There may be things that you should be doing now. There may be things that you shouldn't be doing now. So for me. The biggest action you should take is get personalized guidance as to what this means for you and whether or not there are actions you should or should not be taking in the near and long term so that you can put yourself and your family in the best possible position.

I think that's true, and back to our original point, I think what you just said applies to every taxpayer. There's something in here I believe that affects every single taxpayer. I agree, it's, it is, uh, you know, again, we said there's some, there's some discussion and there's room for disagreement as to how good or bad the bill is, but it is definitively a big [00:30:00] bill, a big piece of legislation.

There's no doubt about that. So it could mean big changes for you. Which brings us to the end of our debate for today, ed, and actually before we wrap up, I think it's worth pointing out that, you know, this law is still new and there are a possibility that some things that we think today may ultimately change over time.

There's always some surprises in future IRS regulations and announcements and so forth. So we'll stay tuned for that. And of course. As we go on, you know, this is a, a pretty significant bill. It's probably not the last you'll hear from Ed and I on it. There's lots of individual provisions in here that we might dive deeper into in a future episode of the Great Retirement Debate, but ultimately, ed.

Our great retirement debate. The purpose of all of our debates is to create one winner, and it's, it's not Ed and it, it, it's not me, it's you, the listener who has more information and can make a more educated decision. Ed and I firmly believe that the more education and [00:31:00] information and individual. The better decisions that they will make.

And on the whole better decisions lead to better outcomes. And that is our hope for you. So thanks for joining us for this special episode of The Great Retirement Debate, covering the One Big Beautiful Bill act. Ed, you had not one but many big, beautiful answers. We appreciate it and thank you for listening.

We'll see you all real soon.