Leaderboard

I just don't see why a distribution would be taxed in any year other than the year it was received. RMDs merely deal with when a distribution must be taken from the plan; this says nothing about taxation. Under what authority would there be a tax on a distribution that has not been taken. So, if the distribution is actually taken in 2018, then that is when it would be taxed. Good Luck!

And why should it? The pro-life position is the taking of an innocent human life is wrong and has been the moral and legal position of humanity for a long time. In all the cases where this issue comes up we have an innocent human life. Therefore, the same protections are due those lives. It is far from obvious quality of life issues ought to justify taking another person's life. Even with end of life issues there is clearly a huge moral and legal difference between suicide and euthanasia.

And by moral issue you mean actually expecting people to follow the law? Which I would add is a conservative value. One of the biggest fallacies in political conversations comes in ridiculous claims of hypocrisy. This is a classic example. A person takes just one value of the other side acts like that is their only value that has anything to say on the topic and runs with it. Like I pointed out conservatives believe that the law ought to be obeyed and you seem to think the AG ought to just ignore the acts of congress based on an idea of federalism- sorry there at a minimum there needs to be a balancing that needs to happen. Sure the AG could abuse the idea of prosecutorial discretion like what happened with Obama and the Dreamers but one can't help but think the same liberals who liked that idea would oppose a GOP AG saying he is using proecutorial discretion to stop enforcing all federal gun laws. They would rightfully be pointing out that is the executive branch not merely using executive discretion but simply in effect making new law without engaging the other branches of government. Which would be an abuse of power. You in fact would find there are plenty of people on the right that would have no problem with congress engaging in federalism when it comes to pot policy but the power to do that is in congress not the AG acting alone. I would add the whole framing of it as simply a moral issue is a strawman. The pro-pot legalization side does in fact down play the extensive health issues that comes with pot and its legalization. So there are in fact valid safety issues and not merely "moral" issues.