Welcome to Radical Personal Finance, a show dedicated to providing you with the knowledge, skills, insight, and encouragement you need to live a rich and meaningful life now while building a plan for financial freedom in 10 years or less. My name is Joshua Sheets. Today I want to continue a discussion on tax changes, tax law changes, with a brief overview of the text of the recent House Democrat proposal for tax changes that they would like to see passed in tax law.

Now when I comment on current events, I'm walking a bit of a tightrope. If I comment on current events and current proposals, that is good for content. It's good for eyeballs because people are often interested in hearing and seeing what's actually happening. The problem is that when you comment at an early stage, it's hard to be certain of what will actually get through the political process.

In the same way that in yesterday's show where I talked about recent proposals and bills that are submitted to Congress for your bank to automatically send all of your transaction information directly to the IRS, if I comment on tax changes here, it's current, it's newsworthy, it's attractive in terms of attention, but it's highly uncertain.

I don't know what's actually likely to be passed into law, and I'm personally not close enough to the political process to even have a sense of what's actually feasible at this point in time in the political process in the United States. So it's dangerous for me to comment on current proposals at an early stage because it's very uncertain.

However, if you wait too long, if I wait too long, then there's not really any planning opportunities available. And I'll point out in just a moment with some commentary on this current bill how obvious and important that is. If you wait for a law to become, or a bill to become law, if you wait for the president's signature, then often you're too late to actually put in place any kind of intelligent planning, and so I didn't serve you in that appropriate way.

So what I want to do to try to tackle this problem is I want to use this current bill as a lesson, and I want to show you a few of the themes that I see in the bill, and then talk about how you can plan for the future without regard to any current particular piece of legislation.

And this is fulfilling a theme that I've talked about for a long time. I've talked, for example, for many years about how I expect there to be changes coming up in things like retirement accounts, and I expect far more changes. I don't expect the rules that you and I are governed by today to be consistent with the rules that you and I are governed by 20 years from now, which is why long-range financial planning is in many cases quite difficult and dangerous.

But I'll talk to you about some of the techniques and tools that I think do work in those scenarios. So let's begin with the text of the document. I will release a direct link to the text of the document in the show notes, so if you would like to read the text of the bill as it is coming out of the House Ways and Means Committee in the United States Congress, then you can feel free to take a look at that.

It's 800 and something pages, about 200 and something pages of which are directly applicable to financial and tax rules. What I would suggest that you do instead of that is take a look at the quite excellent Jeff Levine, who is on Twitter @CPAPlanner. Jeff Levine works with and for Michael Kitsis and the Kitsis team.

He is a real tax expert who does a phenomenal job of staying current on all of the proposals. So I took a look through his tweet storm where he was live tweeting and reading his way through the proposed legislation. He should have an article released a little bit later today on Kitsis.com covering some of the details.

At the time of my recording, I have not yet seen his article. So feel free to take a look at that at Kitsis.com if you're interested in a very technical analysis of some of the proposed changes. A few highlights for you that I think are the most important things that you should know.

First of all, it is proposed that tax rates are going to be increased. Now there are some areas of disagreement between the President's proposal and what the House Democrats are proposing here. In some cases, the House Democrats are significantly more aggressive than the President's proposal, which is in some ways I think to be expected.

In short, the highest tax rate is proposed to be higher. In addition, the highest tax rate under the current proposal is proposed to be kicking in at something around $400,000 for an individual, $450,000 for a married couple filing jointly. That's kind of a lower number than it was previously proposed to be.

So basically looking at something like a 40% tax rate plus the surcharges on anything in excess of $400,000 of income, which we'll see. Now there's also been proposed changes in the capital gains tax rate. President Biden had proposed making the top capital gains tax rate equal to the top ordinary income tax rate of 39.6%.

The House Democrats' proposal seems to be more modest with a maximum capital gains tax rate of 25%. Who knows what will wind up happening. It does seem hard for me to believe that capital gains tax rates will increase to 40%, but I would not be surprised or shocked by really anything at this point in time.

When other important components to the legislation would be changes to even corporate tax rates discussed as well. Now most interesting to me are some of the legislative changes that are being suggested relating to IRAs and Roth IRAs. Specifically, as was pretty easy to predict when the news came out about Peter Thiel's $5 billion Roth IRA.

Specifically, Congress seems to be taking aim at large retirement accounts, adding a set of new rules governing large retirement accounts. Now this is not a surprise in any way. I think here we see the effect of the data leaks from the IRS to ProPublica, the journalists who have been writing the series of articles on the wealthy and their taxes in the United States.

We see here the direct effect by way of reminder. There was evidently an IRS whistleblower who leaked, we don't know the extent of it, but who leaked at the very least years and years worth of confidential tax returns on at least hundreds of taxpayers in the United States directly to ProPublica.

And ProPublica has been systematically going through that data and publishing various articles on it. They had several general interest articles, but perhaps the most newsworthy one was the article they released on Peter Thiel's $5 billion Roth IRA, where he turned, I think it was $1,300 of contributions into $5 billion over the course of a couple of decades.

And because he did that in the context of a Roth IRA, then of course those monies under current tax law are considered to be tax-free. Now interestingly, if you have not seen it, I would encourage you to go and in fact I'll link it in the show notes today.

I would encourage you to go and watch the YouTube video that I released for the Nomad Capitalist channel on Thiel's Roth IRA, because I actually, I argued in that particular video that with Thiel's $5 billion Roth IRA, he actually has a remarkable planning opportunity wherein he could, by expatriating from the United States and renouncing his US citizenship after the age of 59 and a half, he could take his $5 billion and take it offshore completely income tax-free, which would be a remarkable opportunity.

Now will he do that? I doubt it, but in my understanding of the laws surrounding expatriation, Roth IRAs, etc., he does have a really interesting opportunity. So I'll link that in the show notes as well. I would encourage you to go and see how he could potentially use his massive Roth IRA combined with offshoring for a tremendous tax planning opportunity.

Now under the current proposals, however, there will be a number of changes that are recommended. First of all, Roth conversions will be limited based upon income amount, and there will be some new required minimum distribution rules on large retirement accounts. So the wealthy will not be able to do Roth conversions.

There'll be limitations on the so-called mega backdoor Roth IRAs, where you use a 401(k) and then convert some of the after-tax contributions into a Roth IRA. Also some additional restrictions are being proposed on the kind of investments that you can hold inside of an IRA or Roth IRA. There are already restrictions that you can't own businesses in which you have more than a 50% interest in, but they're tightening up even the private placement market as to what kinds of businesses you can hold in the accounts.

So a lot of changes there, and all of them in a higher tax direction. So you need to be aware of what is coming, and hopefully you've taken advantage of opportunities in the past. That's the extent of which I wish to comment at the moment on the content of that proposal.

Again, go to Kitsis.com to read Jeff's article, which I'm sure will be published later today, if you're especially if you're a financial advisor and you need the information to share with your clients. What I want to point out, however, is how do you plan in the face of uncertainty?

I would present this current proposal to you as evidence of the highly unstable nature of US-American tax law and political process. Right now, what you see in the United States is just a complete and total breakdown of the political process. There is no long-term vision that everyone has agreed upon.

There is no overarching plan. We are in a place of schizophrenic gridlock, basically, where we have this ping-pong ball bouncing back and forth between the Democrats and the Republicans, and there's no overarching sense of leadership. There's no overarching sense of consistency of "here's where we're going as a people.

This is what we believe in." Basically, you just have this bounce back, bounce back, bounce back and forth. You see this, "Okay, President Obama is going to raise taxes a little bit. President Trump is going to lower taxes a little bit. President Biden, we're going to raise taxes." Just this back and forth, back and forth.

Now, although you have this schizophrenic gridlock, the actual marginal changes are actually not that big. For all of the news that I've just described to you, there's not all that much of a difference to you. It makes a little bit of a difference if you go from a 37% tax rate to highest marginal bracket to a 39.6% marginal tax bracket.

At the end of the day, that's not that big of a difference. It makes a little bit of a difference if the top rate kicks in at $500,000 or $400,000, but at the end of the day, these are only marginal differences and things kind of march on business as usual.

The IRAs and the Roth IRA proposals are interesting to note, but they're not that big of a deal. Meaning that, okay, some people do backdoor Roth IRAs and mega backdoor Roth IRAs, but they're not super popular. They're popular in the hardcore financial nerd space, but broadly speaking, they're not particularly popular.

They're trying to tighten something up. Okay, some people are going to pass a new law with additional requirement of distribution rules if you have a really big account and a high income, but fine, that's kind of expected. There's this argument back and forth, but things do more or less kind of just march on.

I find it difficult to know how to analyze this because on the one hand, I could create a show saying, "Look how schizophrenic this is and just the whole system is broken," but then on the other hand, I could create a show and say, "Look, things kind of continue as normal." I have argued that, hey, since 1950s, tax collection is locked right out at about 25% of GDP.

So, while there's a little change on the margins, I think that from my perspective, it seems like the politicians in the United States have pretty well feel like they have figured out their Laffer curve, meaning that they've figured out the optimal level of taxation where people will pay as much as they can possibly pay without rebelling.

You don't see much rebellion. Very few people, although some people are, very few people are leaving high income tax states. Some people are, but not really. There's millions and millions and millions of people who are quite happily living in California and New York. There are a few people who are fleeing for different places, but there are some businesses moving but not much.

There are people fleeing the United States, a few people are, but all things considered, not many. And so, it seems like the politicians have pretty well dialed in their Laffer curve, which they've figured out the optimal amount of tax collection and things kind of continue as normal. And so, I don't know which of those arguments to make.

I think that, although it's paradoxical, both of them are true. I think that the current schizophrenic arguments and bickering simply serve the politicians because they are able to go to their side and say, "Look, I'm fighting for us." While the changes aren't actually that significant, so people just kind of go along.

And I know that sounds cynical. I try to guard against cynicism, but it's hard to observe the process and come away with anything but. As far as I can tell, Congress in the United States is broken. There's no major legislation happening. They've abdicated much of their responsibility for legislation to the courts on important issues and it seems pretty well broken.

So, time will tell. We'll see. So, what can you do? The first lesson I would say is you should always do your planning earlier rather than later. One of the things that I think was the most interesting about this particular proposal is the dates that were assigned from it.

When President Biden was elected, there were a lot of people who were saying, "Okay, I need to sell something because I don't want to pay a higher capital gains tax right down the road." But, none of us knew what the date was. Some people argued that the tax changes would be imposed retroactively.

California did that a number of years ago. They passed a tax law and then they made it retroactive. So, the law was passed, for example, on September 1st, but they made it apply all the way back through January 1st. I don't remember the exact dates. That's what a retroactive tax law is.

So, California voters went along with it. They weren't bothered by it. That's pretty wrong and evil in my opinion, but they did that. Some people argued, "Well, it would be a future date." But this particular proposal puts the dates down and it was the date that the proposal was released publicly, which was September 13th.

And so, here I am recording this on September 15th of 2021 and it's too late, right? Unless you had a binding contract in place as of September 13th and nothing materially changes with that, any kind of sales that you do now are exposed to the higher rate. And so, the lesson here is if you think that you see the future, right?

If you think that taxes are going to go up, you have to follow through with your convictions and your analysis, even if there's not evidence that you can point to. Because when they release that date, it's too late, right? When they make that happen, it's done. And so, if you saw that, "Hey, we have a new president, we have a democratic house, democratic senate, taxes are going to go up," you needed the conviction to actually follow through and make your sales to the extent that you were going to sell things in the previous cycle.

Because once it was released, we now see September 13th was the date. That was the date. So, the first thing is follow your convictions. If you believe that taxes are going up and you should do Roth conversions, follow your convictions. If you believe taxes are going up and you should sell assets while they're at a lower amount, follow your convictions.

Because at this point in time, the prognostication business is quite difficult, so you have to look at the general trend. The second lesson that I draw from this is we can clearly see there is a legislative implementation of the general trend, meaning it was not hard to predict that taxes are going to go up, and here we see the teeth coming out for that actual proposal.

What will happen politically? I don't know. I don't know what happens in a reconciliation process, but we see here the evidence that elections have consequences, and if you are living and working in the United States, taxes will go up. And so, pay attention to the trends. Pay attention to what is happening.

The third thing that I observe is that the government changes the rules, and I want you to pay attention to the fact that they are significantly changing here the rules on IRAs, Roth IRAs, and things like conversions. I thought when I was a young man, I thought that, "Hey, law is a law, and it should continue." And that's because I equated moral laws with current laws.

And so I thought, "Well, laws shouldn't change. If it's illegal to kill somebody or to murder somebody, it should be illegal to murder somebody no matter who's president. It should be illegal to murder someone no matter what political party is in power." And so I thought there was a lot of stability, and I used to listen to people when I was younger who would say, "Oh, the laws will change.

Don't trust Roth IRAs, or don't trust IRAs because the laws will change on them." And I thought, "No, they can't change. It's a law. They said it." Well, I have learned over the years that it wasn't wacky to say that things would change. You have to look and read the direction, say what's happening.

And people are using things, they will change. And so I've come to be convinced at the current moment, I've come to be persuaded that many of these laws will change. And all of the laws on things like IRAs, 401ks, Roth IRAs, et cetera, will change. Congress keeps a list of what is called tax expenditures, and on that list is 401k tax exemptions, Roth IRA tax exemptions.

And as is so often the case, when Congress passes a law, they call it an incentive, and then when you follow the law that they pass, they call it a loophole. And so you're dealing here with people who will change the laws. And as the financial situation in the United States becomes more and more dire over the coming years and decades, you will see many of these laws change.

And I think that the way that you will see them change is the way that you see them changing right now. Nobody today is going to cry over the prospect of Peter Thiel or Mitt Romney or some other rich fat cat who's got $500 million in his IRA. Nobody is going to cry over that guy paying higher taxes or him being subjected to additional required minimum distributions, which forces money out in taxes.

No one's going to cry over it. But what that does is that psychologically primes the population to accept that their taxes will change as well, and that their IRAs will be taxed, and their Roth IRAs will be taxed, etc. And so I think that you should assume that everything is going to change.

I do not assume that my Roth IRA will remain tax-free. I look at it and I say, at the moment they're saying that my distributions from my Roth IRA will be tax-free, but that'll change. At the moment they're saying that I can maintain the tax deferral on my 401(k) subject to the current rules at age 70 and a half when I get required minimum distributions, but that will change.

What will change? Well, I don't know. They can change the RMD formula. They can make the money come out at an earlier amount. But these things are not set in stone. They're just the current round. And they can pass if there's a political consensus, and they can just simply pass a new set of rules.

Congress gave us the Roth IRA. Congress can take away the Roth IRA. Congress has power and authority to do whatever they want with these rules, and we're subject to them. So the first lesson that I use this as evidence is, don't place any kind of long-term trust or confidence into the promises of these government agents.

Don't trust them. Recognize that they will change the law when it is politically expedient for them to change the law. And they will use whatever tools and means necessary, including leaking personal data from the IRS to a journalist article to change the perception of people so that everyone's looking down and saying, "Peter Thiel has a $5 billion Roth IRA.

That's not appropriate, and so we should change the law." And then you and I might very well be swept up in that law change. It's political warfare. It's propaganda warfare. And so expect it to happen. Do I have any evidence or proof that the leak was manipulated, the leak was intentional by political actors?

I have no evidence or proof whatsoever. But if you think back, right, for the last few months, leak all the data, all of the confidential tax records of the wealthiest people in the United States, leak it all after the election of a Democratic president, after the election of a Democratic Congress, leak it to a journalistic outfit.

Journalistic outfit starts publishing the stories. The stories make their way into the news cycle. And here at perfect timing, here is the change. Now are the politicians responding to what the muckraking journalists discovered? Or is there something more, is there greater collusion? I don't know, but the end effect is the same.

And I have not yet heard of anybody being prosecuted or any major investigations into who leaked that confidential tax information. The end result is the same. The end result is now we have legislation proposed, which changes new rules, and we're going to have widespread support for taxing the rich.

So the means don't matter. What matters is the end result. Now the next lesson that I would draw from this though is while rules can change, you're kind of stuck with using the rules as they are for yourself. I'm not opposed to making contributions to 401ks, Roth IRAs, etc.

I see that as it's really the only tool that a US citizen has, or a US employee, somebody, a US person who is an employee has to lower his tax rates. And they work well, and there are many good reasons to use them even if the laws change. I'm a major proponent of 401k accounts, especially due to their asset protection benefits.

And so you can know simultaneously that the rules will change, but still look and make a good solid decision saying I'm going to use this account because it serves my interests right now. And that's the way that I think you should look at things, is not look at things and be swept up in this fury of "hey, they're going to change the laws and so I can't trust them." But just simply look at it and say as things exist right now, what serves my interests?

I've made contributions to retirement accounts. I've taken early withdrawals from retirement accounts that I've talked about on Radical Personal Finance. If you have periods in which your income is going to go down, then it's better for you to make contributions to tax-deferred accounts when your income is high, even if a year later when your income is low, you take the money out and pay a penalty.

And so these accounts are not sacrosanct. You just look at them and say, "What can I do now? What's the best solution for me right now?" And so I encourage the use of the accounts if they fit your situation. I encourage people to use Roth IRAs as a place to put their emergency funds.

It's not worrying and banking on the tax laws of 40 years from now. I'm encouraging you to focus on today, on the benefits today, and then we'll see what the tax laws are 40 years from now. Good financial planning should allow a lot of flexibility. Don't do something if the only reason for doing it is what you're going to get 40 years from now, because that's too uncertain.

There's no way for you or me to predict what things will be like 40 years from now. I believe the system will be completely transformed. But do something based upon what serves your interests now, and then be prepared to respond and to adapt as the legislation changes over time.

So go based upon your personal situation, observe what's right in your situation at the moment, and then make whatever changes are necessary along the way to adapt as the laws change. You don't have to be an extremist on the issue. You don't have to say, "Nobody should participate in a Roth IRA because they're going to change the laws." Neither do you have to say that everyone should put in a Roth IRA and you're a wacky conspiracy theorist if you think that the laws will change.

To me, neither of those extremist positions seem to be the appropriate way to handle reality. My opinion, as what seems to me to be the most appropriate way to handle this reality, is look at the rules, understand what they are now, take the measure of the wind as far as the winds of political change, the winds of what's going to happen in the future in terms of tax collection, tax rates, etc., and then do what seems best at the moment, but keep your plans flexible, knowing that you may have to change them and adjust them.

Here are my personal predictions, my current finger in the wind as I dope the wind and try to tell you here's what I think is going to happen. Number one, over the significant arch, the US government has a major fiscal imbalance. Expenses are much higher than revenues, and so the US government needs revenues.

There are four sources of revenue that the US government has. Or, any government has. Number one is tax collection, number two is borrowing, number three is user fees, and number four is inflation. So taxes have to be increased in order for some combination of those four has to happen.

So let's talk about it. What's likely? I think what's likely is all the major three will all be used, maybe user fees as well. User fees is just insignificant, so I'm going to leave it off for now. Number one, taxes will go up, but I think that there is a cultural restraint against massive tax increases.

I don't think that the US highest marginal tax bracket is going to go from 39.6% to a Swedish 65%. It's not going to happen. It's not culturally the same. The US Americans won't accept that. So there will be some changes at the margin, it may go from 39.6% to 41% or 41% to 43%, but we're not going back to 90% marginal tax brackets like the United States had several decades ago.

That's not going to happen, in my opinion. And so tax collection will increase, taxes will increase, but a little bit. Rates will go up a little bit, brackets will adjust, the tax collection will go up. I think the major tools that the US government is going to depend upon are borrowing and inflation.

Those are the two major tools for increasing revenue. And so I think we'll see lots more borrowing and lots more inflation until or unless borrowing doesn't work anymore and/or inflation doesn't work anymore. And then I think we'll see significant levels of default. That's my opinion. But that's over a course of several decades.

And so there's not going to be any kind of major change right now. That's going to be a course of several decades. The next lesson that I think you should take from this is you should focus on doing what's right for you without regard... and focus on the things that you can control.

For example, the people who win or who have won are not the people who've just piled up more money in their IRAs, but rather the people who've taken control of their businesses, taken control of their incomes, etc. And so I spend much more time focusing on income and business because that makes a bigger difference than what the tax rate is in your IRA, your Roth IRA.

Not everyone is right for entrepreneurship. Totally concede that first up. But if you're right for entrepreneurship or if you're right for improving your career scale, that's going to make a bigger difference for you from a financial planning perspective than worrying about tax rates. Always focused. Keep the main thing the main thing.

Always focused on those things that have the bigger impact. Do your 2080 analysis relentlessly. Practice that analysis relentlessly and don't worry too much about short-term tax rates. Focus more on the things that are going to make the biggest difference. The next lesson I would point out to you is those who can afford to wait always have the most options.

The key to good long-term planning is as much as possible have the ability to sit and wait. Think multi-decades. Think multi-generationally. Not just short-term. A difference between 37 and 39% is not that big of a deal. What you need to do is you need to have enough assets that you're sitting on that you're not going to sell for many many years.

One thing that was nice is that to my knowledge, I believe I got this right, is that in the current Democratic House tax proposal they didn't mess around with imposing problems on the step-up basis for the transfer of capital gains assets at death. And so this is a disparity between what the president's proposal was and what the current Democratic proposal is.

And so the key is have assets that you can borrow against when you need to. Have assets that you can just sit and wait and take a very long-term time perspective. Don't think in terms of three years. Think in terms of 30 years whenever you have the opportunity. I guess the final lesson I would say is I do believe that competition is going to become more relevant in the coming years.

I have worked very hard over the last three years to put in place a comprehensive internationalization plan for myself and for my children. And three years ago I had nothing. I had no internationalization plan. Today I have a very robust and resilient and diverse internationalization plan. And it took me three years of work to do but it feels worth it.

And one of my major compelling reasons, I had several major compelling reasons, but one of them was looking at this schizophrenia in the political space and just thinking like "wouldn't it be nice to be out of this? Why should I have my life and my children's lives governed by this?" And I determined, I said "I'm not going to have a significant portion of my life governed by this schizophrenia.

I'm not going to do it." And so I said "I don't want my children's futures to be tied to the future of the United States." And while I'm not as dark in terms of my outlook as a lot of people are, I'm a bit more relaxed in terms of I don't predict worst-case scenarios.

I decided that it was too big of a risk for me to leave alone and so I started doing what I've done over the last three years. Well having completed phase one of my kind of long-term internationalization plans, putting myself in a situation where my life and my children's life is no longer attached to the future of the United States, where I can divorce myself from that country, I can divorce my children from that country, they have to wait until they're 18 to do it themselves.

But I've put in place all the infrastructure that they need. Then it does make me feel a lot more peaceful. And so it just feels like a really good insurance policy to where I look at it and I say "Okay, if I'm wrong and taxes do change dramatically, I don't have to stick around.

I don't have to stay forever." And I would encourage you to do that as well. Is recognize that if this stuff bothers you and annoys you, you don't have to stick it out, right? You don't have to stay and be abused by it. I think there's a good reason why most people will stay.

I'm traveling back to the United States this next week. I might stay for a time. I really love so many things about the United States. But you'll feel better if you just put yourself in a situation where you're not stuck with it, and that may give you more peace.

And so I'd encourage you to do that. You have to do it long in advance, right? You have to do it before you need it. Don't wait for the last minute. The internationalization stuff takes a long time. It's always longer than you wish, but you can do it. So put the pieces in place today that you would need in the future if you didn't want to actually be governed by these guys, if you didn't want to actually deal with their long-term schizophrenia.

Put in place the pieces that you would need to be able to have more options, and I think you'll feel better as well. I have really appreciated that. I try to be thoughtful and share with you that it's not for everyone. I've tried very hard to share with you the difficulties.

I'm very aware of the difficulties. I appreciate so many things that are easier and better in the United States. But I'll tell you, watching the political process, watching this tax stuff change, watching the arguments and the fights and the debates makes me much, much—I'm much more even-keeled and relaxed and less stressed out about it now that I know that I'm no longer a slave.

I know that I'm no longer beholden to them. And so that makes me feel better. And I want you to have that feeling as well if that's of interest to you. Hopefully these are some useful lessons for you. Don't put too much stock in this current proposal. Recognize that taxes may go up, and hey, this might be a time where you just simply grow your wealth rather than your income.

And then when taxes go down in the next round of political things, then that's a time that you take more income. If you will build your reserves, you'll always have that option. So focus on building reserves. Build income streams that don't force you to take income. To do that, you'll need to be in an ownership position of a company and/or negotiate better deferred compensation arrangements.

So remember that there are only three basic tax strategies—going back to what, episode four or something of Radical Personal Finance, right? There are only income shifting strategies, income timing strategies, and income conversion strategies. And all three of these still apply. But get control of the timing of your income so that you can stretch it out and defer it to times when taxes are lower.

Get control of the ways that your income—so you can convert highly taxed income into less taxed income. And then work on shifting strategies. How can you shift income from high taxpayers to low taxpayers? If you will get into a place of control, then you don't need to worry too much about the current proposals.

That's it for today's show. Thank you so much for listening. I would remind you that I have started taking private consulting clients. So if you'd like to consult with me on tax planning or internationalization planning, if you'd like a balanced expert eye to tell you—kind of cut through a lot of the noise and point you in a direction to some things that work quickly, been there, done that can consult with you on either of those topics.

Go to RadicalPersonalFinance.com/consult, RadicalPersonalFinance.com/consult, and book a consulting call with me today. Thank you.