This is not about individuals gaining the ability to use their pre-tax 401k dollars to buy crypto, it’s specifically giving fund managers the permission they’ve actually already had for years, to expose their funds to high-volatility investment vehicles. Crypto, gold, silver, private equity investing into leveraged buyouts of companies to rip the copper out of the walls, etc.
Fidelity, Vanguard, et al. are exactly who asked for this and have already been doing this for years.
If they’ve already functionally had permission, what’s the meaningful change here?
I also find myself skeptical that the barrier to high volatility investments being promoted in 401ks is that they didn’t have the right stuff to push. There’s been nothing functionally stopping fund administrators from offering gold ETFs for the two decades they’ve been available, for instance, it’s just not terribly common.
Yes, this does in fact appear to be another useless retread EO, I think it’s another example of the administration trying to replicate existing legislation in order to signal their support for a concept or will it into happening.
This is not about individuals gaining the ability to use their pre-tax 401k dollars to buy crypto, it’s specifically giving fund managers the permission they’ve actually already had for years, to expose their funds to high-volatility investment vehicles. Crypto, gold, silver, private equity investing into leveraged buyouts of companies to rip the copper out of the walls, etc.
Fidelity, Vanguard, et al. are exactly who asked for this and have already been doing this for years.
If they’ve already functionally had permission, what’s the meaningful change here?
I also find myself skeptical that the barrier to high volatility investments being promoted in 401ks is that they didn’t have the right stuff to push. There’s been nothing functionally stopping fund administrators from offering gold ETFs for the two decades they’ve been available, for instance, it’s just not terribly common.
Yes, this does in fact appear to be another useless retread EO, I think it’s another example of the administration trying to replicate existing legislation in order to signal their support for a concept or will it into happening.