The Tax Code Doesn't Care About Your Politics

I have strong political opinions. If you know me personally, you probably know what they are. I’m not going to pretend otherwise, and I’m not going to insult your intelligence by claiming I’m some neutral observer floating above the fray.

But here’s what I am going to tell you: my political opinions have no business in a client meeting. And neither do yours.

The §530A / Trump Accounts Problem

Trump Accounts are here. Created under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OB3), they’re a new type of tax-advantaged savings account for children under 18. Kids born after 12/31/2024 and before 1/1/2029 are eligible for a $1,000 seed contribution from the Treasury. Families can contribute up to $5,000 per year. Employers can kick in up to $2,500 per employee annually as a tax-free benefit. The funds get invested in limited but sound options.

They ran a Super Bowl ad for these things. Half a million families have already filed Form 4547 to open one. This is not a niche product. This is something your clients are going to ask you about.

And this is where it gets uncomfortable for some of us, because they’re literally called “Trump Accounts.”

I’ve already watched this play out in real time. Tax professionals on social media fall into two camps. One group refuses to acknowledge that these accounts exist or dismisses them outright because of the name on the label, or feels like this “isn’t a tax matter”. The other group is cheerleading them as the greatest financial innovation since the Roth IRA because of who signed the bill. Both groups are letting politics drive their professional judgment and failing their clients.

Politicians Have Been Doing This Forever

Before anyone clutches their pearls over the branding, let’s take a step back and acknowledge something: politicians have been putting their names on tax provisions for decades. This is not new.

The Roth IRA? Named after Senator William Roth, a Republican from Delaware, who sponsored the legislation as part of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. Before that, the Kemp-Roth Tax Cut of 1981 was named after Representative Jack Kemp and the same Senator Roth. The Coverdell Education Savings Account was originally called the Education IRA until Congress renamed it after Senator Paul Coverdell, a Georgia Republican, following his death in 2000. We don’t call them “Section 530 education accounts.” We call them Coverdells.

Nobody refused to recommend a Roth IRA because they didn’t vote for William Roth. Nobody steered clients away from a Coverdell ESA because they disagreed with Paul Coverdell’s politics. The provisions were evaluated on their merits, explained to clients based on their financial situations, and utilized when appropriate.

Trump Accounts should be no different. The name on the label doesn’t change the tax code. §530A works the way it works regardless of how you feel about the person whose name is on it.

But Let’s Be Honest, the Name Hits Different

I get it. The Roth IRA is named after a senator most people outside of Delaware had never heard of. “Coverdell” sounds like it could be a mutual fund family. “Trump” carries a little more cultural weight than those names did.

If the exact same provision had been signed by a different president and called “Child Investment Accounts” or “American Future Savings Plans,” most of the controversy would evaporate overnight. The mechanics would be identical. The tax treatment would be identical. The planning opportunities would be identical.

But they’re not called that. They’re called Trump Accounts. And that name is doing something to practitioners that should concern all of us.

I’ve seen posts from colleagues who flat-out said they won’t discuss these accounts with clients. A tax professional, refusing to inform a client about a legitimate, legally enacted savings vehicle because they don’t like the name. That’s not a political stance. That’s a failure of professional responsibility.

I’ve also seen practitioners pushing these accounts aggressively on every client who walks through the door, not because they’ve done the analysis to determine whether it’s the right vehicle for that specific client’s situation, but because they want to be seen as supportive of the administration. That’s not advice. That’s salesmanship wrapped in a political flag.

“That’s Not Our Job”

I’ve also heard another excuse from practitioners who don’t want to touch Trump Accounts: “That’s an investment advisor conversation, not a tax conversation.”

No. It isn’t. Or at least, it’s not exclusively one.

This reminds me of the BOI (Beneficial Ownership Information) days. I miss those days, when some people screamed it was the unauthorized practice of law, and we shouldn’t do it. By the way, I’m still waiting on a citation on that, and no one has provided it.

Form 4547 is an IRS form. It gets filed with a tax return. The election to open a Trump Account is made through the tax filing process. This is literally part of our world. Yes, people can also go online to the TrumpAccounts.gov website and fill out the form, but most clients expect their tax professional to tell them about it.

We talk about IRAs with clients all the time. We discuss Roth conversions. We walk clients through the tax implications of 529 contributions. We help them understand how employer retirement plan contributions affect their returns. Nobody says “that’s an investment advisor issue” when a client asks whether they should do a Roth conversion. We explain the tax consequences and let the investment advisor handle the portfolio allocation. That’s how this works.

Trump Accounts are no different. The investment decisions, which index fund to choose, how it fits into an overall portfolio, sure, that’s investment advisor territory. But the form, the contribution limits, the tax treatment, the comparison to other tax-advantaged accounts? That’s us. That’s what we do.

If you’re a tax professional and a client with a newborn asks you about Trump Accounts, telling them to “talk to their financial advisor” without providing any guidance on the tax implications is a disservice. You don’t have to manage the account. You do have to know how it works and be able to explain it.

What Your Client Actually Needs to Hear

Your clients with kids under 18, and especially those with newborns or children born since 2025, need to know that these accounts exist. They need to understand the contribution limits, the investment restrictions, the tax treatment on distributions, how they compare to 529 plans and custodial accounts, and whether the account makes sense for their specific financial situation.

Some of your clients are going to walk in excited about Trump Accounts because they love the president. They don’t need you to validate their politics. They need you to walk them through whether a 529 plan might be a better fit if the goal is education funding, since 529s often come with state tax benefits that Trump Accounts don’t offer.

Some of your clients are going to walk in hostile toward Trump Accounts because they can’t stand the president. They don’t need you to commiserate. They need you to explain that leaving a $1,000 government contribution on the table because you don’t like the name on the account is not a sound financial decision when you have a newborn.

In both cases, the conversation should sound exactly the same: “Here’s what the law says. Here’s how it applies to your situation. Here are the pros and cons compared to other options. What questions do you have?”

That’s it. No editorial. No commentary on the administration. No eye rolls. No cheerleading.

It’s Not Just Online

I teach continuing education classes. Recently, I briefly mentioned Trump Accounts during a presentation. Briefly. The comments section lit up like I’d thrown a grenade into the room. Not questions about contribution limits or how they compare to 529 plans. Political commentary. From tax professionals. In a CE class.

And I got off easy. Another instructor I know almost had to eject someone from their class over it. A continuing education class for tax professionals, where an attendee got so heated over the mere mention of a legally enacted tax provision that they nearly had to be kicked out.

Think about that for a second. We are the people our clients rely on to be calm, objective, and knowledgeable. We are the professionals who are supposed to cut through the noise and deliver clear guidance. And we can’t even sit through a CE class without losing our composure over the name on a financial account?

We should be better than this. We have to be better than this.

The Social Media Trap

I want to talk specifically about what I’ve seen on practitioner social media, because it’s been ugly.

Professional Facebook groups and forums that are supposed to be about tax practice have turned into political battlegrounds over these accounts. Practitioners calling colleagues idiots for recommending them. Other practitioners calling colleagues unpatriotic for questioning them. Threads that start with a legitimate technical question about contribution limits devolve into political arguments within three replies.

If you’re a practitioner and your professional social media presence includes political hot takes about Trump Accounts, understand that your clients can see that. Prospective clients can see that. And roughly half of them are going to conclude that you can’t be objective about their financial situation.

You might be fine with that. I’m not going to tell you how to run your business. But don’t pretend you’re not making a choice about who you’re willing to serve.

It Goes Both Ways

I want to be clear that this isn’t aimed at one side of the political spectrum. I’ve seen failures in both directions.

I’ve seen practitioners who automatically enroll clients unless they opt out, because they want to promote the program. I’ve seen practitioners who oppose the administration steer clients away from a legitimate $1,000 government contribution because they couldn’t stomach the branding.

Both of those are wrong. Both of those put politics ahead of the client’s financial interest. And both of those should make you uncomfortable if you take professional standards seriously.

The Practical Takeaway

Here’s what I’d suggest:

Get educated on Trump Accounts. Read Notice 2025-68. Understand Form 4547. Read Tom Talks Taxes’ article on it. Know how these accounts compare to 529 plans, Coverdell ESAs, custodial accounts, and Roth IRAs for minors. Understand what happens when the child turns 18.

Then, when your client asks, and they will ask, give them the facts. All of them. Without editorializing. Let them make an informed decision based on their financial situation, not based on your feelings about who’s in the White House.

I have strong opinions about plenty of things. When I’m sitting across from a client, the only opinion that matters is my professional one. And my professional opinion is always going to be based on what the law says and what’s best for the person in front of me. That’s literally what I am paid to do.

If clients paid me to discuss politics, that would be a dream job, but no one has made the offer.

The tax code doesn’t care about your politics. Your clients shouldn’t have to either.