Yes, the Secure Act 2.0 began indexing the catch-up contribution to inflation for those > 50 years old starting next year. It is still 1K for 2025 for Traditional and Roth IRA’s and then it will incrementally move higher from there starting next year. A marginal benefit, but one nonetheless, and certainly one that will compound over time. You're right, employer-sponsored plans like 401K plans had more relevant changes with Secure 2.0. They raised the catch-up contribution amount from $7,500 this year to $11,250 next and indexed it to inflation. The Act did, however, phase out pre-tax catch-up contributions for ‘high’ income earners (meaning they must go towards the Roth side only for earners over 145K). There was added the ability to roll 529’s to Roth’s etc. All net positive for retirement savers.
~ Brian T. Szytel, July 2, 2025

Bingo!
~ David L. Bahnsen, July 2, 2025

It makes no sense to say that Powell was motivated by politics (the politics of liking Biden and not liking Trump) when he put the fed funds rate at ZERO percent under Trump, and enacted $5 trillion of QE under Trump. And even before COVID, in 2019, he inexplicably stopped normalizing rates and stopped quantitative tightening when asset markets resisted those efforts (a huge boost to Trump’s economic record in 2019). He didn’t “have to raise rates” by 550 basis points in one year under President Biden, and if he had been motivated by politics, he most certainly would not have (the market expected 150, not 550). And the Inflation Reduction Act passed AFTER Powell had raised rates, not before.

There is huge circularity in believing the fed funds rate should be where the two-year is.
And why would there be no term spread at all between 24 hours and 730 days?
~ David L. Bahnsen, July 1, 2025

What is likely meant in the question is that Chairman Powell cut rates in late 2024 and has not cut rates in 2025, yet. Some have suggested this is due to Chairman Powell trying to help the Democrats last year, and hurt President Trump this year. I’d prefer to take a more sober approach to answering this question.

First of all, I am in disagreement with Chair Powell about not cutting rates in the last meeting or two, and while I do not believe it is politically motivated, per se, I believe it is a bad decision to stay in a tightening posture right now versus a more neutral one (i.e. something closer to 3% in the fed funds rate). So nothing I am about to say suggests agreement with Chairman Powell’s decision not to cut in 2025 thus far.

Second of all, if there is “politics,” I think it can be called “reverse politics,” whereby the heavy pressure from the White House to force rate cuts has worked against the effort, as Powell has potentially resisted cutting rates to avoid looking like he is succumbing to pressure.

So with both of those things said, the idea that Powell was trying to help the Democrats with rate policy before this year is just simply absurd. He hiked rates from 0% to 5.5% in one year in the middle of the Biden term, the most aggressive rate hikes in a timeline like that in modern history. If Powell’s version of playing politics with rate policy was 550bps of rate hikes, he’s not very good at it.
~ David L. Bahnsen, June 30, 2025