IRS to Open “MAGA” Accounts for BABIES?!
House Republicans have proposed creating automatic “MAGA accounts” for newborns, triggering privacy fears and criticism over branding financial futures with Trump-era slogans.
At a Glance
A House GOP bill proposes $1,000 “MAGA accounts” for every U.S. newborn
Accounts would be created by the IRS for children born from 2025 to 2028
Parents must opt out to prevent account creation
Funds are locked until age 18, with restrictions extending to age 25
The bill must pass the Senate and is not yet law
$1,000 Baby Bonus or Big Brother Banking?
In an unexpected twist of fiscal populism, House Republicans have introduced a proposal offering every newborn in America a $1,000 government-funded savings account. Dubbed the “Money Account for Growth and Advancement,” or MAGA account, the program draws fire not just for its acronym’s political baggage, but for its mechanics.
According to the bill—part of the sprawling “One, Big, Beautiful Bill”—the IRS would automatically create accounts for children born between 2025 and 2028. Parents would need to actively opt out if they didn’t want government trustees managing their child’s finances. Critics call it an “accounting Trojan horse,” leveraging Trump-era branding while embedding federal oversight into the heart of family financial planning.
Watch a report: $1,000 for Newborns: What’s the Catch?.
Financial Control with Federal Strings
These MAGA accounts function like trust funds—but with Washington in charge. While families could contribute up to $5,000 annually, the funds would be locked until the child turns 18, with further access limits until age 25. Only “eligible index funds” would be permitted for investments, with the account terminating entirely by age 31.
Proponents frame the initiative as pro-growth, offering tax-deferred contributions and potential tax breaks. But opponents argue the real motive is expanded state control, warning that these “Trump Accounts” may evolve into tools for monitoring family finances or restricting investment autonomy.
Even conservative voices caution against trusting the same federal system that struggles to balance its own budget. As inflation erodes spending power, critics see the program as performative politics rather than a solution to genuine economic inequality.
Branding the Future?
Perhaps most contentious is the bill’s overt branding. Whether by design or political happenstance, MAGA accounts have already earned the nickname “Trump Accounts” across mainstream news and social media. That’s sparked fears that future financial mishaps or bureaucratic bloat could be tied to one polarizing political legacy.
The use of opt-out mechanics—similar to how organ donation is managed in some countries—has also drawn scrutiny. Critics claim it puts the burden on families to disengage from a program they never asked for. With the IRS, not parents, initiating account creation, the program stands accused of embedding surveillance under the guise of savings.
Whether the Senate will embrace or reject the proposal remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: MAGA accounts have ignited a fresh battle over federal overreach, childhood privacy, and the politicization of personal finance.