IMHO there is a numerical instability in the computations done by the macros of the tkz-euclide package. This has nothing to do with the coordinates set via the calc syntax. To see this, consider
\documentclass[tikz, border=1cm]{standalone}
\usepackage{tkz-euclide}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\coordinate (A) at (0,0);
\coordinate (B) at (4,0);
% \coordinate (C) at ($(A) + (2,-3)$); %({-60}:4)
\coordinate (C) at ({-60.01}:4); %({-60}:4)
% \coordinate (C) at (2,-3);
\draw (A)--(B)--(C)--cycle;
% circumcircle
\tkzCircumCenter(A,B,C)\tkzGetPoint{O}
% \tkzDrawPoint(O)
\tkzDrawCircle(O,A)
% incircle
\tkzDefCircle[in](A,B,C)\tkzGetPoint{I}\tkzGetLength{rIN}
\tkzDrawPoint(I)
\tkzDrawCircle[R](I,\rIN pt)
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

Everything is cool (except for the bounding box, which could be computed correctly if tkz-euclide were to put overlay when it is computing the auxiliary paths, but this is off-topic here).
However, if I remove the last digit of the angle that defines C, i.e. do
\coordinate (C) at ({-60}:4);
I get what you got

I stress that I have even made an attempt to figure out what's going on internally, simply because I don't speak French and don't understand many things in the manual or code.
Bottom-line: To me it seems that you have discovered an issue in tkz-euclide.
ADDENDUM: Why does that happen here? To understand this, let us recall how incircles are computed. To this end, I follow this nice answer, which uses Heron's formula to compute the radius \inrad of the incircle. This tells us that the incircle is where the lines that are parallel to the edges with distance \incircle intersect. However, for a given edge there are two parallel lines with that distance.
\documentclass[tikz, border=1cm]{standalone}
\usepackage{tkz-euclide}
\begin{document}
% from https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/299451/121799
% calculate semiperimeter
% \pgfmathsetmacro{\semip}{(\sideA+\sideB+\sideC)/2}
% calculate radius of incircle: area (given by Heron's formula) divided by semiperimeter
% \pgfmathsetmacro{\inrad}{sqrt(\semip*(\semip-\sideA)*(\semip-\sideB)*(\semip-\sideC))/\semip}
\begin{tikzpicture}[globalize/.code n args={2}{\xdef#2{#1}}]
\coordinate (A) at (0,0);
\coordinate (B) at (4,0);
% \coordinate (C) at ($(A) + (2,-3)$); %({-60}:4)
\coordinate (C) at ({-60.01}:4); %({-60}:4)
% \coordinate (C) at (2,-3);
\path let \p1=($(A)-(B)$), \p2=($(B)-(C)$),\p3=($(C)-(A)$),
\n1={0.5*(veclen(\x1,\y1)+veclen(\x2,\y2)+veclen(\x3,\y3))},
\n2={sqrt(((\n1-veclen(\x1,\y1))/\n1))*sqrt((\n1-veclen(\x2,\y2))*(\n1-veclen(\x3,\y3)))}
in [globalize={\n2}{\inrad}];
\foreach \X/\Y in {A/B,B/C,C/A}
{\draw[gray,thin] ($(\X)!\inrad!90:(\Y)$) -- ($(\Y)!\inrad!-90:(\X)$);
\draw[gray,thin] ($(\X)!\inrad!-90:(\Y)$) -- ($(\Y)!\inrad!90:(\X)$);}
\draw (A)--(B)--(C)--cycle;
% circumcircle
\tkzCircumCenter(A,B,C)\tkzGetPoint{O}
% \tkzDrawPoint(O)
\tkzDrawCircle(O,A)
% incircle
\tkzDefCircle[in](A,B,C)\tkzGetPoint{I}\tkzGetLength{rIN}
\tkzDrawPoint(I)
\tkzDrawCircle[R](I,\rIN pt)
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

Looking at this picture, I think that tkz-euclide computes the intersection of the wrong (i.e. outer) parallels. This picture also shows that the incircle center is not precisely at the intersection of the parallel lines.
This suggest that, at least as long tkz-euclide requires proficiency in the French language, to compute the incircle radius and center without that package, but following this nice answer.
\documentclass[tikz,border=3.14mm]{standalone}
\usetikzlibrary{calc,intersections}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}[globalize/.code n args={2}{\xdef#2{#1}}]
\coordinate (A) at (0,0);
\coordinate (B) at (4,0);
\coordinate (C) at ($(A)+({-60}:4)$);
\draw (A) -- (B) -- (C) -- cycle;
%
\path let \p1=($(A)-(B)$), \p2=($(B)-(C)$),\p3=($(C)-(A)$),
\n1={0.5*(veclen(\x1,\y1)+veclen(\x2,\y2)+veclen(\x3,\y3))},
\n2={sqrt(((\n1-veclen(\x1,\y1))/\n1))*sqrt((\n1-veclen(\x2,\y2))*(\n1-veclen(\x3,\y3)))}
in [globalize={\n2}{\inrad}];
\foreach \X/\Y in {A/B,B/C,C/A}
{\path[name path global=path-\X-\Y-1] ($(\X)!\inrad!90:(\Y)$) -- ($(\Y)!\inrad!-90:(\X)$);
\path[name path global=path-\X-\Y-2] ($(\X)!\inrad!-90:(\Y)$) -- ($(\Y)!\inrad!90:(\X)$);}
\foreach \X in {1,2}
{\foreach \Y in {1,2}
{\path[name intersections={of={path-A-B-\X} and {path-B-C-\Y},total=\t}]
\ifnum\t=1
(intersection-1) coordinate (incenter)
\else
\fi
;}
}
\draw (incenter) circle (\inrad);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}

One can even go a step further and get rid of the intersections library, and make things more TikZy by using elementary trigonometry the determination of the center based on Cartesian coordinates.
\documentclass[tikz,border=3.14mm]{standalone}
\usetikzlibrary{calc}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}[incircle/.style n args={3}{%
insert path={
let \p1=($(#2)-(#1)$), \p2=($(#3)-(#1)$),\p3=($(#2)-(#3)$),
\n1={0.5*(veclen(\x1,\y1)+veclen(\x2,\y2)+veclen(\x3,\y3))},
\n2={sqrt(((\n1-veclen(\x1,\y1))/\n1))*sqrt((\n1-veclen(\x2,\y2))*(\n1-veclen(\x3,\y3)))},
\n3={veclen(\x1,\y1)}, % length #1 -- #2
\n4={veclen(\x2,\y2)}, % length #1 -- #3
\n5={veclen(\x3,\y3)}, % length #2 -- #3
\n6={\n3+\n4+\n5}
in % \pgfextra{\typeout{\n1,\n2,\n3,\n4,\n5,\n6}}
(${(\n5/\n6)}*(#1)+{(\n4/\n6)}*(#2)+{(\n3/\n6)}*(#3)$) circle (\n2)
}}]
\coordinate (A) at (0,0);
\coordinate (B) at (4,0);
\coordinate (C) at ($(A)+({-60}:4)$);
\draw (A) -- (B) -- (C) -- cycle;
%
\draw[incircle={A}{B}{C}];
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}
This leads the same output as above. (When writing this, I found it is not at all trivial to grasp all cases, and there is no guarantee that I did. That is, I am really deeply impressed by Alain Matthes' achievements. In other words, even though I do think that there might be an issue with tkz-euclide, one should also highlight that it overall works great.)
\coordinate (C) at ($(A) + (2,-3)$);, you are back at the first result. I guess that this simply means that there is a problem with settingCat({-60}:4), but not with using thecalcsyntax to set the coordinates. This is confirmed by the fact that just doing\coordinate (C) at ({-60}:4);also leads to the incorrect incircle. That is, there might be an issue in tkz-euclide, but as far as I can see it is not tied to using thecalcsyntax. – Nov 17 '18 at 17:40