U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-07-2019, 08:44 AM
 
71,535 posts, read 71,712,424 times
Reputation: 49120

Advertisements

you could put 6400 dollars of earnings in a traditional or just 5k in a roth with 1400 going for taxes in the 22% bracket .

most never allow for all the taxes they paid up front in a roth when comparing and so all that extra compounding on the larger amount is not calculated .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2019, 11:54 AM
 
36 posts, read 11,663 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
you could put 6400 dollars of earnings in a traditional or just 5k in a roth with 1400 going for taxes in the 22% bracket .

most never allow for all the taxes they paid up front in a roth when comparing and so all that extra compounding on the larger amount is not calculated .
100% agreed!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,700 posts, read 4,063,393 times
Reputation: 1260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuce88 View Post
You don't pay taxes on the contributions.

The only thing that you are not taxed on are HSAs. It's pre-tax (or tax deducted), tax-free growth, and tax-free when used (for healthcare expenses).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
1,700 posts, read 4,063,393 times
Reputation: 1260
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
my opinion is roths should have non taxable rmd's after 70-1/2... they should be treated like traditional's at 70-1/2 where whether you pay taxes up front or along the way it should have nothing to do with what happens at 70-1/2 ... they should even it up by making both have to be emptied over a lifetime

I agree with you and I have said for a long time that Roth is a fantastic inheritance tool for all these reasons. I don't plan on touching my Roth so think about how much is in the account after building it for 60 years and then passing it to your grandchild who has a lifetime to withdraw from that tax free in entirety.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:39 PM
 
1,697 posts, read 611,572 times
Reputation: 1778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
Why not now? Convert while taxes are discounted 3%.

And I was referring to marginal rate, not average rate. Sure, 12% average is fine, it every dollar AFTER that AGI is taxed at 22% today, 25% after 2025. Thatís what counts.

The reason why I am converting my IRA to Roth now (ie, over the next 3 years) is because of the confluence of favorable factors: (1) I am 59, so this is really the final time for Roth conversion to be meaningful to me in terms of enough years left for tax-free growth of money in the Roth (I do not need to leave inheritance, and plan to use withdrawals from the Roth if I live well past 80), (2) I am old enough to have taken care of other retirement income, so can finally work very little, which allows for Roth conversion without bumping me into the >33% tax bracket (which would happen if I worked more than a couple of months per year - the reason why I could not do any Roth conversion earlier, when I worked more), and (3) as you say, tax rates are favorable right now for Roth conversion. The only element that is missing is that the stock market is still very high... if it is going to crash, it would be nice for me if it did that this year and the next :-). I wouldn't mind if my SEP IRA lost 50% of its value by this December (as it did in 2009) because then I would have to pay only half of the taxes on the Roth conversion :-).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:42 PM
 
36 posts, read 11,663 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonwalkr View Post
The only thing that you are not taxed on are HSAs. It's pre-tax (or tax deducted), tax-free growth, and tax-free when used (for healthcare expenses).
You don't pay taxes on IRA contributions, they are tax deductible. traditional IRA contributions are tax deferred and are taxed when distributed, Roth IRA contributions are made after taxes are paid but are not taxed when distributed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:44 PM
 
71,535 posts, read 71,712,424 times
Reputation: 49120
to set the record straight , roths have the taxes paid up front since it has to be funded with after tax money . traditionals are not tax free they are tax deferred
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
12,248 posts, read 12,499,482 times
Reputation: 19393
I have a pension so am screwed anyway, but a Roth can let you avoid paying income tax on up to 85% of your SS. That's huge. If you can figure out how to keep your taxable retirement income low, do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
203 posts, read 32,747 times
Reputation: 214
It is important to note - not all IRA are not taxed up front, many can only make a non-deductible contribution. With a non-deductible IRA the better choice almost always skews in favor of the Roth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 04:06 PM
 
476 posts, read 94,654 times
Reputation: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
It is important to note - not all IRA are not taxed up front, many can only make a non-deductible contribution. With a non-deductible IRA the better choice almost always skews in favor of the Roth.
Correct. If your income does not allow the deduction of contribution to traditional IRA... then I can't think of ANY advantage over Roth, and there is no reason to leave in traditional. In fact, it would seem foolish to leave in traditional and get taxed someday, missing out on tax free growth in the Roth.

(I am open to someone pointing out what I am overlooking in that analysis, however. Bueller..... Bueller??)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top