Dividend taxes.... 0%?? Anyone know?

[MichealKnight]

Greetings and Salutations to one and all.

So I've Googled. I've looked. I can't find clear language. So here I am to ask the wise and the scholarly....

"Married, Filing Jointly"

The rules say that "if your taxable income is 0-$80,000, then your dividend taxes are 0%".

My question....

Let's say your job pays you $79,000. Does that mean that your dividend taxes are 0%

Or, does "taxable income" include dividend income? In which case....if your job pays you $50,000.... then you only have $30,000 in 0% tax on dividends?

Any insight would be appreciated.

 

[pb4uski]

Yes, you got the right idea. Taxable income is income (including pay and dividend income) less deductions, and in 2020 the standard deduction is $24,800.

So you could have as much as $104,800 of income (pay and dividends) and there would be no/0% tax on the dividends since your taxable income would be $80,000 or less.

P.S. How is KITT?

 

[cathy63]

Greetings and Salutations to one and all.

So I've Googled. I've looked. I can't find clear language. So here I am to ask the wise and the scholarly....

"Married, Filing Jointly"

The rules say that "if your taxable income is 0-$80,000, then your dividend taxes are 0%".

No, that's not quite what the rules say. Qualified dividends and long term capital gains are taxed at 0% when your total taxable income, including said dividends and cap gains, is less than $80K.

Ordinary non-qualified dividends and short term cap gains are taxed at your regular ordinary income rate.

My question....

Let's say your job pays you $79,000. Does that mean that your dividend taxes are 0%

Or, does "taxable income" include dividend income? In which case....if your job pays you $50,000.... then you only have $30,000 in 0% tax on dividends?

Any insight would be appreciated.

Yes, taxable income includes dividends.

If your job pays you $50K, then you first subtract your standard deduction of $24.8K. Subtract what's left from $80K, and that's how big your 0% QDiv and LTCG bracket is.
$80K - ($50K - $24.8K) = $54.8K

This is assuming you don't have anything like a 401K or deductible IRA or HSA contribution, and that you don't itemize deductions ... in short, it's a very rough estimate.

 

[MichealKnight]

Thanks!

Cathy and PB I really appreciate it.

I'm still planning my Early Retirement that I feel will come - and at times....I want part of my nest-egg to be in real estate where between standard deduction and depreciation - I'd be at "0" Income fair and square.... and then the first $80k in dividends is also legally tax-free.

I feel like if I can save on taxes - it's less money I have to risk in the markets.

Pb.... KITT is fine Thank you very much. Yes, I own all 84 episodes and yes...it's been mo more than a week since I've seen the show

 

[MichealKnight]

Oh, as Columbo would say "one more question".

Pretend that after all deduction - job pays $20,000 per year.

So I got $60,000 in tax-free dividends to go.

What if I make $65,000 in dividends? Does that mean paying 15% on the whole $65000? Or do you pay 15% on the $5,000 that is over the $60k bogey?

 

[RunningBum]

Just on the $5000 that's over.

If you really want to understand it, take a look at the Qualified Dividends and Capital Gains worksheet along with 1040. I penciled in various amounts of regular income and Q Divs to understand all of the effects. You could also run it through a tax program. I just found it easier to do the work myself to really see it.

 

[pb4uski]

....I want part of my nest-egg to be in real estate where between standard deduction and depreciation - I'd be at "0" Income fair and square.... and then the first $80k in dividends is also legally tax-free. ....

I'm not a fan of rental real estate, especially in retirement. 90 yo DM owns a single tenant commercial property that I have managed for her since DF dies 15 years ago.

Residential rentals are a job... including hassle with tenants unless you have the magic touch to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff or pay for a manager to do it. Also, the responsibilities of being a landlord can make extended traveling in retirement a hassle. For example, DM's property had a broken underground sewer pipe last summer that was a major hassle to address and almost impossible if I was traveling.

Also, there is a sinister flip side of depreciation when you sell called depreciation recapture, where a portion of your gain on sale up to your inception to date depreciation deductions is taxed at 25%, a higher rate than the 15% capital gains rate.

Here’s an example. Say you hold the rental property you bought for $240,000 for 10 years and you’ve written off $74,130 in depreciation deductions. That's $5,409.60 for the first year, since it was placed in service in April, and $7,635.60 each year for the remaining nine years.

In this example, your adjusted cost basis in the property after 10 years is $135,870 (the original cost basis of $210,000 less the $74,130 depreciation). If you sell for, say, $300,000, you’ll recognize a gain of $164,130 ($300,000 minus $135,870).

While it would be nice to pay taxes at the lower capital gains rate on the entire gain, you’ll pay up to 25% (based on your ordinary tax rate) on the part that’s tied to depreciation deductions. If you owe the maximum, it would be 25% of $74,130, or $18,532.50.

The remaining $90,000 is taxed at your regular long-term capital gains tax rate. Assuming you’re in the top bracket, that would be $18,000 in capital gains taxes. All in all, you’re looking at $36,532.50 in taxes.

Depreciation recapture applies to the lesser of the gain or your depreciation deductions. If you sell the property for $200,000, for example, you’ll have a gain of $64,130. Since that’s less than the $74,130 depreciation deductions you’ve taken, the recapture rate of 25% applies to the entire $64,130 gain for a total tax bill of $16,032.50.

https://www.fool.com/millionacres/t...capture does,4797, Sales of Business Property.

Also, don't forget that you can have ordinary income equal to your deductions and still pay zero tax.

So if you had $24,800 of income and $80,000 of qualified dividends then your tax bill would be zero.

Finally, if you have significant tax-deferred accounts you don't what a tax bill of zero... in most cases you want to fill the 10% and 12% tax brackets with Roth conversions at low cost.

 

[pb4uski]

Oh, as Columbo would say "one more question".

Pretend that after all deduction - job pays $20,000 per year.

So I got $60,000 in tax-free dividends to go.

What if I make $65,000 in dividends? Does that mean paying 15% on the whole $65000? Or do you pay 15% on the $5,000 that is over the $60k bogey?

If you had $20,000 of earnings and $60,000 or $65,000 of dividends your tax would still be zero:

Earnings..............$20,000
Dividends..............65,000
Total income .........85,000
Std dedn..............(24,800)
Taxable income.....$60,200 under $80,000

If you had $20,000 of earning you could have as much as $84,800 of qualified dividends and not pay any tax:

Earnings..............$20,000
Dividends..............84,800
Total income ........104,800
Std dedn..............(24,800)
Taxable income.....$80,000

Ordinary income...$(4,800)
Qualified income.....84,800
Taxable income.....$80,000

If you have $100 more earnings or dividends, you would have $15 in tax as the additional $100 in earnings would push $100 of dividends from the 0% bracket into the 15% preferenced income tax bracket.

https://www.kitces.com/blog/underst...st-capital-gains-for-a-free-step-up-in-basis/

https://www.kitces.com/blog/long-te...one-higher-marginal-tax-rate-phase-in-0-rate/

 

[cathy63]

Please make sure you understand the difference between qualified and non-qualified dividends. Unless you're just going to buy some stock and hang onto it for a long time, it's not very likely that all your dividends are going to be qualified and therefore "tax free". And even if you do hang onto your stock forever, you'll still probably have non-qualified dividends in the first year.

You're talking about pretty small numbers here anyway, so it may not matter much, but you'll likely end up owing the IRS a few bucks if you don't account for the non-qualified divs in your planning.

 

[CRLLS]

Not asked but important to note, Roth conversions also are included in the taxable income as far as LTCG tax calculations are concerned. I just thought I'd add this little tidbit.

 

[pb4uski]

Please make sure you understand the difference between qualified and non-qualified dividends. ...

Generally speaking, dividends from US individual stocks or from US stock funds will be qualified dividends.... dividends from bonds funds, money market funds and the like are not qualified. If you look at your 1099-DIV from 2019 it will show total and qualified dividends for stocks, or funds or ETFs that you owned in 2019.

 

[SALTedOut]

A great tax calculator can be found at https://www.dinkytown.net. You enter your personal information, married, single, etc. income by item, deductions by item and then it computes tax. You can then adjust items to see their impact.

The problem with your plan is its based on todays tax laws. Those tax rates are set to expire on 12/31/2025. At that point the tax brackets shift back to higher rates and brackets. Then depending on the November elections the tax rates could go up even higher than the current expected 2026 tax rates/brackets. And will likely change at least 10 more times over the next 40 years.


IMO, planning to pay no tax by trying to guess what kind of income will not be taxable 10 - 40 years from now is the wrong approach and a futile exercise.

 

[pb4uski]

.... The problem with your plan is its based on todays tax laws. Those tax rates are set to expire on 12/31/2025. At that point the tax brackets shift back to higher rates and brackets. Then depending on the November elections the tax rates could go up even higher than the current expected 2026 tax rates/brackets. And will likely change at least 10 more times over the next 40 years.


IMO, planning to pay no tax by trying to guess what kind of income will not be taxable 10 - 40 years from now is the wrong approach and a futile exercise.

While all you say is true, it isn't particularly helpful. Especially since it seems clear to me that the OP's questions are focused on the short term and while ordinary rates will revert in 2026, preferenced rates will not.

What would you do... no tax planning at all? Do you have a crystal ball that you use for tax planning? If so, let us know as we all have some questions for it.

My view is that you do the best tax planning that you can based on current tax law considering any sunset provisions, etc. and recognize that you may need to make some mid-course corrections if and when circumstances change.... IOW, do the best with the cards that you are dealt.

Or alternatively, you could play ostrich and bury your head in the sand.

 

[SALTedOut]

Especially since it seems clear to me that the OP's questions are focused on the short term and while ordinary rates will revert in 2026, preferenced rates will not

I interpreted the OP's second post "planning for early retirement" as he is trying to plan taxes over his retirement years. I may be incorrect but that was the basis of my longer term response.

What would you do... no tax planning at all? Do you have a crystal ball that you use for tax planning? If so, let us know as we all have some questions for it.

My view is that you do the best tax planning that you can based on current tax law considering any sunset provisions, etc. and recognize that you may need to make some mid-course corrections if and when circumstances change.... IOW, do the best with the cards that you are dealt.

Or alternatively, you could play ostrich and bury your head in the sand.

I agree with the best planning you can but not based on current tax law w/ sunset provisions. My tax planning for my FIRE at 52 was to assuming an effective tax rate of 30% (live in TX so no state tax). That is what I have used for my models.

I'm not convinced that capital gains and qualified dividend rates will survive the next 40 years. They may but I don't want to plan my retirement on that.

In my accumulation years I got as much as I could in ROTH 401k, back door ROTH IRA and HSA. After those annual buckets were full the rest went into taxable accounts.

In my early FIRE years I've been converting as much IRA as I can up to the top of the 22% bracket and will likely go 1/2 way into the 24% bracket because I'm convinced tax rates will be higher than that in the future. I'm pushing conversion as hard as I can until 2026. I looked at the expected balance of my IRA in 19 years (at age 72) using a 5-6% growth rate and my RMDs alone (before pension, investment income and SS) would put me above the 24% bracket.

So I think I am closely considering my tax position now and what I think it will be 20-40 years from now.

I was just trying to give the OP my opinion on using a zero percent tax rate and trying to plan to be in one. If he plans for higher rates and then he ends up in the zero percent bracket he's golden. However, if he plans for zero and ends up at 15-30% its not so good.

My tax planing strategy (and overall FIRE strategy) is to plan for the worst, hope for a little better. But lots of different ways to approach planning for taxes.

In 40 years we will know how it comes out.

 

[pb4uski]

....My tax planning for my FIRE at 52 was to assuming an effective tax rate of 30% (live in TX so no state tax). That is what I have used for my models. ...

WADR, I think an effective tax rate of 30% is way too conservative. If a MFJ couple has $150k of ordinary income and $150k of preferenced income in 2020 then their effective tax rate would be less than 15% of their $300k income according to dinkytown calculator that you posted.

Makes me wonder if you might be confusing effective tax rates with marginal tax rates. In the example above, the marginal tax rate is 24% but the effective tax rate is only 14.51%.

While I agree that there is substantial risk that tax rates might increase, I highly doubt that they will more than double.

 

[SALTedOut]

In the example above, the marginal tax rate is 24% but the effective tax rate is only 14.51%.

Not confusing anything. Masters in tax, CPA and tax accountant for 30 years. I filed thousands of tax returns (individual, corporate, partnership, trusts) each year, tax planning for clients, handled audits and administrative hearings, even an expert witness in two different court cases. I'm pretty familiar with effective vs. marginal rates.

As I said above my conservative approach and I am planning for the worst case scenario. I'm convinced tax rates will go up past the 2026 rates. Will they go to the 70% marginal rates of the past, probably not and if so it will be for pretty high income amounts. But I could see income over $100,000 getting up to the 30-40% range and possibly preferred cap gain rates going up or going away. I hope not but I could see with with the free spending (on both sides of the isles) these days. One day they (both sides) are going to have to do something besides print more money.

There was no way I was going to FIRE only to find out things cost way more in 20-40 years than I expected. My entire budget model was derived from inflating major expenses such as taxes, healthcare and travel. Then my current actual spending comes no where near those levels. All done on purpose to avoid problems in the future. Overbudget, underspend, it's my method of ultimate safety. I fully recognize others plan differently.

 

[MichealKnight]

thanks

A great tax calculator can be found at https://www.dinkytown.net. You enter your personal information, married, single, etc. income by item, deductions by item and then it computes tax. You can then adjust items to see their impact.

The problem with your plan is its based on todays tax laws. Those tax rates are set to expire on 12/31/2025. At that point the tax brackets shift back to higher rates and brackets. Then depending on the November elections the tax rates could go up even higher than the current expected 2026 tax rates/brackets. And will likely change at least 10 more times over the next 40 years.


IMO, planning to pay no tax by trying to guess what kind of income will not be taxable 10 - 40 years from now is the wrong approach and a futile exercise.

Your point is well taken. For now.... I am trying to plot a course for about 6-7 years.

I agree- 20-30 years from now we have NO idea how things will be.

And yes, current tax laws expire in 2025 *but*.....I am not using today's laws.

I am actually referring to proposals by leading candidates that have a 50% chance to be in power next year. Even the most Progressive ones. And as of now.... if my "ordinary income" was in fact zero or close.....it looks like even under a leadership change I'd be 0% for $80,000 in qualified dividends. Furthermore...the lower I keep my income, the greater chance for ACA subsidy.

0 tax on dividend. Let's say I save $12,000 in taxes

Low "income" ....let's say I get $9000 in ACA subsidy.

$21,000 in free money to me. @5% return... that means I'd have to risk $420,000 in investment capital in this World-Wrestling-Federation thing known as the stock market.

I'd rather depend on $21,000 in goodies from Uncle Sam, and shield $420,000 in capital from risk.

It's not a final plan..... but if I can't depend on nice returns in the next decade...I'm trying to see how I can offset lower returns and lower risk with more favorable taxation and moochery off Uncle Sam.

 

[MichealKnight]

PB- re rentals

I'm not a fan of rental real estate, especially in retirement. 90 yo DM owns a single tenant commercial property that I have managed for her since DF dies 15 years ago.

Residential rentals are a job... including hassle with tenants unless you have the magic touch to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff or pay for a manager to do it. Also, the responsibilities of being a landlord can make extended traveling in retirement a hassle. For example, DM's property had a broken underground sewer pipe last summer that was a major hassle to address and almost impossible if I was traveling.


Also, don't forget that you can have ordinary income equal to your deductions and still pay zero tax.

So if you had $24,800 of income and $80,000 of qualified dividends then your tax bill would be zero.
****************

All valid points. My vantage point....

As of now, I own (2) residential condos and I have a property manager....I'v never ONCE spoken to a tenant. Property manager isn't a big company but rather an individual who does this professionally. He screens tenants, he does it all.

Excluding appreciation, if I bought at TODAY's higher prices....I'd make 3.75% return...this is after all fees, repair, accounting for vacancy, etc. 3.75% isn't great but if I do retire early....I just can't have "all" my nest-egg in paper assets that I feel *sometime* are the subject of hype and WWF Hulk Hogan showmanship. Also in a worst case scenario - - I'd like to have some sort of solid, real asset versus just paper and I'm willing to accept the lower 3.75% return to that end.

Another investment I'm considering - is a triple-net-leased commercial property. Again - lower return - but better quality. For instance - -a Taco Bell leased to someone who owns 50+ stores....in a growing metro area. Pays perhaps 5% return.


Depreciation recapture: Yes, I've been looking at it. Nobody knows the future but if the time comes to sell:

*1031 exchange. - complicated - but people do it rather mainstream.

*IF IF IF my nest-egg holds up long term....and I want to pass a property on to an heir....heir doesn't pay the tax until and unless he sells it.

I just feel that a modicum of real estate keeps me not only diversified out of the paper assets.... but "nimble" vis a vis taxable income and government subsidies.

My slightly wet dream....

60% in stocks and mutual funds that can average 5.5% nominal yearly.

35% in real estate that can average 4.75% yearly

5% in cash-CD-Muni-etc average return 2%


This would constitute a 5.06% return with a rather favorable tax rate.....and nice ACA subsidy.

Trust me - I see VWINX and all the historical data on how the 60-40 portfolios have made 8%. I'm tempted to just "let it ride" in a few funds ....but I'd like some form of diversity from stocks and bonds.

Bottom line for me....

4.75% long term - I can make it.

5.5 % long term - - I'm living rather well.

Anything over 5.5% long. term and Daddy is very happy.

 

[Out-to-Lunch]

Pb.... KITT is fine Thank you very much. Yes, I own all 84 episodes and yes...it's been mo more than a week since I've seen the show

You would have thought that somewhere in those 84 episodes they would have shown how the title character spells "Michael."

 

[MichealKnight]

Yes I realized it. Was a typ-o when I created the account and I didn't want to re-do an account.

Forgive me - I'm from the South Hudson Institute of Technology. (Famous acronym for my education)

 

[braumeister]

If you'd like to change it, you could ask one of the admins here to help with that.

 

[MichealKnight]

I fully agree with your (professional) assessment - taxes *WILL* go up. There's no other alternative.

What I am hoping for is that if my combined income, BEFORE any deductions, depreciation, etc if my income is $165,000 - $180,000 I question just how much my taxes will go up.

As of now - even the most "progressive" proposals wouldn't raise my taxes at that income level.

I do anticipate my state taxes going up for SURE, and I feel there will be a V.A.T in America too

 

[pb4uski]

Not confusing anything. Masters in tax, CPA and tax accountant for 30 years. I filed thousands of tax returns (individual, corporate, partnership, trusts) each year, tax planning for clients, handled audits and administrative hearings, even an expert witness in two different court cases. I'm pretty familiar with effective vs. marginal rates.

As I said above my conservative approach and I am planning for the worst case scenario. I'm convinced tax rates will go up past the 2026 rates. Will they go to the 70% marginal rates of the past, probably not and if so it will be for pretty high income amounts. But I could see income over $100,000 getting up to the 30-40% range and possibly preferred cap gain rates going up or going away. I hope not but I could see with with the free spending (on both sides of the isles) these days. One day they (both sides) are going to have to do something besides print more money. ...

Good to know. MBA, CPA, but not tax... Controller-type (finanacial reporting/SEC compliance) and Big 4 advisory Managing Director for 34 years.

While I agree that it is likely that tax rates increase I hope that you're wrong about effectinve tax rate's doubling.... but only time will tell.

 

[Out-to-Lunch]

Yes I realized it. Was a typ-o when I created the account and I didn't want to re-do an account.

Forgive me - I'm from the South Hudson Institute of Technology. (Famous acronym for my education)

<-- I was looking for a "thumbs-up" but we have very few positive emojis available!

Forgive my nit-picking, just messing around. But, if it interests you to do so, I am confident that a moderator could change your name if requested.

 

[Clone]

Yes I realized it. Was a typ-o when I created the account and I didn't want to re-do an account.

Forgive me - I'm from the South Hudson Institute of Technology. (Famous acronym for my education)

Thank you for sharing your formal training- I went to YouTube to find a relevant snippet from the South Harmon Institute of Technology, it was a movie a few years ago. Followed that down a rabbit hole of other humorous movies, and then a series of Saturday Night Live skits. Two hours later-- I forget where I was going with this.