Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-16-2021, 10:37 AM   #21
Recycles dryer sheets
newellcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 224
Sunset,


If I read it right, according to the finance buff article, the conversions on pre-tax money are permissible until 2031 without restriction...
newellcr is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 09-16-2021, 11:10 AM   #22
Recycles dryer sheets
ducky911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark1 View Post
You made me go back and look to see how much DW and I backdoor ROTH'ed while at Megacorp. We moved ~$375K into ROTHs via backdoor conversion from 2012 to 2016. Today the two accounts are worth $745K, so that equates to a $370K tax free gain.

This law never made much sense to me, as we made too much to contribute to a ROTH in the traditional way. But hey, I'll take it.
Those are big numbers! didn't you pay a lot of taxes to enjoy this tax free gain in lieu of tax deferred gain.

State tax here in California is so high and I was always in a top bracket so I passed on this roth conversion.....Will be paying the price for it when I hit 72 or maybe 75.
__________________
You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
Retired July '11 investments in very low cost index and mutual funds, balance once a year at best.
ducky911 is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 11:47 AM   #23
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Grand Junction
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducky911 View Post
Those are big numbers! didn't you pay a lot of taxes to enjoy this tax free gain in lieu of tax deferred gain.

State tax here in California is so high and I was always in a top bracket so I passed on this roth conversion.....Will be paying the price for it when I hit 72 or maybe 75.
Yes, these are big numbers, but that is how it worked out. Some years DW was able to contribute $16,000 post-tax/year to her 401K. The tax was the same if we did the post tax contribution or went out and spent the money on a new car. Either way we were taxed on our wages.
Mark1 is online now  
Old 09-16-2021, 12:01 PM   #24
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by newellcr View Post
Sunset,


If I read it right, according to the finance buff article, the conversions on pre-tax money are permissible until 2031 without restriction...

Yes, it looks like with income under $400k conversions will still be permitted to 2031. The big change is the elimination of all after-tax contributions to qualified plans like the 401k from 2022. Luckily this year I have already maxed out my after-tax 401k contributions and Mega backdoor it to my ROTH IRA.


If the bill passes I will have to change my investment plan IPS. Probably end up sending the ~$26k after-tax 401k contributions to my taxable brokerage account instead.
ExPatKiwi is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 12:04 PM   #25
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Tampa
Posts: 9,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I don't have a problem with any of those proposals.... the whole IRA program was intended to allow middle income taxpayers to save for retirement with an incentive of tax savings.

Given their very names, it should be obvious that the backdoors were not intended and should be closed and locked.

I also don't have any problems with restrictions on IRAs above certain limits.
Agree.
__________________
TGIM
Dtail is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 12:37 PM   #26
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExPatKiwi View Post
If the bill passes I will have to change my investment plan IPS. Probably end up sending the ~$26k after-tax 401k contributions to my taxable brokerage account instead.

Same here.

The blog article I posted above is pretty good about what you should do before 2022 if this becomes law. The main takeaway I got was to make sure you donít make any after-tax contributions in 2022, which probably means you have to stop contributions in late November since it usually takes a couple pay periods before the change goes into effect.
__________________
Eat, Drink and Be Merry.
tulak is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 01:52 PM   #27
Recycles dryer sheets
newellcr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 224
Here is a clip from a Bloomberg article today, link below. I kinda feel like I'm stoking discontent, but that isn't where I'm going with this. I just find it interesting...

"More than $279 billion sits in mega-IRAs, individual retirement accounts with at least $5 million each, according to Congressís nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. Despite rules designed to limit IRA contributions by the wealthy, almost 29,000 Americans hold these giant accounts, and nearly 500 of them somehow managed to get $25 million or more into their IRAs."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s?srnd=premium
newellcr is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 05:45 PM   #28
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 149
I see bit of "as long as they target people who make more than I do, is good with me" in this thread.

Sooner or later it will arrive at your door step as well. And here is one such nugget. Taxing ETFs:
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/16/demo...ded-funds.html


Snippet from the article:
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., has floated a new levy on exchange-traded funds to help pay for the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion budget package.

Exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, are baskets of assets — such as stocks or bonds — and can be bought or sold throughout the day like stock. While everyday investors don’t directly own the shares, a fund manager may buy or sell the underlying assets to financial institutions.
Regular investors typically avoid taxes while owning the fund because financial institutions can swap the underlying assets for others, known as an “in-kind” trade, which doesn’t trigger capital gains.

Wyden has called for ending the tax break for these in-kind transactions, according to the proposal, which may affect all investors across the $6.8 trillion U.S. exchange-traded fund industry
yhoomajor is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 06:55 PM   #29
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,979
Considering that federal government is spending "trillions", with more multi-trillion spending bills on the way, just how much tax do they think they will collect from all the punish the rich schemes? Someone above quoted $279 "billion" sitting in "mega-IRAs. Those are not going to generate taxes more than a mere fraction of only $1 trillion. I think "punish the rich" tax schemes are counter productive when all is said and done. My opinion.
__________________
Dreams Worth Dreaming are Dreams Worth Planning For. I Spent a Career Planning for Early Retirement.
RetireeRobert is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 08:21 PM   #30
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I don't have a problem with any of those proposals.... the whole IRA program was intended to allow middle income taxpayers to save for retirement with an incentive of tax savings.

Given their very names, it should be obvious that the backdoors were not intended and should be closed and locked.

I also don't have any problems with restrictions on IRAs above certain limits.
Agreed.
PatrickA5 is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 10:27 PM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 32,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetireeRobert View Post
Considering that federal government is spending "trillions", with more multi-trillion spending bills on the way, just how much tax do they think they will collect from all the punish the rich schemes? Someone above quoted $279 "billion" sitting in "mega-IRAs. Those are not going to generate taxes more than a mere fraction of only $1 trillion. I think "punish the rich" tax schemes are counter productive when all is said and done. My opinion.
Your "punishing the rich" is my adjust the program back to what it was intended to be to begin with. My read is that there is no punishment proposed, but that they will not allow these mega programs to get bigger.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 10:39 PM   #32
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,082
I'll never make anywhere close to $400K so it's not something that applies to me. However, the backdoor option never made sense to me. Why lock the front door but leave the back door wide open? Seems like the same rules should apply to both. You either qualify for contributions or you don't.

I've also never understood why IRA's are limited to $7000 contributions (over 50) but 401K's are allowed to contribute $19500? The same limits should apply to both. Why should I have a lower limit just because my employer doesn't offer a 401K?

Too many separate rules and loop holes.
mountainsoft is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 10:56 PM   #33
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
Your "punishing the rich" is my adjust the program back to what it was intended to be to begin with. My read is that there is no punishment proposed, but that they will not allow these mega programs to get bigger.
Call them "adjusting the program back", or call them "punishing the rich", whatever one calls them, the only possible amount of tax revenue potentially generated is but a shadow fraction of the trillions in spending and spending proposals being pushed.

And I do believe these "adjustments back" will be counter productive to the country economically in the long run anyway.
__________________
Dreams Worth Dreaming are Dreams Worth Planning For. I Spent a Career Planning for Early Retirement.
RetireeRobert is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 10:58 PM   #34
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 32,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetireeRobert View Post
Call them "adjusting the program back", or call them "punishing the rich", whatever one calls them, the only possible amount of tax revenue potentially generated is but a shadow fraction of the trillions in spending and spending proposals being pushed.

And I do believe these "adjustments back" will be counter productive to the country economically in the long run anyway.
Yes, but so what? What is your point? The proposals were not intended to generate trillions of dollars of revenue so you really don't have a point other than you don't like deficit spending... but that ship has sailed a long time ago.

On the last part, I think you are wrong... it won't make a rat's ass bit of difference.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 10:59 PM   #35
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Undisclosed
Posts: 816
Now that the Secure Act was passed, when the mega Roth and IRA holders die the funds pass to the surviving spouse but after the spousal death the funds typically have to be distributed within 10 years. So, I don't see the need to limit the growth of the Roth or IRA, unless they are worried the surviving spouse will remarry someone younger, who will remarry someone younger, etc. Passed down wealth doesn't typically last more than 3 generations anyway and I certainly don't see remarriages making the funds last longer either.
N02L84ER is online now  
Old 09-16-2021, 11:02 PM   #36
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
The proposals were not intended to generate trillions of dollars of revenue .........
Meaning the proposals are nothing more than "punish the rich" (my original point). Otherwise, why make them? They are not to generate revenue.
__________________
Dreams Worth Dreaming are Dreams Worth Planning For. I Spent a Career Planning for Early Retirement.
RetireeRobert is offline  
Old 09-16-2021, 11:51 PM   #37
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
Your "punishing the rich" is my adjust the program back to what it was intended to be to begin with. My read is that there is no punishment proposed, but that they will not allow these mega programs to get bigger.

I agree. This was meant as a way for normal wage earners to save money. Unfortunately it changed to something else. Iíve benefited, to a much lesser extent, and Iím ok if itís gone. Saving in a taxable account works too.
__________________
Eat, Drink and Be Merry.
tulak is offline  
Old 09-17-2021, 12:00 AM   #38
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetireeRobert View Post
Meaning the proposals are nothing more than "punish the rich" (my original point). Otherwise, why make them? They are not to generate revenue.

Well, do you think itís ok for someone to have tens of millions invested and never pay any taxes?

I donít think this is punishing anyone. This is closing a loophole that should have never existed. Punishing them would be taking back some of their gains, which isnít part of the proposal.

Personally, I think everyone should pitch in. But people with lots of money know how to be clever to keep more of their money.
__________________
Eat, Drink and Be Merry.
tulak is offline  
Old 09-17-2021, 05:51 AM   #39
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sarasota, FL & Vermont
Posts: 32,250
Quote:
Originally Posted by tulak View Post
... I donít think this is punishing anyone. This is closing a loophole that should have never existed. Punishing them would be taking back some of their gains, which isnít part of the proposal. ...
Spot on.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56
pb4uski is offline  
Old 09-17-2021, 07:44 AM   #40
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: The Great Wide Open
Posts: 3,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by tulak View Post
Well, do you think itís ok for someone to have tens of millions invested and never pay any taxes?

I donít think this is punishing anyone. This is closing a loophole that should have never existed. Punishing them would be taking back some of their gains, which isnít part of the proposal.

Personally, I think everyone should pitch in. But people with lots of money know how to be clever to keep more of their money.
Due to the SECURE Act, the gubmint will still get their money within 10 years of the owners death unless a spouse inherits. So what if it's grown to $10 million? or created by an clever omission?

There's a thread on here about "coping with change". When I started planning 40+ years ago, I used the rules "they" made. Now, because someone got their nose out of joint because of "income inequality" or "fairness", they want to change/punish those who followed the rules?
__________________
Give me Liberty or give me Death. Patrick Henry
Winemaker is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question re: Rollover from High-Fee 401K to IRA, and Possibly to Roth IRA Mo Money FIRE and Money 6 06-27-2015 03:27 PM
Dual W-2 earners - how to stop getting hosed on taxes? soupcxan FIRE and Money 84 02-10-2014 03:06 PM
Under-Earners Anonymous Jay_Gatsby FIRE and Money 8 12-02-2010 12:54 PM
Trad 401k or Roth 401k for High Earners Linney Young Dreamers 7 01-01-2007 08:24 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:58 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.