Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-06-2021, 10:21 AM   #141
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by pb4uski View Post
I get the same results but look at it a bit differently. The marginal tax on their RMD is $5,038... $0 tax without RMD vs $5,038 with RMD. The marginal income is the $37k RMD, so his marginal tax rate on the RMD is 13.6%.
It looks like they can keep some RMDs and pay no taxes so Time2 should probably not fully convert the tIRA. This is why I like to look at the deltas as well as full conversion to try to estimate how much to convert.

This is why it's impossible to say that you are going to get $X or Y% by converting as some people seem to be looking for. For some people it will be a lot, for others a little, and some should not convert, or only convert a little.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
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 03-06-2021, 10:23 AM   #142
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
If you are over 59 1/2 when you take the money out, you don't need to meet the 5 year rule for conversions. https://www.doughroller.net/retireme...a-conversions/. So you should be free to Roth convert today and withdraw next month if you want. Of course, you still have to pay the taxes on the conversion amount.



Thanks! I didn't know that!
meleana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 10:34 AM   #143
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 19,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
It looks like they can keep some RMDs and pay no taxes so Time2 should probably not fully convert the tIRA. This is why I like to look at the deltas as well as full conversion to try to estimate how much to convert.

This is why it's impossible to say that you are going to get $X or Y% by converting as some people seem to be looking for. For some people it will be a lot, for others a little, and some should not convert, or only convert a little.
Correct. I found with my model that changing the starting balance in the tIRA and the account growth assumptions would change the relative benefit of conversion. Among other things, that drives the RMD tax bracket, and the delta between the RMD rate and the rate at the time of conversion is what drives the size of the conversion benefit.

I haven't modeled everything, but my sense is that the most beneficial case is one where someone starts with a small enough tIRA balance, has no other taxable income (so that conversions can occur in the 10% and 12% brackets), and starts early enough so that the tIRA is completely converted prior to RMD age.

In our case, we are starting out in the 22% bracket due to other income and we are 62 and 60. So, even converting to the IRMAA threshold will only slow the growth of the tIRA. The balance will not drop until we are close to 90 and the RMDs get quite large. So our conversion benefit is small, as pb4uski posited.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 10:59 AM   #144
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: 32,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
It looks like they can keep some RMDs and pay no taxes so Time2 should probably not fully convert the tIRA. This is why I like to look at the deltas as well as full conversion to try to estimate how much to convert.

This is why it's impossible to say that you are going to get $X or Y% by converting as some people seem to be looking for. For some people it will be a lot, for others a little, and some should not convert, or only convert a little.
Agreed... I get that Time2 could have as much as $12.5k of RMDs assuming $10k of qualified dividends and pay no tax so that would be ~$312k tIRA at age 72. Add another $10k in RMD to $22.5k and the additional $10k attracts $1,843 in tax... which would be 18.4%.
__________________
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   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 02:27 PM   #145
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 682
@RunningBum We agree. You said there are no home runs with such low risk. I agree that Roth conversions are not a home run and have low risk. I see no gap in our perspective here.

@pb4uski I don't view asking an anonymous internet poster about their education and experience as questioning their credentials. It would be an error to assume that any one of us on this site has the same level of financial education, acumen or experience. Therefore I ask, rather than assume. It is a sign of respect that I would use if I was sitting across the table from anyone on this thread, drinking coffee and talking personal finance.

@pb4uski You mention "richer". This means a numerically higher net worth, correct? This is what your words mean to me. This means that the impact of a Roth conversion can be measured, in fact calculated. This is what I have been asking through this thread.

@SecondCor521 You suggest understanding things. I agree with you. Many people, including Socrates and myself, do this by asking questions. I have never retired before; it's a once-per-lifetime action for most people. So I come to this site with apparently knowledgeable people and ask questions. And when I don't understand the answer I ask more questions. Do you agree with this approach: asking questions when you don't understand what has been said or written?

Business case is precisely a term that can be applied to Roth conversions. A translation for business case is financial payoff, or payback, or breakeven, or NPV or FV. Hopefully people executing Roth conversions are of the belief they are "better off" by doing them. Business case can also be translated into "What's in it for me?", "Why am I doing this?", "Where's the beef?" and "Is the juice worth the squeeze?"

How much better off is what I am trying to understand. So far my calculations tell me I will not be much better off. But a little better off.
chassis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 05:04 PM   #146
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
SecondCor521's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boise
Posts: 6,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by chassis View Post
@SecondCor521 You suggest understanding things. I agree with you. Many people, including Socrates and myself, do this by asking questions. I have never retired before; it's a once-per-lifetime action for most people. So I come to this site with apparently knowledgeable people and ask questions. And when I don't understand the answer I ask more questions. Do you agree with this approach: asking questions when you don't understand what has been said or written?
Yes, I agree. However, my willingness to engage and help is based on whether the person asking questions appears to be listening and trying to understand better or just digging in and being argumentative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chassis View Post
Business case is precisely a term that can be applied to Roth conversions. A translation for business case is financial payoff, or payback, or breakeven, or NPV or FV. Hopefully people executing Roth conversions are of the belief they are "better off" by doing them. Business case can also be translated into "What's in it for me?", "Why am I doing this?", "Where's the beef?" and "Is the juice worth the squeeze?"
The first sentence here indicates to me that you are not trying to listen or learn, because you have simply reiterated what you have said before and have not asked any further questions seeking to understand.

As I have already said once before, you are using the term business case incorrectly, although the way you are misusing it is pretty common.
You're also using the other business terms sloppily. I understand exactly what you mean. However, the fact that you're not willing to listen means that I am going to wish you well but not help you any further until you show signs of being interested in learning rather than just arguing like a troll.
__________________
"At times the world can seem an unfriendly and sinister place, but believe us when we say there is much more good in it than bad. All you have to do is look hard enough, and what might seem to be a series of unfortunate events, may in fact be the first steps of a journey." Violet Baudelaire.
SecondCor521 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 06:27 PM   #147
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: 32,247
+1
__________________
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   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 06:43 PM   #148
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Cobra9777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,612
+2
__________________
Retired at 52 in July 2013. On to better things...
AA: 55% stock, 15% real estate, 27% bonds, 3% cash
WR: 2.7% SI: 2 pensions, some rental income, SS later
Cobra9777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 07:19 PM   #149
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 2,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by RunningBum View Post
Except you're not in the 12% marginal rate when taking RMDs. Every RMD dollar pushed 85 cents of additional social security being taxed. So instead of your marginal rate being 1x12%, it's really 1.85x12%, which is 22.2%.

Just to make sure we're thinking the same. I am in the 12% bracket now and you are writing about after we get SS and RMDs, correct?



Quote:
I quickly ran your numbers thru https://www.guidestone.org/resources...rs/tax/tax1040 . With $37K of RMDs you have $30,650 of SS taxed, and your total tax is $5038. If you could reduce this to $27K of RMDs, you have $22,150, and total tax of $2818. That's a $2220 difference of taxes.
Without looking, I'm guessing that RMD reduction drops me one tax bracket?



Quote:
This is part of the SS tax hump. Fortunately you would not be pushing any qualified dividends into being taxed, or the rate would be much higher, 49.95%.

This is what I meant earlier in this thread that people really should try to go through a little more effort to try to determine their real tax rate. It took me about a minute at that website to plug in your numbers. Might take you a few minutes to become familiar with it on your first run.
Yes, but knowing what the numbers in my accounts will be in 6 years is a bit of a guess.

Quote:
Does that mean you should convert more now, like to the top of 22%? Maybe, maybe not. There are other factors to consider like pushing qualified dividends into being taxed, ACA subsidies if you are using them, and IRMAA if you are 63 or older. Maybe some years to convert big, and some years you stay at the 12% cap with no QDivs taxed.


I don't know the number, that will push my qualified dividends to be taxed. But MFJ, only living on $50k and doing Roths, to the top of the 12% bracket (for now), What is the number that causes qualified dividends to be taxed?
No ACA subsidy, IRMAA is a lot higher income than I expect to have.


Quote:
Maybe I should add the disclaimer that I only have a finance minor and no professional experience in financial management.

Edited to add: You said you had $15K of interest and dividends. I put $5K of interest and $10K of total and qualified dividends in the tool. You may come out with different total tax numbers if those numbers are split differently, but the difference should still be $2220.
Actually, this year ended the interest payments, so things are a little different than stated, and my crystal ball does not see 2025 (SS) and 2027 RMDs very well and what my account gains will be then. I expect the tax deferred accounts will grow at about the same rate as I can Roth convert if I stay in the 12% bracket.[/quote]

As I said, we over saved, when we start SS and RMDs, that will be plenty for us, With RMDs 3.65% of our Tax deferred accounts, that drops us to under 2% WR for our total accounts.
We just need to learn to "blow that dough"
I appreciate your time and feedback.
Time2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 07:39 PM   #150
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,380
answers inline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Time2 View Post
Just to make sure we're thinking the same. I am in the 12% bracket now and you are writing about after we get SS and RMDs, correct?

Yes, I tried to make that clear by saying "When taking RMDs".


Without looking, I'm guessing that RMD reduction drops me one tax bracket?

No, not really. You're in the 12% bracket either way. It appears to be a lower bracket but what's really happening is that $10K reduction also keeps another $8500 of SS income from being taxed at 12%.

Yes, but knowing what the numbers in my accounts will be in 6 years is a bit of a guess.

I get that. IMO it's worth taking a reasonable guess than not including other factors like SS taxation at all.

I don't know the number, that will push my qualified dividends to be taxed. But MFJ, only living on $50k and doing Roths, to the top of the 12% bracket (for now), What is the number that causes qualified dividends to be taxed?
No ACA subsidy, IRMAA is a lot higher income than I expect to have.

Right now it's $80,800 for MFJ. It's indexed somehow to inflation, so it will slowly creep up but this is close enough.


...
I appreciate your time and feedback.
You're welcome.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 08:03 PM   #151
Dryer sheet aficionado
54andchange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tbd
Posts: 41
Long-term Roth skeptic here. I also believe, as one reply here already surmised, that roth threads largely are answered by Roth fans. I converted to Roth last year for the first time, stopping at the state retirement exemption level limit here, avoiding all state tax on the conversion. I may do a couple more years at the same level, but as I generally prefer maximizing compounding of equity gains by deferring tax payments as long as possible, I probably will not convert more. This article from Kiplinger's provides six reasons not to convert, which may or may not apply to your specific situation, but is good food for thought.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kip...nversion%3famp
54andchange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 08:43 PM   #152
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54andchange View Post
Long-term Roth skeptic here. I also believe, as one reply here already surmised, that roth threads largely are answered by Roth fans. I converted to Roth last year for the first time, stopping at the state retirement exemption level limit here, avoiding all state tax on the conversion. I may do a couple more years at the same level, but as I generally prefer maximizing compounding of equity gains by deferring tax payments as long as possible, I probably will not convert more. This article from Kiplinger's provides six reasons not to convert, which may or may not apply to your specific situation, but is good food for thought.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kip...nversion%3famp
Have you actually run a spreadsheet to see the end result of compounding the larger pre-tax amount in tax-deferred against the smaller post-tax amount in a Roth? I'll bet not, and you may be surprised at the answer. You should also run the spreadsheet with the conversion tax paid out of your taxable account, so that you can see what happens when you have even more money grow tax free.

The Kiplinger article is very fair, though I think all of those factors have been brought up in this thread. The OP covered the lower state tax effect (point #1). Note that the article doesn't include your rationale of compounding equity gains by deferring taxes, for good reason. #6 is a little weak because it takes a secondary advantage of Roth conversions and uses it as a negative for smaller estates. Roth conversions can be quite favorable even for smaller estates for other reasons. Still, a good write-up and everyone should consider these points, as well as all the possible reasons why Roth conversions can be advantageous. As the article concludes, "evaluate your situation from all angles".
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 08:46 PM   #153
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Out-to-Lunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 2,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54andchange View Post
Long-term Roth skeptic here. I also believe, as one reply here already surmised, that roth threads largely are answered by Roth fans. I converted to Roth last year for the first time, stopping at the state retirement exemption level limit here, avoiding all state tax on the conversion. I may do a couple more years at the same level, but as I generally prefer maximizing compounding of equity gains by deferring tax payments as long as possible, I probably will not convert more. This article from Kiplinger's provides six reasons not to convert, which may or may not apply to your specific situation, but is good food for thought.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kip...nversion%3famp
Gosh, I didn't know we had skeptics and fans. I thought we were all just sharing info on how best to manage the existing tax laws!

The article you referenced basically came down to two things: (1) tax-rate arbitrage (and don't convert when you are on the wrong side of that) and (2) one innumerate musing (from a CPA??).

Consider this quote from the article (emphases added):

Quote:
No. 2: If You Don’t Have Enough Cash or Savings to Pay the Conversion Tax


By converting to a Roth IRA, a person is paying tax on their IRA now instead of later in retirement. You shouldn’t plan to use funds from the traditional IRA to pay the tax since your new Roth IRA will have much less money. So, where will that money come from?

For example, assume you plan to convert a $100,000 traditional IRA to Roth and are in the 24% tax bracket. The $24,000 in taxes need to be paid now.

If $24,000 is withdrawn from a savings account to the pay the tax, your new Roth IRA will start with the same $100,000 it had before and will require no more taxes to be paid on distributions in the future. But if you pay the tax from the IRA funds being converted, your new Roth IRA will start with a balance of $76,000 — effectively handicapping it from the very beginning.
Do they really not understand the concepts of liabilities and disposable income? Or is this just random clickbait to fill up Kiplinger pages?
__________________
The closing years of life are like the end of a masquerade party, when the masks are dropped. -Arthur Schopenhauer, philosopher (1788-1860)
Out-to-Lunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 09:44 PM   #154
Dryer sheet aficionado
54andchange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Tbd
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Out-to-Lunch View Post
Gosh, I didn't know we had skeptics and fans.
Out to Lunch: you are rude and your behaviour sophomoric. Your sarcasm, as a belittling attack towards me, is uncalled for. If I say I am a Roth Skeptic, who are you to imply I am not, or that the position itself is invalid?

Yes, the Kiplinger piece could have better explained why paying conversion tax from say the source IRA is not optimal. I would have noted the 10% early withdrawal penalty under 59 1/2 for instance.
54andchange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 09:46 PM   #155
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54andchange View Post
Long-term Roth skeptic here. I also believe, as one reply here already surmised, that roth threads largely are answered by Roth fans. I converted to Roth last year for the first time, stopping at the state retirement exemption level limit here, avoiding all state tax on the conversion. I may do a couple more years at the same level, but as I generally prefer maximizing compounding of equity gains by deferring tax payments as long as possible, I probably will not convert more. This article from Kiplinger's provides six reasons not to convert, which may or may not apply to your specific situation, but is good food for thought.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kip...nversion%3famp
I read that article a week or so ago. Its mostly good. If the valid points of the article apply for a person asking a conversion question, youd see agreement out here. But the convert or not question largely has a numerical answer.

Im not wanting to pick on anyone, but @chassis has not helped by leaving out the numbers while disagreeing with the theory. Saying it doesnt work for me is too subjective. Maybe an extra $2000 per year on a $200k budget is noise. Or maybe the result is $200/yr savings and it truly is no big deal.
Sharing personal numbers is not for everyone. But when the question has a numerical answer, its necessary to be taken seriously.
thefist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 09:59 PM   #156
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Out-to-Lunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 2,551
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54andchange View Post
Out to Lunch: you are rude and your behaviour sophomoric. Your sarcasm, as a belittling attack towards me, is uncalled for. If I say I am a Roth Skeptic, who are you to imply I am not, or that the position itself is invalid?

Yes, the Kiplinger piece could have better explained why paying conversion tax from say the source IRA is not optimal. I would have noted the 10% early withdrawal penalty under 59 1/2 for instance.
Well, your message had its intended effect on me, because it was painful for me to read. In no way did I mean my comment as belittling you. I apologize that I sounded as if I did, sincerely. I really, really had never thought of Roth conversions as an issue where there were "sides." I had only thought of our discussions about them as trying to weigh situtations where they fit and where they didn't.
__________________
The closing years of life are like the end of a masquerade party, when the masks are dropped. -Arthur Schopenhauer, philosopher (1788-1860)
Out-to-Lunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 10:23 PM   #157
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54andchange View Post
Long-term Roth skeptic here. I also believe, as one reply here already surmised, that roth threads largely are answered by Roth fans. I converted to Roth last year for the first time, stopping at the state retirement exemption level limit here, avoiding all state tax on the conversion. I may do a couple more years at the same level, but as I generally prefer maximizing compounding of equity gains by deferring tax payments as long as possible, I probably will not convert more. This article from Kiplinger's provides six reasons not to convert, which may or may not apply to your specific situation, but is good food for thought.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kip...nversion%3famp
Yes, agree with this post. I'm a Roth skeptic at this point. And continuing to build and refine my model. 2% net worth improvement at age 91 is a marginal play.
chassis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2021, 11:01 PM   #158
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: 32,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54andchange View Post
.....but as I generally prefer maximizing compounding of equity gains by deferring tax payments as long as possible ...
Compounding of equity gains really isn't a relevant factor... it is totally a tax arbitrage play. Let's say that you have $10,000 in a tIRA and the relevant tax rate is 12% and investments double in 10 years.

If you convert and pay $1,200 in tax then you end up with $8,800 in the Roth and in 10 years it doubles to $17,600.

If you don't convert and the $10,000 doubles to $20,000 and you withdraw and pay 12%/$2,400 in tax then you have $17,600 to spend.

So you equity gains don't matter either way... what matters is if there is a difference in tax rates between today and tomorrow... which is nil in the example above.. so there is no particular benefit.

If you use the same example and the tax rate today is 12% but in 10 years will be 22% then if you convert you end up with $17,600 but if you don't convert you end up with $15,600...$20,000 * (1-22%)... so where your tax rate today is better than your tax rate later then you are better off to convert. It's that simple.

On the Kiplinger article, let's look at them:

No. 1: If You Will Be in a Lower Tax Bracket in Future Years... agreed... it's the inverse of what I was explaining above... if it is beneficial to convert when future rates are expected to be higher then it would obviously be disadvantageous to convert when future rates are expected to be lower.

No. 2: If You Don’t Have Enough Cash or Savings to Pay the Conversion Tax... I wouldn't agree and the example above proves that even if you pay the conversion tax from the conversion that you still come out ahead if your tax rate now is lower than your tax rate later. For many people, between ER and when pensions and SS start they will be in a lower tax rate than they will be once pensions and SS start.

No. 3: If You Might Need the Money Within Five Years or Less... no necessarily... if you are over 59 1/2 you can withdraw conversions out tax and penalty free... but if under 59 1/2 then I would agree.

No. 4: If You Plan to Leave Your IRA to a Charity... totally agree and we often refer to this... the reality is that many here have very significant tIRA balances that even with aggressive beneficial Roth conversions will still have significant balances left over for qualified charitable distributions.

No. 5: If Your Beneficiary Will Have a Lower Tax Bracket Than Yours... agreed and we often talk about this here as well. In my case DD and DSIL are in a higher tax bracket than we currently are but DS is in a lower tax bracket.

No. 6: If Your Estate Isn’t Large Enough... I'm not sure what their point is here but I haven't heard that people do conversions for estate tax benefits and it woudl rarely apply anyway... people do it for the income tax benefits.
__________________
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   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2021, 08:36 AM   #159
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 12,380
#2 makes sense if you are under 59.5 and don't have enough in taxable to pay the taxes, because you get hit with an early withdrawal penalty on the part you pay taxes with out of the conversion. But that's the only case where it's a bad idea. The author shows bias against conversion by talking about how much less money you have in your Roth by paying taxes out of the conversion (after 59.5) but that's a wash as pb4 shows at the top of the previous post. The author should have stuck with the under 59.5 and cash poor case because that's the only valid part of this point.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2021, 06:59 PM   #160
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Austin
Posts: 71
For later.
__________________
The church is near, but the road is icy. The bar is far, but I will walk carefully.
james22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Gift a Roth IRA? Bad Idea? travelover Other topics 4 02-19-2014 12:37 PM
Why Cancelling An Existing Whole Life Or Universal Life Policy May Be A Bad Idea mickeyd FIRE and Money 8 04-21-2013 11:26 AM
Roth IRA Conversion: Good Idea?? Relaxed Cajun FIRE and Money 19 03-05-2013 02:52 PM
Roth conversion for non-retirement taxable accounts idea Animorph FIRE and Money 13 03-31-2011 08:25 AM
Roth IRA Conversion: A Bad Bet? headingout FIRE and Money 51 11-07-2010 02:58 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:48 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.