- Joined
- Oct 13, 2010
- Messages
- 10,787
It seems to be fairly common for early retirees to manage their income number so that they qualify for the premium tax credit associated with PPACA. But how much is it really worth, in dollars? Of course everyone's situation is different, and some benefit more than others. Is it possible that limiting Roth conversions to come under the cliff, for instance, will actually cost you MORE in taxes once you get to the RMD range?
Presuming the ACA will persist roughly in it's current form, staying squarely in the analytical area and strictly away from the moral area of if it's "right", can we answer what tax advantage (or disadvantage) is expected across one's lifetime?
I think we can, but only if we convince James
Presuming the ACA will persist roughly in it's current form, staying squarely in the analytical area and strictly away from the moral area of if it's "right", can we answer what tax advantage (or disadvantage) is expected across one's lifetime?
I think we can, but only if we convince James
Does avoiding the ACA subsidy tax cliff really save much? That's the question that I think is important to have answered. Currently, a cliff-on vs. cliff-off i-orp run isn't quite apples to apples because a cliff-on run has a significant reduction in taxes for model years below age 65 that is not credited in the model. For me, $11K for 9 years. For people who will work to age 65 or those who can't qualify for the ACA, this feature would be of no value. But for those of us with years of ACA in our future, it would allow us to see if we really should bother with cliff avoidance.