target2019
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
There's a flow chart on this site built by a member.
I may even have it saved on my computer!
I may even have it saved on my computer!
There's a flow chart on this site built by a member.
I may even have it saved on my computer!
I guess that I look at it too simply. The funds that I have converted over the last 10 years were converted at about 10% on average ( a mix of 0%, 10% and 12%).
If I live long, I'll be paying a mix of 12% and 22% on RMDs, probably averaging about 18%.
If I die early and DW lives long, she will be paying more than that because she'll be filing as a single unless she remarries.
If we both die early, then our kids will be paying the tax. One kid has good income and is already in the 22% tax bracket and the other kid is already in the 12% tax bracket.
So for example, on my 2023 conversion I'll pay about 11.5%. Given all of the above, how can we (and our heirs) possibly not benefit?
It seems to me that no matter what the benefit will be positive, it is just a matter of degree. In some cases the benefit will be small and in others it might be substantial, only time will tell. It seems like a chance worth taking and I don't need no stinking payback analysis.
When people are doing their analysis, make sure you do a "what if 1 spouse dies" alternative.
Alternatively consider: what if one spouse dies and the survivor gets remarried to a person with much lower wealth and income?
Given all of the above, how can we (and our heirs) possibly not benefit?
DW & I both have 401ks. DW is the sole beneficiary of My 401k. I'm about to figure out how much roth conversion I can do for this year. DW does not yet have a Roth. We can convert hers or mine. It's all gonna be hers anyway. Is there any benefit for DW as the survivor, of converting some of mine or starting a Roth for DW and converting hers?
Let's assume that the $12k is cash so there is no basis difference or even you sold somehting at a capital gain to generate the $12k that the capital gains tax would be nil if you are in the 12% tax bracket for ordinary income. ....
Looking at the value of the $12k after 30 years in isolation:
With conversion: $51,863 = 12000*(1+5%)^30
No conversion: $43,671 = 12000*(1+5%*(1-12%))^30
Taxes avoided as a result of conversions: $8,192
If the $12k didn't effectively end up in the Roth then there would be no additional benefit.
Get it now?
Another retired CPA. Have NOT done Roths because I have been doing the ACA game. Quite successfully.
Not Z3Dreamer but he is not doing big Roth conversions to keep income low the benefit from ACA health insurance premium subsidies... typically until the you turn 65 and go on Medicare.Can you provide a bit more detail here? Thanks.
Not Z3Dreamer but he is not doing big Roth conversions to keep income low the benefit from ACA health insurance premium subsidies... typically until the you turn 65 and go on Medicare.
Can you provide a bit more detail here? Thanks.
If you are already taking pensions that meet your spending, you probably aren't really in a position to benefit from Roth conversions. So don't. It's not one-size-fits-all.
We are 69 and 67. Our pensions plus Social Security plus dividends (etc.) thrown off by mutual funds put us into the middle 22% bracket -- even before I take SS next year. Conversions don't make a lot of sense for us, IMHO.
I would agree with RunningBum. We are in a similar situation to you where we find ourselves at lower end of the 22% bracket today with only one SS today. In 3 years we will add 2nd SS and move to higher end of 22%. I'm converting to IRMAA limits. In my mind, even if I pay 22% today and 22% tomorrow that money paid in taxes isn't mine today, it only takes the gummt share out of our account. Do you see any chance of taxes being reduced when you start SS and start RMDs ? Why not convert up to IRMAA limit (about $194K for 2023) ? Not questioning your decision, just want to ensure I understand why you won't convert if it would save you paying more taxes in the future.So if you're in the middle of the 22% bracket now without SS, will you still be in the 22% bracket when you start SS and have to take RMDs? The difference between 22% and 24% isn't that much, but those brackets could revert back to 25% and 28% in 2026 where it becomes a little more. I would be looking to convert to the top of 22% or to the edge of an IRMAA tier if I were you. If you don't want to bother with it, that's your business, but to say it doesn't make a lot of sense really doesn't seem true. In my opinion "won't make a big difference" is not the same as "don't make a lot of sense".
We are 69 and 67. Our pensions plus Social Security plus dividends (etc.) thrown off by mutual funds put us into the middle 22% bracket -- even before I take SS next year. Conversions don't make a lot of sense for us, IMHO.
The only argument I've seen that I considered seriously is preparing for widow(er)-hood, when one of us will be vaulted up into the tax bracket stratosphere. I've decided that's far enough off to not be a worry now. I-ORP (before it went dormant) agreed with me -- the difference between aggressive Roth conversions and none at all was very minor (a few $1000 per year).
In other words, we have too much income -- not the worst situation.
I can see the value of conversions if your pre-RMD / pre-SS income is in the 12% bracket, and you'll be pushed up when those income sources hit.
So In my opinion "won't make a big difference" is not the same as "don't make a lot of sense".