Roth 401(k)s are gaining prominence as a tax-advantaged workplace retirement account. This post provides introductory information regarding Roth 401(k)s and their potential benefits as a retirement savings account.
Two important introductory notes. First, not all 401(k) plans offer a Roth option, so for some employees, a Roth 401(k) contribution is not an option. Second, this post is for educational purposes only and is not advice for any particular taxpayer.
Traditional 401(k) versus Roth 401(k)
In an ideal world, contributions by an employee to a traditional 401(k) result in a tax deduction when contributed, and taxable income when withdrawn.
Example 1: Tony makes $100,000 from his employer in W-2 wages in 2021. Tony contributes $15,000 during the course of 2021 to his employer’s traditional 401(k). Tony will receive a W-2 from his employer reporting $85,000 of taxable W-2 wages for 2021.
In an ideal world, contributions by an employee to a Roth 401(k) result in no tax deduction when contributed, and no taxable income when withdrawn.
Example 2: Rudy makes $100,000 from his employer in W-2 wages in 2021. Rudy contributes $15,000 during the course of 2021 to his employer’s Roth 401(k). Rudy will receive a W-2 from his employer reporting $100,000 of taxable W-2 wages for 2021.
Roth 401(k) Contributions
Employees can contribute the lesser of their earned income or $19,500 (2021 limit) to a Roth 401(k) in “employee deferrals.” For those 50 years old or older, the 2021 limit is the lesser of earned income or $26,000.
The employee deferral limit factors in both traditional 401(k) employee contributions and Roth 401(k) employee contributions. Here’s an illustrative example.
Example 3: Sarah, age 35, earns $100,000 in W-2 income in 2021 at Acme Industries, Inc. Sarah contributes the maximum to her 401(k) plan. Assuming Acme offers both a traditional 401(k) and a Roth 401(k), that maximum $19,500 contribution can be split up however Sarah chooses ($13,000 to the traditional 401(k) and $6,500 to the Roth 401(k), $5,000 to the traditional 401(k) and $14,500 to the Roth 401(k), etc.).
Any combination (including all in the traditional or all in the Roth) is permissible as long as the total does not exceed $19,500 (using 2021’s limits).
Roth 401(k) Contributions: Income Limits
There’s good news here. Unlike their Roth IRA cousins, Roth 401(k) contributions have no income limits. In theory, one could make $1 billion annually in W-2 income and still contribute $19,500 to a Roth 401(k).
Matching Contributions
Employer matching contributions are one of the best benefits of 401(k) plans.
Example 4: Elaine, age 35, works at Perry Publishing. She earns a salary of $50,000. Perry matches 50% of the first 6% of salary that Elaine contributes to her 401(k). Elaine decides to contribute $3,000 (6 percent) of her salary to the 401(k) as a Roth contribution. Perry contributes $1,500 as a matching contribution. The $1,500 employer match goes into the 401(k) as a traditional contribution. The $3,000 and its growth are treated as a Roth 401(k), and the $1,500 and its growth are treated as a traditional 401(k).
Matching contributions may be subject to vesting requirements, as described in this post. Employee contributions to a 401(k) (whether traditional or Roth) are always 100% vested.
Roth 401(k) Withdrawals
The greatest benefits of a Roth 401(k) are tax-free growth and tax-free withdrawals. Tax-free withdrawals are generally the goal, but they are not automatic. Recently, I wrote a post on Roth 401(k) withdrawals.
One important consideration regarding Roth 401(k) withdrawals: Roth 401(k)s are subject to the required minimum distribution rules starting at age 72. Thus, you must start withdrawing money from a Roth 401(k) at age 72. As a result, you will have less wealth growing tax-free. For this reason, many consider rolling Roth 401(k)s to Roth IRAs prior to age 72.
Conclusion
Roth 401(k)s provide a great opportunity to save and invest for retirement. Taxpayers should consider their own circumstances, and often consult with tax professionals, in deciding their own investment program.
Further Reading
For more information about 401(k) plans, please read this post.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial planner! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, investment, legal, and tax matters.Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
We live in a Roth IRA world (or, at least I wish we did). We also live in a world where increasing numbers of people invest through a Roth 401(k).
The Roth 401(k) is still a relatively new account. Taxpayers and practitioners alike are still learning its contours. Things get even more complicated when you roll money from a workplace Roth 401(k) to a Roth IRA.
To get our feet wet, first I will illustrate the ordering rules for withdrawals from a Roth IRA. Then we will explore withdrawals from a Roth 401(k).
Note that much of this post discusses withdrawals before age 59 ½. In most cases, it is not wise to take a withdrawal from a retirement account before age 59 ½ unless (a) there is an emergency or (b) it is part of a well crafted financial plan.
Watch me discuss Roth 401(k) withdrawals.
Default Rule for Roth IRA Withdrawals: The Layers
Unless the distribution qualifies as a “qualified distribution” (see below), amounts come out of Roth IRAs in layers. Only after one layer has been exhausted can the next layer come out.
Here is the order of distributions that come out of a Roth IRA:
Second Layer: Roth IRA conversions (first-in, first-out)
Third Layer: Roth IRA earnings
Here’s a brief example:
Example 1: Steve has made five $5,000 contributions to his Roth IRA in previous years. He also made a $10,000 conversion from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA in 2014. In 2021, at a time when his Roth IRA is worth $60,000 and Steve is 45 years old, he takes a $10,000 withdrawal from his Roth IRA. All $10,000 will be a recovery of his previous contributions (leaving him with $15,000 remaining of previous contributions). Thus, the entire distribution from the Roth IRA will be tax and penalty free.
The Roth IRA contributions come out tax and penalty free at any time for any reason!
A qualified distribution from a Roth IRA is usually one where the account holder both (i) has owned a Roth IRA for at least 5 years and (ii) is at least 59 ½ years old. If either condition is not satisfied, the default layering rules described above apply. Qualified distributions from a Roth IRA are tax and penalty free regardless of the layers inside the Roth IRA.
See page 31 of IRS Publication 590-B for more information about qualified distributions from Roth IRAs.
Roth 401(k) Withdrawals
First, a practical note: employers may restrict in-service Roth 401(k) withdrawals before age 59 1/2. Consider that before thinking about how the tax rules apply to withdrawals.
Default Rule: Cream-in-the-Coffee
Generally speaking, Roth 401(k)s have (1) investment in the contract (“IITC”), which is generally previous contributions and conversions and (2) earnings.
Unlike the sequenced layering of Roth IRA withdrawals, Roth 401(k) withdrawals generally default to what Ed Slott refers to as the “cream-in-the-coffee” rule (see Choate — discussed below, page 140).
As a result, withdrawals default to carrying out both some IITC and some earnings. Here’s an example:
Example 2: Lilly has made five $6,000 contributions to her Roth 401(k) in previous years. She also made a $10,000 conversion from a traditional 401(k) to her Roth 401(k) in 2014. In 2021, at a time when her Roth 401(k) is worth $60,000 and Lilly is 45 years old, she takes a $10,000 withdrawal from her Roth 401(k). Two-thirds ($6,667, computed as the fraction $40,000 divided by $60,000 times the withdrawal) of the $10,000 will be a recovery of her IITC (entirely tax and penalty free), and one-third ($3,333, computed as the fraction $20,000 divided by $60,000 times the withdrawal) of the $10,000 will be earnings, which are subject to both ordinary income taxation and a 10 percent penalty.
Quick Thought: Had Lilly’s Roth conversion occurred in 2017 or later, the portion attributable to the conversion ($1,667) would be subject to the 10 percent early withdrawal penalty (but not to ordinary income taxation).See Section 402A(c)(4)(D) and Section 408A(d)(3)(F). Note an earlier version had “2018 or earlier” where the bolded words are in error. I regret the error.
Quick Thought: The cream-in-the-coffee rule does not factor in amounts in traditional 401(k) accounts, even if they are within the same 401(k) plan.
Solving the Cream-in-the-Coffee Issue
We see that the cream-in-the-coffee rule has bad effects. It does not allow exclusive access to tax-favored amounts when there are non-tax favored amounts in an account. So what to do? There are three primary exceptions to the cream-in-the-coffee rule.
Exception 1: Wait for a Qualified Distribution
The cream-in-the-coffee rule can be waited out.
A qualified distribution from a Roth 401(k) is a withdrawal that occurs when the owner is age 59 ½ (see Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.402A-1 Q&A 2(b)(2)) and has had that particular Roth 401(k) account for five years (see Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.402A-1 Q&A 2(b)(1) and Q&A 4). Other qualified distributions can occur upon death or disability (if the 5 year test is satisfied), but for our purposes, we will assume for the rest of the article that any qualified distributions are qualified distributions occurring at or after age 59 ½ and after five years of ownership.
The owner of a Roth 401(k) who qualifies for a qualified distribution does not need to roll the Roth 401(k) to a Roth IRA to take a tax free withdrawal. Once the owner qualifies for a qualified distribution he or she can simply withdraw amounts from the Roth 401(k) tax-free.
However, as a practical matter, it is often the case that Roth 401(k)s are rolled into Roth IRAs (for several reasons). If the rollover from the Roth 401(k) to the Roth IRA would qualify as a qualified distribution if taken directly, then the entire amount in the Roth 401(k) (IITC and earnings) goes into the Roth IRA as a contribution. Ian Berger discussed this issue in an August 11, 2022 response to a question. His answer applies the rule in Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.408A-10 Q&A 3 (the sentence beginning with “Thus,”).
Up to the amount rolled into the Roth IRA can be distributed tax and penalty free. So long as the taxpayer has met the 5 year rule with respect to any Roth IRA, any future earnings beyond the amount rolled in can be withdrawn tax free at any time.
Quick Thought: I would be remiss if I didn’t insert the standard tax planner advice that rollovers from Roth 401(k)s to Roth IRAs are best accomplished through a direct trustee-to-trustee transfer.
There is one five year rule nuance to consider. If the taxpayer has never had a Roth IRA, he or she must wait 5 years (regardless of their age) to access later earnings generated by rollover contribution tax free. Here’s a quick example:
Example 3: John is 60 years old. He has never had a Roth IRA. He has had a Roth 401(k) with his employer for over five years. He has made $100,000 of contributions to the Roth 401(k) which has grown to $200,000. He does not need to roll his Roth 401(k) into a Roth IRA to take out money entirely tax and penalty free.
If John chooses to roll all $200,000 in his Roth 401(k) into a Roth IRA, all $200,000 goes into the Roth IRA as a contribution. If John withdraws more than $200,000 from the new Roth IRA before the Roth IRA turns 5 years old, those withdrawals of new earnings would be subject to income tax (though, of course, penalty free since John is over 59 ½ years old).
As a practical matter, as long as the taxpayer does not plan on withdrawing more than the rolled over amount in the first five years, this nuance is not likely to be a gating issue in determining whether the Roth 401(k) should be rolled over to a Roth IRA.
Exception 2: Roth 401(k) Rollover then Withdraw
The second strategy to overcome the cream-in-the-coffee rule is to rollover the Roth 401(k) to a Roth IRA without waiting.
If either the taxpayer is less than 59 ½ years old and/or has not held that particular Roth 401(k) for at least five years, the nonqualified distribution rules apply to the rollover. The Roth 401(k) goes into the Roth IRA as “contributions” to the extent of the IITC in the Roth 401(k), and as “earnings” to the extent of growth in the Roth 401(k).
Recall the example of Lilly above. Here is how it changes if she rolls the Roth 401(k) into a Roth IRA and then takes the withdrawal.
Example 4: Lilly has made five $6,000 contributions to her Roth 401(k) in previous years. She also made a $10,000 conversion from a traditional 401(k) to her Roth 401(k) in 2014. In 2021, at a time when her Roth 401(k) is worth $60,000 and Lilly is 45 years old, she rolls her Roth 401(k) over to a Roth IRA (her first ever). A month later, Lilly takes a $10,000 withdrawal from her Roth IRA. All $10,000 will be a recovery of her previous contributions (leaving her with $30,000 remaining of previous contributions). Thus, the entire withdrawal will be tax and penalty free.
While rollovers of nonqualified distributions do not eliminate Roth 401(k) earnings, they do eliminate the cream-in-the-coffee rule. As a result, Roth 401(k) to Roth IRA rollovers often make sense.
The Five Year Roth Earnings Rule
Where such rollovers can be disadvantageous is the five year rule as applied to earnings. Recall that being age 59 ½ is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to withdrawing Roth earnings tax free. You also need to meet a 5 year rule.
If you have a Roth 401(k) that is 5 years old but have never had any Roth IRA, and you are less than 5 years away from attaining age 59 ½, rolling into a Roth IRA could subject withdrawals of earnings (after age 59 ½) in excess of IITC to ordinary income taxation. That said, often withdrawals do not exhaust contributions in the first five years after a rollover. Thus, often this will not be a gating issue.
Exception 3: Roth 401(k) Withdrawal then Rollover
There is a third way to overcome the cream-in-the-coffee rule. It is to take a withdrawal from the Roth 401(k) and then rollover the earnings component to a Roth IRA. Let’s see how that would affect Lilly:
Example 5: Lilly needs $10,000 and has decided to access it from her Roth 401(k). Lilly has made five $6,000 contributions to her Roth 401(k) in previous years. She also made a $10,000 conversion from a traditional 401(k) to her Roth 401(k) in 2014. In 2021, at a time when her Roth 401(k) is worth $60,000 and Lilly is 45 years old, Lilly takes a $15,000 withdrawal from her Roth 401(k). Based on her Roth 401(k) consisting of two-thirds IITC and one-third earnings, $5,000 of the withdrawal is taxable and subject to an early withdrawal penalty. However, Lilly can, within 60 days, rollover the $5,000 of earnings into a Roth IRA. The earnings will go into the Roth IRA as earnings, and Lilly avoids the tax and penalty on the withdrawal.
Note that if Lilly does this partial rollover, the rollover piece is not subject to the cream-in-the-coffee rule. The partial rollover attracts earnings before attracting any IITC (see Treasury Regulation Section 1.402A-1 Q&A 5).
Note further that if Lilly has no other Roth IRAs, she now has a Roth IRA that consists only of earnings. She will not (generally speaking) be able to touch this Roth IRA without ordinary income tax and a penalty until age 59 ½.
As a practical matter, the “withdraw then rollover” strategy may not be available to Lilly. The 401(k) plan may not allow partial distributions pre-age 59 1/2 after separation from service.
Coordination with the Rule of 55
Many like the Rule of 55, which is a rule that allows taxpayers to take amounts from workplace retirement plans such as 401(k)s without the early withdrawal penalty. It applies when a taxpayer separates from service at age 55 or older (up to age 59 ½, when withdrawals become penalty free), and the plan allows partial withdrawals.
So the question becomes, if you are in the 4.5 year Rule of 55 window (ages 55 to 59 ½) and you separate from service, should you leave a Roth 401(k) in the plan or roll it into a Roth IRA if you need to withdraw from it? Let’s consider an example.
Example 6: James is 56 years old and leaves his employment. He has contributed $100,000 over more than five years to his Roth 401(k), and it is currently worth $200,000. If he keeps the amounts in the Roth 401(k), every dollar he takes out will be half recovery of IITC (tax-free) and half a withdrawal of earnings (taxable, but qualifies for a penalty exception). If, instead, James follows the “rollover then withdraw” strategy and rolls his Roth 401(k) to a Roth IRA, the first $100,000 he withdraws before age 59 ½ will be a return of contributions, and only if he exceeds $100,000 in withdrawals will he have ordinary income and a penalty. A second option for James would be to do the “withdraw then rollover” strategy whereby James would direct half of each distribution (the earnings half) to a Roth IRA in order to avoid ordinary income taxation on the earnings portion.
This illustrates that numbers matter in this regard. It also shows that as long as the pre-age 59 ½ withdrawals will be less than the previous Roth 401(k) contributions, it is generally better to take the withdrawals from a rollover Roth IRA than from a Roth 401(k) penalty protected by the Rule of 55.
However, if one employs the “withdraw then rollover” strategy, keeping money in the Roth 401(k) can work as effectively as rolling over to a Roth IRA.
A Note on Rollovers
Any designated Roth account (401(k), 403(b), and/or 457) can be rolled into a Roth IRA. Designated Roth accounts can be rolled into other designated Roth accounts, though note there can some be some complexity in this regard.
Roth IRAs cannot be rolled into a designated Roth account, including a Roth 401(k).
The IRS has a handy rollover chart accessible here.
SECURE 2.0 Update
SECURE 2.0 makes three changes relating to Roth 401(k)s. First, it eliminates required minimum distributions (“RMDs”) from Roth 401(k)s during the owner’s lifetime. This change has little practical effect, as many Roth 401(k)s will ultimately be rolled to Roth IRAs anyway in order for the owner to obtain more investment choice and control of the account.
Second, SECURE 2.0 mandates that beginning in 2024, employee catch-up contributions to 401(k) accounts must be Roth contributions if the employee made more than $145,000 in wages the prior year.
Third, SECURE 2.0 allows employer contributions to Roth 401(k)s.
I suspect that based on the second and third changes, more employers may offer Roth 401(k)s in addition to traditional 401(k)s.
Further Reading
For those interested in seeing more information on distributions out of Roth IRAs after rollovers of Roth 401(k)s, please see Treasury Regulation Sec. 1.408A-10. For more information on rollovers of distributions from Roth 401(k)s into Roth IRAs, please see Treasury Regulation Sec. 1.402A-1.
The rules around Roth 401(k)s are complex, and different than those applicable to Roth IRAs. This blog post only presents an educational introduction to those rules. Taxpayers should exercise extra caution, and often consult with tax professionals, before moving money out of a Roth 401(k).
FI Tax Guy can be your financial planner! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, investment, legal, and tax matters.Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
It won’t surprise many to find out that a tax-focused financial planner is fond of the Roth IRA. Below is a brief review of the advantages of a Roth IRA.
Tax Free Growth
Amounts in Roth IRAs grow tax free. Considering many Americans may now live into their 80s, 90s, and beyond, this is a tremendous benefit.
The only caveat is that in order for all distributions from Roth IRAs to be tax and penalty free, they generally have to be either (a) a return of contributions or of sufficiently aged conversions (see below), or (b) a distribution of earnings made in the Roth IRA (or other amounts in the Roth IRA) at a time when the owner of the account is 59 ½ or older and has owned a Roth IRA for at least five years.
The rules for ordering distributions out of a Roth IRA generally provide that contributions come out first, and then the oldest conversions come out next. This means that in many cases Roth IRA distributions, even those occurring before age 59 ½, are tax and penalty free.
N.B. Generally speaking, you want to only take a distribution from a Roth IRA before age 59 ½ if it is either (i) a serious emergency or (ii) part of a well crafted, very intentional financial plan.
Ease of Administration and Withdrawal
There are many financial institutions that provide Roth IRAs. Investment expenses in low-cost index funds at financial institutions that provide Roth IRAs are approaching zero. Vanguard, Fidelity, and Schwab are among the very good providers of low-cost Roth IRAs (and there are others).
It is also relatively easy to access money inside a Roth IRA. This makes the Roth IRA a great account to have in an emergency. Of course, it is generally best to leave money inside a Roth IRA to let it grow tax free, but it is good to know that you can access money in a Roth IRA relatively easily if an emergency arises.
Tax Free Withdrawals of Contributions
This is a great benefit of the Roth IRA. Contributions to a Roth IRA can be withdrawn at any time for any reason tax and penalty free. Further, the first money deemed distributed from a Roth IRA is a contribution. Here is a quick example:
Mark is 35 years old in 2025. He made $6,000 contributions to his Roth IRA in each of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024 (for $30,000 total). In 2025, when his Roth IRA is worth $41,000, Mark withdraws $10,000 from his Roth IRA in 2025. All $10,000 will be deemed to be a return of contributions, and thus entirely tax free and penalty free.
The only exception is a taxpayer favorable exception: a timely withdrawal of an excess contribution (and related earnings) occurs before regular contributions are considered withdrawn.
N.B. Roth 401(k)s, 403(b)s, and 457s have different distribution rules — most pre-age 59 ½ distributions will take out some taxable earnings.
Tax Free Withdrawals of Sufficiently Aged Converted Amounts
If you convert an amount into a Roth IRA, you start a five year clock as of January 1st of the year of the conversion. Quick example:
Mike is 35 years old in 2025. Mike converts $10,000 from a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA on July 2, 2025. His five year conversion clock starts January 1, 2025. On January 1, 2030, Mike can withdraw the entire $10,000 he converted in 2025 tax and penalty free.
This feature of the Roth IRA, the tax free withdrawal of sufficiently aged conversions, is the basis for the Roth Conversion Ladder strategy. Sufficiently aged converted amounts are deemed to come out after contributions are exhausted and before more recent conversions and earnings come out.
No Required Minimum Distributions
During an account holder’s lifetime, there are no required minimum distributions from a Roth IRA. You can live to 150 and never be required to take money from a Roth IRA.
Creditor Protection
In federal bankruptcy proceedings, Roth IRAs are (as of 2024), protected up to $1,512,350.
Where there can be differences in liability protection are state general creditor claims (i.e., creditor protection in non-bankruptcy situations). In some states, Roth IRAs receive a level of creditor protection similar to that of ERISA plans. Generally, such protection is absolute against all creditors except for an ex-spouse or the IRS.
In other states, Roth IRAs receive no or limited creditor protection. In my home state of California, Roth IRAs are only creditor protected up to the amount necessary to provide for you and your dependents in your retirement (as determined by the court). Such protection is valuable but hardly airtight.
A Sneaky Way to Contribute More to Your Retirement
Yes, in theory everyone should save for retirement based on exacting calculations (i.e., I estimate I need $X in retirement, so based on projections I save $A in traditional accounts and $B in Roth accounts this year). That’s the theory.
In practice, it’s “I maxed out this account and that account” or “I put $C into this account and $D into that account.” There isn’t that much wrong with how we practically save for retirement, as long as we are saving sufficient amounts for retirement.
But not all “maxing out” is created equal. We know this because if Jane has $100,000 in a traditional IRA and Mary has $100,000 in a Roth IRA, who has more wealth? Mary! Unless Jane can always be in a zero percent income tax bracket, Mary has more than Jane, even though they both nominally have $100,000.
A Great Account to Leave to Heirs
While non-spouse heirs will have to take taxable required distributions from inherited IRAs (in many cases beginning in 2020 they will need to drain the account within 10 years of death), heirs are never taxed on distributions from Roth IRAs. This makes a Roth IRA a great account to leave to your heirs.
Compare with Other Retirement Accounts
No other retirement account combines ease of administration and withdrawal, low costs, significant tax benefits, creditor protection, and great emergency access the way the Roth IRA does. Most workplace retirement plans have some restrictions on withdrawals. Traditional account withdrawals do not have the tax advantages of a Roth IRA. Distributions from a traditional IRA, even one at a low-cost, easy to use discount brokerage, will trigger ordinary income taxes, and possible penalties, if withdrawn for emergency use.
Financial Planning Objectives
Personal finance is indeed personal. But I submit the following: pretty much every individual has some desire (and/or need) to not work at some point in his/her lifetime and every individual needs to be prepared for emergencies. Further, these are two very important financial planning objectives for most, if not all, individuals.
If the above is true, then we must ask “which account type best supports the combination of these two pressing financial planning objectives?” It appears to me that the answer is clearly the Roth IRA.
None of this is to say that a Roth IRA is the only way to plan for retirement and plan for emergencies, but rather, it is to say that, generally speaking, a Roth IRA ought to be a material element in such planning. Other tools, such as other retirement accounts, insurances, investments in taxable accounts, and sufficiently funded emergency funds are likely needed in addition to a Roth IRA.
Retirement Accounts and Emergencies
Let’s examine how a Roth IRA might help someone facing a very serious emergency.
Picture Jack, who is 52 years old, and has a full time job. He has $1M in a traditional 401(k) and $10,000 in cash in a taxable account. That’s it. Then picture Chuck, also 52 with a full time job. Chuck has $700,000 in a traditional 401(k), $250,000 in a Roth IRA, and $10,000 in cash.
Who is better situated to deal with an emergency? Far and away the answer is Chuck. 401(k)s are difficult to access in an emergency. First of all, the 401(k) plan might not allow in-service distributions, and it might not allow taking out a loan.
Even if the 401(k) allows in-service distributions, distributions from 401(k)s are immediately taxable, and often subject to penalties (10% federal, 2.5% in California, for example) if you are under age 59 ½. Loans, while not immediately taxable, can become taxable if not paid back.
Long story short, a 401(k) may be a tough nut to crack in an emergency.
What about a Roth IRA? In Chuck’s case, he can access his prior Roth IRA contributions and sufficiently aged contributions tax and penalty free at any time for any reason! And his Roth IRA is easy to access, particularly if it is at a low-cost discount brokerage.
When you combine tax-free growth, no requirement to take required minimum distributions during the account holder’s lifetime, and the best emergency access of any tax-advantaged retirement account, it is difficult to see why working adults should not have at least some money in a Roth IRA.
When a Roth IRA Doesn’t Make Sense
The short answer is: not often! I struggle to come up with profiles of individuals that would not benefit from having some amount in a Roth IRA.
I can think of two profiles. The first, a rare case, is someone with very large legal liabilities such that all of their wealth would benefit from the creditor protections offered by an ERISA retirement plan (such as a 401(k)) and who needs almost all of their wealth shielded from creditors.
First, if you have built up 6 figures or more in wealth, having creditors able to claim your entire wealth is relatively rare. Second, in most cases, good insurance coverage, including adequate medical insurance, professional liability insurance (as applicable), home and automobile insurance, and personal umbrella liability insurance, should protect the vast majority of people such that they could withstand any liability exposure caused by having money in a Roth IRA instead of an ERISA protected plan.
The second profile is someone with incredibly high income currently and very little anticipated income in the future (such that their future tax rate is much lower than today’s rate). This too is a bit of a unicorn – people with high income today tend to have decent income tomorrow (even in the FI community).
Health Savings Accounts
It will also come as no surprise that I am fond of health savings accounts. Health savings accounts share some of the attributes that make the Roth IRA such a winner for both retirement savings and emergency planning.
But, there are some drawbacks. First, the distribution ordering rules are not as taxpayer friendly. While it may be the case that you have sufficient old medical expenses that you can reimburse yourself for (and thus not pay tax and a penalty on the HSA distribution), that is not always going to be the case, and even if it is, does add a layer of complexity.
Second, the HSA is not for everyone. If a high deductible health plan is not good medical insurance for you, an HSA is generally off the table.
So, that leaves the HSA as a fantastic option for those who qualify for and use a high deductible health plan (and usually an option that should be part of a comprehensive financial plan if you use a HDHP). But it also means that the HSA is not quite as good as a tool for the combination of retirement saving and emergency planning.
Conclusion
Assuming that an individual (a) has retirement planning and emergency preparedness as financial planning objectives and (b) is not in a position where legal liabilities would cripple them without ERISA creditor protection, it is hard to argue against having at least some material amount in a Roth IRA.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial planner! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, investment, legal, and tax matters.Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
Perhaps you find yourself preparing your 2020 tax return in early April 2021.You have not contributed anything to a traditional IRA or a Roth IRA yet for 2020. Do you have time to perhaps do a Roth IRA or a Backdoor Roth IRA? The answer is, “Absolutely!” if you have the right facts in place. Let’s discuss a comprehensive example:
Example 1: Jack is single, 35 years old, participates in a 401(k) at work, and has self-prepared his 2020 tax return but not yet filed it. It is April 9, 2021, and his tax-return software indicates that he does not qualify for a Roth IRA, as his modified adjusted gross income for 2020 is $150,000. Jack has no traditional IRAs, SEP IRAs, or SIMPLE IRAs. Jack just learned about the existence of the Backdoor Roth IRA.
What can Jack do? Can he do a Backdoor Roth IRA for 2020? The answer is, Yes!
First, Jack should, by April 15, 2021, make a traditional, non-deductible IRA contribution of $6,000. When he does this, he should designate the contribution as being for 2020. With his soon-to-be-filed 2020 federal income tax return, he should file a Form 8606 which will report the $6,000 traditional, non-deductible IRA contribution. Easy enough.
Assuming Jack contributed to his 2020 traditional, non-deductible IRA in April 2021, in May of 2021 Jack should convert the entire balance in his traditional IRA to a Roth IRA. Third, he should ensure he has no balance in traditional IRAs/SEP IRAs/SIMPLE IRAs as of December 31, 2021.
Jack can also do a Backdoor Roth IRA for 2021, which may be advisable if (a) his modified adjusted gross income exceeds the Roth IRA contribution thresholds and (b) he will have no balance in traditional IRAs/SEP IRAs/SIMPLE IRAs as of December 31, 2021.
Assume Jack makes a traditional, non-deductible contribution to an IRA for 2021 on June 1, 2021, and on July 2, 2021, he converts the amounts in the traditional IRA to a Roth IRA. Further assume (a) the amounts converted in May and July were $6,001 and $6,002, respectively, and (b) Jack has no balance in traditional IRAs/SEP IRAs/SIMPLE IRAs as of December 31, 2021.
When Jack files his 2021 tax return, Page 1 of his Form 8606 should look like this:
Page 1 of the Form 8606 reflects the total basis in traditional IRAs (without considering the Roth conversions). Note that I had to use the 2019 version of the Form 8606, as the 2021 version has not yet been released. Please adjust all dates in your mind’s eye accordingly.
Page 2 (reporting the 2021 Roth IRA conversions) of the Form 8606 should look like this:
The gross amount of the Roth IRA conversions are taxable, but Jack gets to recover his $12,000 of traditional IRA basis.
Post Tax Return Filing Split-Year Backdoor Roth IRA
Example 2: Jim is single, 35 years old, participates in a 401(k) at work, and has self-prepared his 2020 tax return and filed it on March 15, 2021. Jim’s modified adjusted gross income for 2020 is $150,000. Jim has no traditional IRAs, SEP IRAs, or SIMPLE IRAs. It is April 9, 2021 and Jim just learned about the existence of the Backdoor Roth IRA.
Can Jim still do a Backdoor Roth IRA for 2020? Absolutely!
First, Jim should, by April 15, 2021, make a traditional, non-deductible IRA contribution of $6,000. When he does this, he should designate the contribution as being for 2020. So far, everything is the same as Example 1.
But here is where things change. Jim should also, by April 15, 2021, file a standalone Form 8606 with the IRS and be sure to sign the form on page 2. The Form 8606 will report the contribution to the traditional, non-deductible IRA. Jim will have to paper file the Form 8606 and mail it to the IRS Service Center that he would mail his Form 1040 to (if he were to paper file his Form 1040).
Jim could then convert the traditional IRA to a Roth IRA to successfully complete the Backdoor Roth IRA. He should also ensure he had no balance in a traditional IRA, SEP IRA, or SIMPLE IRA on December 31, 2021.
Advanced Split-Year Backdoor Roth IRA
Example 3: Jill is married to Joe, 35 years old, participates in a 401(k) at work, and has self-prepared their 2020 tax return but not yet filed it. Jill and Joe’s modified adjusted gross income for 2020 is $250,000. Jill has a traditional IRA with a balance of $100,000 (and no previous non-deductible contributions). It is April 9, 2021 and Jill just learned about the existence of the Backdoor Roth IRA.
Jill’s example is a bit more challenging than Jack and Jim’s previous example. Yes, it is possible that Jill could successfully complete a Backdoor Roth IRA for 2020. But it involves much more execution risk – the risk that the proper steps will not be completed in time. While taxpayers engaging in any sort of tax planning should consider engaging professional assistance, Jill is in a position where that is even more so the case.
Here is how Jill could successfully execute a Backdoor Roth IRA for 2020. Jill should go to her workplace benefits website and download and review the “Summary Plan Description” for the 401(k) plan (sometimes initialized “SPD”).
It may be the case that Jill’s workplace 401(k) plan will accept a roll-in of her traditional IRA. Many 401(k)s do, but many do not. Some plans will only accept roll-ins of other qualified plans (401(k)s, 403(b)s, etc.), and some plans will only accept roll-ins of qualified plans and so-called “conduit IRAs” i.e., IRAs that consist only of money that was formerly in a qualified plan. However, there are some plans that will accept roll-ins of both old qualified plans and any type of traditional IRA (though note that in all events 401(k) plans cannot accept roll-ins of amounts representing non-deductible IRA contributions).
If Jill’s workplace 401(k) plan will accept a roll-in of the $100,000 traditional IRA, then Jill could transfer (in a direct trustee-to-trustee transfer) her traditional IRA (other than the amount of any nondeductible contributions, including a $6,000 2020 contribution) to the 401(k). If she fails to do that by December 31, 2021, then any Backdoor Roth IRA would be very tax inefficient (and unavisable) – you can read more here in the “Jennifer” example.
This is one reason I say that there is “execution risk” – perhaps Jill does the “Backdoor Roth IRA” steps but neglects the transfer of the old traditional IRA to the 401(k) until after December 31, 2021. If that happens, Jill’s Backdoor Roth IRA will now be very tax inefficient.
Some might say “couldn’t Jill start a side hustle, open a Solo 401(k) for it, and then roll the traditional IRA into the Solo 401(k)?” To my mind, that is a dangerous path. Jill’s side hustle might not rise to the level of a trade or business for tax purposes. If it does not, then it is not eligible to have a Solo 401(k). Any transfer of a traditional IRA to a plan that does not qualify as either an IRA, 401(k), 403(b), or similar plan is simply a taxable distribution subject to full income tax and a 10 percent early withdrawal penalty. Ouch!!!
Jill should not over think it. If she can easily roll her old traditional IRA into her workplace 401(k), then she should consider doing so and doing a Backdoor Roth IRA. But if she cannot, then fine, there are plenty of other ways to become financially independent and/or achieve retirement planning goals. Not having the Backdoor Roth IRA tool available is no killer to her future plans and goals.
Note further that if Jill’s balance was in a SIMPLE IRA that was less than 2 years old, she could not roll the SIMPLE IRA into anything other than a SIMPLE IRA for the first two years of her SIMPLE IRA’s existence without incurring a 25% penalty.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial advisor! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, investment, legal, and tax matters.Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
In late December 2019 the President and Congress enacted the SECURE Act. The SECURE Act makes some significant revisions to the laws governing IRAs, 401(k)s, and other retirement accounts. This post discusses the impacts of these changes on those pursuing financial independence.
The Big Picture
The SECURE Act is a big win for the FI community, in my opinion.
The FI community significantly benefits from IRAs, 401(k)s, and other tax-advantaged retirement accounts. However, the federal government is facing increasing debts and annual deficits. That puts tax-advantaged accounts in the crosshairs. What Congress gives in tax benefits Congress can take away.
So what does the SECURE Act do? First, it actually gives us a couple more tax advantages during our lifetimes (see “Opportunities” below). Second, it significantly reduces the tax advantages of inherited retirement accounts for our heirs.
For those either with large retirement account balances or planning to have large retirement account balances, any change in tax laws is a potential problem. We should be glad that this round of tax law changes has occurred without our own retirement accounts being negatively impacted. Congress has passed the bill to our heirs, which, right or wrong, is a victory for us.
When you see people in the financial press squawking about how awful the SECURE Act is, remember, it could be a whole lot worse–your retirement account could have been more heavily taxed during your lifetime!
For those pursuing FI, the ability to use tax-advantaged retirement accounts remains the same, and in a couple small ways, has been enhanced. The next generation still has all those retirement account opportunities, even if they won’t be able to benefit from inheriting retirement accounts as much as they do under current law.
Opportunities
Traditional IRA Contributions for those 70 ½ and Older
Starting in 2020, those aged 70 ½ and older will be able to contribute to a traditional IRA. This will open up Backdoor Roth IRA planning for those 70 ½ and older and still working. For those still working (or doing side hustles) at age 70 ½ or older, this is a nice change.
Remember, regardless of age, in order to contribute to an IRA, you or your spouse must have earned income.
RMDs Begin at 72
For those attaining age 70 ½ after December 31, 2019, the age at which they will need to take RMDs will be 72, not 70 ½. This gives retirement accounts a bit more time to bake tax-deferred. It also slightly expands the window to do Roth conversions before RMDs begin. However, this last benefit is tempered by the fact that you must take Social Security no later than age 70. Roth conversion planning to reduce taxable RMDs should be mostly completed well before age 70 ½, regardless of this change in the law.
Note that taxpayers can still make qualified charitable distributions (“QCD”) starting when they turn age 70 ½. While pre-age 72 QCDs won’t satisfy RMD requirements, they will (a) help optimize charitable giving from a tax perspective (by keeping adjusted gross income lower and avoiding the requirement to itemize to deduct the contribution) and (b) reduce future RMDs.
Annuities in 401(k)s
The new law provides rules facilitating annuities in 401(k) plans. This one requires proceeding with extreme caution. If your 401(k) plan decides to offer annuity products, you need to carefully assess whether an annuity is the right investment for you and you need to fully understand the fees charged.
Remember, just because the law changed doesn’t mean your asset allocation should change!
Leaving Retirement Accounts to Heirs
This is the where the SECURE Act raises taxes. The SECURE Act removes the so-called “stretch” for many retirement plan beneficiaries. For retirement accounts inherited after December 31, 2019, only certain beneficiaries will be able to stretch out distributions over their remaining life (or based on the age of the decedent if over 70 ½ at death). For nonqualified beneficiaries, the rule will simply be that the beneficiary must take the account within 10 years of the owner’s death (the “10-year rule”).
My overall opinion on the SECURE Act stated above, planning for the next generation is important. Particularly if you are already financially independent and want to help your children become financially independent, the SECURE Act has significant ramifications.
Spouses
If your current estate plan features your spouse as your retirement account primary beneficiary, the SECURE Act should in no way change that aspect of your plan. Fortunately, the many advantages applicable to spouses inheriting retirement accounts will not change. Spouses remain an excellent candidate to inherit a retirement account.
Minor Children
If you leave your retirement account to your minor children, they are exempt from the 10-year rule (and can generally take distributions based on IRS RMD tables that are generous to younger beneficiaries) while they are still minors. Once your children reach the age of majority, they will have ten years to empty the retirement account.
The exception to the 10-year rule applies only to your minor children. It does not apply to your grandchildren, your adult children, and the children of others (including nieces and nephews).
Other Eligible Beneficiaries
The exceptions to the 10-year rule apply to your spouse, your minor children, the disabled, the chronically ill, and persons not more than 10 years younger than you at your death. All others will need to empty retirement accounts within 10 years of inheritance. This will require some significant planning in cases where the beneficiary has inherited a traditional retirement account to strategically empty the account over the 10 year window to manage adjusted gross income, taxable income, and total tax.
Planning
For those of you with estate plans involving adult children, the passage of the SECURE Act may well require revisions to your plans. First off, as a practical matter, your revocable living trust may need modifications. Many have designated a trust as a retirement account beneficiary. To do so properly requires conforming with specific income tax rules. Those with trusts as the beneficiary of their retirement account would be well advised to, at a minimum, consult with their lawyer to determine if the language of the trust needs updating.
Second, understanding that inheriting a traditional retirement account will now mean accelerated, and possibly significantly increased, taxation for their heirs, many will want to consider Roth conversion planning. Roth accounts will be subject to the 10-year rule, but the good news is that the beneficiary can keep the assets in the Roth account for 10 years, let it grow tax free, and then take out the money in 10 years tax free. Not too bad.
Roth conversion planning to optimize your heirs’ income tax picture is now even more important. However, it should not be done if it will impose a financial hardship on the account owner during their lifetime. The first priority should be securing the account owner’s retirement. Only if the account owner is financially secure should they consider Roth conversion planning to reduce their heirs’ tax liability.
Conclusion
Tax rules are always changing. This round of changes is a victory for those pursuing financial independence. Any tax law change that does not negatively impact your path to financial independence is a win.
For those considering the financial health of their heirs, particularly their adult children, the SECURE Act should prompt some reconsideration of estate plans. Often it is wise to consult with professional advisors in this regard.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial advisor! FI Tax Guy can prepare your tax return! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, legal, and tax matters.
Are you self-employed? Is your self-employment income your primary source of income? If so, you might want to consider doing a Roth conversion before the end of the year.
Takeaways
If most of your taxable income is self-employment income (either reported on Schedule C or from a partnership), you might want to consider year-end Roth conversions to maximize your QBI deduction and pay a lower-than-expected federal income tax rate on the conversion.
To optimize this strategy, convert traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs (or do in-plan traditional 401(k) to Roth 401(k) conversions) to increase your QBI deduction.
Starting in 2018, there is a deduction for “qualified business income.” This is generally income from a qualified trade or business received from a sole proprietorship (and reported on Schedule C), from a partnership, or from a S Corporation (in these cases, generally reported to the taxpayer on a Form K-1 and reported on the Schedule E with the tax return).
Important for this purpose is the initial limit on the QBI deduction. It is the lesser of following two amounts:
20 percent of taxable income less “net capital gain” which is generally capital gains plus qualified dividend income (“QDI”) (the “Income Limit”) or
20 percent of QBI (the “QBI Limit”).
As a practical matter, in most cases the limit will be determined by the second limitation (such taxpayers are what I call “QBI Limited”). Many taxpayers will have much more taxable income than they have QBI. Consider spouses where one has self-employment income and the other has W-2 income. Unless the W-2 income is very small, their combined taxable income is likely to be in excess of their combined QBI, and thus they will be QBI Limited.
Alternatively, consider a situation where a single person has QBI from an S corporation (say $50,000) and the S corporation also pays him or her a W-2 salary (say $60,000). In such a case the QBI is $50,000 (20% of which is $10,000) and the taxable income might be $97,450 ($110,000 total from the S corporation less a $12,550 standard deduction), 20% of which is $19,490. This taxpayer would also be QBI Limited.
Income Limited
But what if you are not QBI Limited, but rather, limited by the Income Limit listed above (what I call “Income Limited”)? Here is an illustrative example.
Example 1: Seth is single and self-employed. He claims the standard deduction in 2021. He reports a business profit of $100,000 on his Schedule C. He also has $1,000 of interest income.
His Income Limit is computed as follows:
Schedule C Income: $100,000
Interest Income: $1,000
Deduction for ½ Self-Employment Taxes: ($7,065)
Standard Deduction: ($12,550)
Taxable Income: $81,385
20% Limit: $16,277
Seth’s QBI Limit is computed as follows:
Schedule C Income: $100,000
Deduction for ½ Self-Employment Taxes: ($7,065)
QBI: $92,935
20% Limit: $18,587
In this case, Seth’s QBI deduction is only $16,277 (he is Income Limited), the lesser of these two calculated limits.
Roth Conversion Planning
Is there anything Seth can do to increase his limitation and optimize his QBI deduction?
Imagine Seth has $20,000 in a traditional IRA (with zero basis). He could convert some of that traditional IRA to a Roth IRA by December 31, 2021. This would create taxable income, which would increase Seth’s Income Limit. Here is how that could play out:
Without Roth Conversion
Schedule C Income
$ 100,000
Interest Income
$ 1,000
Deduction for ½ Self-Employment Taxes
$ (7,065)
Adjusted Gross Income
$ 93,935
Standard Deduction
$ (12,550)
Qualified Business Income Deduction (see above)
$ (16,277)
Taxable Income
$ 65,108
Federal Income Tax
$ 10,072
With Roth Conversion
Schedule C Income
$ 100,000
Interest Income
$ 1,000
Deduction for ½ Self-Employment Taxes
$ (7,065)
Roth IRA Conversion
$ 11,550
Adjusted Gross Income
$ 105,485
Standard Deduction
$ (12,550)
Qualified Business Income Deduction
$ (18,587)
Taxable Income
$ 74,348
Federal Income Tax
$ 12,105
What has the $11,550 Roth IRA conversion done? First, it has made the Income Limit ($18,587) the exact same as the QBI Limit ($18,587). Thus, Seth’s QBI deduction increases from $16,227 to $18,587.
Second, notice that Seth’s taxable income has increased, but not by $11,550! Usually one would expect that a Roth IRA conversion with no basis recovery would simply increase taxable income by the amount converted. But not here! The interaction with the QBI deduction caused Seth’s taxable income to increase only $9,240 ($74,348 minus $65,108).
This example illustrates that, under the right circumstances, a Roth IRA conversion can receive the benefit of the QBI deduction!
As a result, at Seth’s 22 percent marginal federal income tax bracket, his total federal income tax increased only $2,033. In effect, Seth pays only a 17.6 percent rate on his Roth IRA conversion ($2,033 of federal income tax on a $11,550 Roth IRA conversion). This is true even though Seth is in the 22 percent marginal tax bracket. His Roth IRA conversion is only 80 percent taxable. This is the flip-side of the 80% deduction phenomenon I previously blogged about here.
Is it advantageous for Seth to convert his traditional IRA? Well, it depends on Seth’s expected future tax rates. If Seth’s future marginal tax bracket is anticipated to be 22 percent, then absolutely. Why not convert at a 17.6 percent instead of face a 22 percent rate on future traditional IRA withdrawals?
Strategy
Seth’s Roth IRA conversion is optimized. The takeaway is that the Roth IRA conversion gets the benefit of the QBI deduction, but only for amounts that increase the Income Limit up to the QBI Limit.
A *very general* rule of thumb for solving for the optimal Roth conversion amount is to multiply the difference between the QBI Limit and the Income Limit (without a Roth conversion) by 5. In Seth’s case, that was $18,587 minus $16,277 (which equals $2,310) times 5.
In this case, converting exactly $11,550 made Seth’s Income Limit exactly equal his QBI Limit. As long as the Roth conversion increases the Income Limit toward the QBI Limit, the conversion benefits from the QBI deduction.
But the first dollar of the Roth conversion that pushes the Income Limit above the QBI Limit does not receive the benefit. If Seth converted $11,551 from his traditional IRA to his Roth IRA, that last dollar above $11,550 would be taxed at Seth’s full 22 percent federal marginal tax bracket.
Note that instead of / in addition to a Roth IRA conversion, Seth could do an in-plan traditional 401(k) to Roth 401(k) conversion, if he had sufficient funds in a traditional 401(k), and the 401(k) plan permits Roth 401(k) conversions.
Also note that the strategic considerations with QBI deductions become much more complicated once taxpayers exceed the initial QBI taxable income limitations (in 2021, those are $164,900 for single taxpayers and $329,800 for married filing joint taxpayers).
Conclusion
Taxpayers whose taxable income consists mostly or exclusively of self-employment income should consider Roth conversions toward year-end. This is often an area that benefits from consulting with a professional tax advisor before taking action.
Further Reading
I have blogged about the QBI deduction and retirement plans here. After the IRS and Treasury provided some QBI deduction regulations in January 2019, I provided some QBI deduction examples and lessons here.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial planner! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, legal, and tax matters.Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
Watch me discuss Backdoor Roth IRA tax return reporting on YouTube.
The word is out. The Backdoor Roth IRA is a powerful tax planning tool. You may believe that by previously executing Backdoor Roth IRAs, you have planned well and received a great tax benefit while building retirement savings.
Is it possible you are mistaken? It is possible you did not complete the Backdoor Roth IRA correctly?
It may be true that you have successfully completed the two independent steps of a Backdoor Roth IRA: a traditional, non-deductible IRA contribution followed by a later Roth IRA conversion. It may also be true that you had no balances in a traditional IRA, SEP IRA, and/or SIMPLE IRA as of December 31st of the year you did the Backdoor Roth IRA.
Year-end tip: The deadline to clean out traditional/SEP/SIMPLE IRAs (by rolling them into employer retirement plans such as 401(k)s) so as to optimize a Backdoor Roth IRA is December 31st of the year of the Roth IRA conversion step. As a practical matter, you should not complete the Roth IRA conversion step until you have cleaned out the traditional/SEP/SIMPLE IRAs. Life happens; there is simply no guarantee you complete the clean out before December 31st. Failing to do so will significantly increase the tax on your Backdoor Roth IRA.
But you may not have correctly reported the Backdoor Roth IRA on your tax return. This last step is too-often overlooked. Below I discuss how to properly report a Backdoor Roth IRA, a potential tax return mistake that could have cost you thousands in erroneous taxes, and ways to fix the mistake.
Backdoor Roth IRA Example
Charlie is single and 35 years old. He is covered by a retirement plan at work. In 2018 his W-2 salary was $200,000, and thus he did not qualify to make a Roth IRA contribution for 2018. He has no balance in a traditional IRA, SEP IRA, or SIMPLE IRA. He decides to do a Backdoor Roth IRA.
On September 2, 2018, Charlie contributed $5,500 to a traditional, non-deductible IRA. On October 10, 2018, he converted the entire balance in the traditional IRA, then $5,510, to a Roth IRA.
So far, so good with the Backdoor Roth IRA! But Charlie’s not done yet. Let’s look at how the Charlie should file his tax return and the pitfalls he should avoid.
Backdoor Roth IRA Tax Return Reporting
Early in the year, Charlie should receive a Form 1099-R that looks like the following from his financial institution.
Charlie’s Backdoor Roth IRA Form 1099-R should look something like this. Note that the “taxable amount” is the full conversion amount ($5,510) and the box indicating that the taxable amount has not been determined is checked.
This requires precise tax return reporting to ensure Charlie increases his taxable income by the correct amount to account for the Backdoor Roth IRA. An error in the tax return reporting could erroneously overstate his adjusted gross income and thus cause him to pay significantly more to the IRS and state tax agency than he owes.
There are two places Charlie needs to report the Backdoor Roth IRA: Pages 1 and 2 of Form 8606 and lines 4a and 4b of the Form 1040.
Let’s start with the Form 8606. Below is the correct way for Charlie to file Page 1 of his Form 8606.
Lines 1, 6, and 11 of the Form 8606 are crucial to properly reporting a Backdoor Roth IRA and computing the nontaxable portion of the Roth IRA conversion.
Notice a few things about this form. First, on line 1 Charlie reports his traditional, non-deductible IRA contribution of $5,500. Second, on line 6, Charlie reports the total combined value of his traditional IRAs, SEP IRAs, and SIMPLE IRAs as of December 31, 2018. He can find this number on the Forms 5498 that his financial institutions send him and the IRS regarding his IRA accounts. To have a very efficient Backdoor Roth IRA, ideally Charlie should no balance in these accounts on December 31, 2018, and thus Charlie can, and does, report zero on line 6. If Charlie has any such balances the total must be reported here and it will cause his Backdoor Roth IRA to be partially (maybe mostly) taxable.
Next, Charlie reports his Roth IRA conversion amount on line 8. This is the total taxable amount he converted, reported to him in Box 2 of the Form 1099-R, $5,510. The mechanics of the Form 8606 then lead to lines 11 and 13, the nontaxable portion of Charlie’s Roth IRA conversion. In Charlie’s case, this is $5,500. This is because he is entitled to recover all $5,500 of basis he has in his traditional IRA (as computed in this part of the Form 8606). This $5,500 number is required to correctly prepare Page 2 of the Form 8606 and line 4b of the Form 1040.
Form 8606 Line 18 should be reported on Line 4b of Form 1040 for a 2018 Backdoor Roth IRA.
Page 1 computed how much of Charlie’s basis he can recover and the nontaxable portion of his Roth IRA conversion. Page 2 answers the second question: How much of Charlie’s Roth IRA conversion is taxable? Line 16 is simply line 8, and line 17 is simply line 11. Subtracting the nontaxable portion of the Roth IRA conversion from the total converted amount yields the amount of the Roth IRA conversion that is taxable. In Charlie’s case, it is only $10. This amount goes to Charlie’s Form 1040, line 4b.
This is how a Backdoor Roth IRA should look on your Form 1040. Notice the very small number on Line 4b.
The Wrong Way
The following is what Charlie’s Form 1040 might look like if his Backdoor Roth IRA is misreported.
Heed the warning of my chicken scratch: a four figure number on Line 4b after a Backdoor Roth IRA is likely an indication that either the tax planning or the tax reporting is off.
How might this happen? It could be that a Form 8606 simply was not prepared, or it was incorrectly prepared. Sometimes the Form 1099-R is misunderstood. People see that $5,510 is the “taxable amount” in line 2 of the Form 1099-R and believe that must be the taxable amount reported on line 4b. But remember, the Form 1099-R has a box checked indicating that the taxable amount is not determined. The Form 8606 is what determines the taxable amount created by the Backdoor Roth IRA (in Charlie’s case, $10).
As a check, you should ensure that the Lines 18 of your previously filed Forms 8606 agree to the appropriate line on the Form 1040 (line 4b in 2018). If there are discrepancies (and/or a Form 8606 was not filed for a Backdoor Roth IRA), that is an indication there is likely an error on the tax return. If Line 18 on the Form 8606 is a four-figure or greater number after a Backdoor Roth IRA, it is very likely that either the tax planning or the tax return reporting went wrong somewhere.
We can see how deleterious this error is for Charlie. If he filed his tax return the wrong way, his federal taxable income is overstated by $5,500. In his case, this caused him to erroneously owe $1,760 more in federal income tax ($43,613 minus $41,853 — hat tip to ProConnect Tax Online for the tax calculations). If Charlie lives in a state with a state income tax, he will also overpay his state income taxes because of this error.
Filing an Amended Tax Return
Imagine that Charlie filed his tax return as pictured in the Wrong!!! picture above. What can Charlie do?
Charlie’s remedy is to file an amended return. This entails refiling the Form 1040 and all of its related forms and schedules (including the Form 8606) with the correct amounts. It also entails filing a Form 1040X. This form presents amounts as originally filed and as corrected, with the difference illustrated. It also requires a narrative submission explaining the changes made on the amended tax return.
There are several things to keep in mind when filing an amended tax return. First, a taxpayer filing an amended return is under an obligation to correctly report amounts. If, as part of the exercise of fixing a Backdoor Roth IRA through an amended tax return, the taxpayer learns that other amounts on the originally filed tax return were incorrect, he or she must correct those amounts if they choose to file an amended return.
Second, there is a deadline for amending a federal income tax return (the so-called statute of limitations). Generally, the deadline is three years from the later of the tax return due date (if originally filed on or prior to the initial tax return due date) or the filing date (if filed after the initial tax return due date). This later deadline applies anytime the taxpayer files after the initial due date (including, for example, a timely post-April 15th tax return filing made after filing for an extension).
If the amended return claiming the refund (because of the corrected Backdoor Roth IRA tax return reporting) is filed after this three year deadline, the IRS cannot and will not issue a refund to the taxpayer due to the statute of limitations. There are limited exceptions to this rule (such as when the IRS and the taxpayer have mutually agreed to extend the statute of limitations).
States have their own statutes of limitations, which may or may not be the same as the federal statute of limitations. In my home state of California, it is a four-year statute of limitations instead of a three-year statute of limitations.
The statute of limitations means the clock is ticking to correct Backdoor Roth IRAs not correctly reported on previously filed tax returns. In many cases, taxpayers learning they have incorrectly filed a tax return (for whatever reason, including an erroneously reported Backdoor Roth IRA) are well advised to seek professional assistance in amending their tax returns.
Further Reading
I have previously blogged about Backdoor Roth IRAs for beginners here and about tactics to employ if you want to do a Backdoor Roth IRA but currently have a balance in a traditional IRA, SEP IRA, and/or SIMPLE IRA.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial planner! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, investment, legal, and tax matters. Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
The post below has NOT been updated for the January 13, 2021 update. Please use the below for general background purposes only and refer to the IRS website and Mr. Zollars’ article.
Identity theft continues to be a significant 21st century concern. It can happen in many ways. One particularly nefarious way is that your identity might be stolen to file a tax return with the IRS. Below I discuss a relatively new program that the IRS has made available to many Americans to help prevent identity theft with the IRS. If you are eligible, you should give strong consideration to opting into the program.
Identity Theft and Tax Returns
Obviously identity theft is bad. But why would someone use your identity with the IRS?
The answer is a tax refund. The scam often works like this: a scammer steals your identity and files a tax return with your name and Social Security number early in the year, before you have a chance to file your tax return for the prior year. The scammer will report taxable income and tax payments such that the tax return claims you have a significant income tax refund due from the IRS. The phony tax return will direct the refund such that the scammer gets the tax refund.
This becomes a nightmare for the victim. Once the IRS accepts the tax return and issues the scammer a refund, the victim will not be able to file a tax return. The IRS will reject the valid return and will not issue any tax refunds owed to the victim. The victim now faces what is likely months of remedial action to correct the situation.
Identity Protection PINs
The IRS is aware of this problem. They have an optional program that allows certain people to obtain an Identity Protection Personal Identification Number (PIN). The PIN functions to protect a taxpayer.
If a taxpayer has an Identity Protection PIN issued with the IRS, the IRS will only accept that taxpayer’s electronic tax return if the tax return provides the Identity Protection PIN. That stops the sort of scams described above. For paper returns, a missing or incorrect PIN will delay the IRS accepting the tax return while the IRS takes additional steps to verify that the tax return came from the taxpayer whose name and Social Security number appear on the tax return. Either way, obtaining a PIN provides a level of protection against tax return identity theft.
Spouses each separately apply for their own PIN and the IRS will issue each spouse a unique PIN. If the spouses file jointly, both PINs are included on the tax return. If you have an Identity Protection PIN and use a paid tax preparer, it is important that your paid tax preparer include the PIN on your tax return.
Eligibility
You are eligible to apply for an Identity Protection PIN from the IRS if:
You received a letter from the IRS inviting you to obtain a PIN; or
Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and Washington.
The yellow states below are the ones in which all taxpayers may apply for an IRS Identity Protection PIN (hat tip to 270toWin.com).
PLEASE SEE UPDATE FROM JANUARY 13, 2021 ABOVE: NOW ALL AMERICANS CAN POTENTIALLY QUALIFY.
Application
To obtain an IRS Identity Protection PIN, you can start at this website.
You will need to establish an IRS electronic account. The IRS website will guide you through the process and will use some credit history information to verify your identity. Once you have your IRS electronic account, you can easily obtain an IRS Identity Protection PIN.
Future Years
Your PIN changes every year. At the beginning of the year, the IRS will put your new PIN (for use in filing the prior year’s tax return) in your IRS electronic account and they will mail your PIN to your last address of record. This makes it crucial to file a Form 8822 with the IRS to officially change your address with the IRS anytime you move, so that any PIN related correspondence (including retrievals in the event you lose your PIN) are directed to your correct address.
The IRS will change your PIN every year, so it is important to ensure you use the correct PIN when filing your tax return. A PIN received in October 2019 will be for 2018 and you will need to use the PIN issued early in 2020 to file your 2019 tax return.
Conclusion
Taxpayers eligible for the IRS Identity Protection PIN program should strongly consider applying for a PIN. It can help protect you from the serious headache of having your identity stolen and used to file a false tax return in your name.
Further Reading
Kay Bell wrote a great post about the IRS Identity Protection PIN program here.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial advisor! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, legal, and tax matters.Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
Incentive stock options (“ISOs”) are a great employee benefit. ISOs are very powerful because they provide the possibility of compensating employees at preferential long term capital gains rates instead of at ordinary income tax rates, and they avoid Social Security and Medicare taxes. ISOs can also help build wealth by allowing employees to purchase employer stock at a discount. However, ISOs can create several tax challenges, and reporting them on your tax return can be confusing.
Incentive Stock Options
Employers grant employees incentive stock options as an incentive to stay with the company. The company grants the employee an option to purchase the stock of the company at a certain price (the “exercise price” or the “strike price”). That price is no less than the company’s current stock price (i.e., the stock price on the grant date, defined below).
There is a $100,000 annual limit on the fair market value of stock subject to ISO treatment per employee. If an employee leaves the employer’s employment, he or she must exercise or forfeit their ISOs within three months.
Three dates matter when considering ISOs.
Grant Date: The date the employee is granted the option (i.e., the first date the employee has the option to purchase the stock at the strike price).
Exercise Date: The date the employee exercises the ISO (i.e., the date the employee purchases the stock of the company under the terms of the ISO at the strike price).
Disposition Date: The date the employee sells the stock acquired by the previous exercise of the ISO.
Tax Treatment
Grant: There is no tax consequence to the employee upon the grant of the ISO.
Exercise: Upon exercise, there is no income tax consequence to the employee. However, the difference between the fair market value of the ISO and its strike price is an adjustment that creates income for alternative minimum tax purposes (the dreaded AMT). Fortunately, the late-2017 tax reform bill increased AMT exemptions (i.e., the amount of income below which the AMT does not apply), thus reducing, but not eliminating, the potential negative impact AMT can have on ISO exercises.
Further, the AMT issue is removed if the exercise and later stock disposition occur in the same year. As a practical matter, it is often the case that the later stock disposition occurs almost instantaneously after exercise, which takes the AMT issue off the table.
Dispositions: ISOs have very favorable tax treatment upon disposition if the disposition of the shares satisfies both of the following rules.
The disposition is at least two years from the grant date; and,
The disposition is at least one year from the exercise date.
If both rules are satisfied, the employee has long term capital gain or loss upon the disposition of the shares. Long term capital gains are taxed at preferential rates for federal income tax purposes.
Example: Gary works for Acme Explosives, Inc. Acme grants Gary 10,000 ISOs at an exercise price of $10 per share on January 1, 2018. Gary exercises the ISOs on June 1, 2018 at a time when the fair market value of the stock is $15 per share. On February 1, 2020, Gary sells each share acquired through the ISO exercise at a price of $20 per share. Assume that Gary was not subject to AMT in 2018.
Because Gary sold the Acme shares at least one year after exercise and at least two years after the ISO grant, Gary’s sale qualifies entirely for long term capital gain treatment (creating a $100,000 capital gain — $200,000 sales proceeds less $100,000 basis) and creates no taxable ordinary income.
Early Dispositions
Often employees will dispose the ISO stock before the time required to get favorable income tax treatment. As a practical matter, employees often exercise the ISO and immediately sell the stock.
Employees are exposed to the economic performance of their employer through their job and possibly other equity holdings. Thus, they often want to reduce the risk associated with their employer’s performance and dispose of their ISO stock as soon as possible. Most view the tax cost as well worth it considering that (i) the employee immediately pockets (net of tax) the difference between the fair market value of the stock and the strike price, and (ii) the diversification benefits of investing the ISO proceeds into other investments.
If the employee disposes of the ISO stock early (referred to as a “disqualifying disposition”), what result? The difference between the strike price and the fair market value of the stock at exercise becomes ordinary income to the employee reported to the employee as compensation income included in Box 1 of the employee’s Form W-2. The remaining amounts create long or short term capital gain or loss.
Example: Angela works for Acme Anvils, Inc. Acme grants Angela 10,000 ISOs at an exercise price of $10 per share on January 1, 2019. Angela exercises the ISOs on June 1, 2019 at a time when the fair market value of the stock is $15 per share. On December 1, 2019, Angela sells each share acquired through the ISO exercise at a price of $20 per share.
Because Angela’s December 2019 sale violates both timing tests, Angela’s sale does not qualify for long term capital gain treatment. Thus, Angela has $50,000 of compensation income ($15 fair market value less $10 strike price times 10,000 shares) of ordinary compensation income. The remaining $50,000 of gain is short term capital gain.
Fortunately, the compensation income is not included in compensation income for purposes of Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes (and, thus, is not included in Boxes 3 and 5 on the Form W-2). Because Angela sold the ISO shares in the same year she exercised the ISOs, there will not be a separate AMT consequence of the ISOs.
Tax Reporting
Staying with Angela’s example, the $50,000 of ordinary income will be reported as compensation income in Angela’s Form W-2 Box 1, but not in Boxes 3 and 5. Box 14 should indicate “ISO DISQ” and $50,000 as the amount.
Angela should also receive two other tax reporting documents. First, Angela should receive a Form 1099-B. The form should indicate $200,000 of sales proceeds ($20 per share times 10,000 shares) and should indicate a basis of $100,000 (Angela’s historic cost basis, as she paid $10 per share for 10,000 shares). Angela should also receive a Form 3921. This form should indicate the exercise price per share ($10) and the fair market value per share on the date of the exercise ($15).
The IRS will expect to see at least two numbers on Angela’s tax return. First, the compensation income must be reported on Angela’s Form 1040 box 1. Second, the $200,000 stock sale should be reported on Schedule D and on Form 8949.
This is where it gets interesting. If Angela simply reports $200,000 as gross proceeds and $100,000 as basis on her Schedule D and her Form 8949, she is going to have a very bad tax result. Why? Angela’s W-2 includes $50,000 of the overall $100,000 of income she recognized on the ISO exercise and disposition. If she simply reports a $100,000 gain on her Schedule D/Form 8949, her total reported income will be $150,000, creating $50,000 in over-reported taxable income.
Thus, Angela must increase the basis she reports on Schedule D and Form 8949 by the $50,000 of ordinary compensation income reported on her Form W-2. Her Schedule D and Form 8949 should report both the $200,000 of gross proceeds and $150,000 of basis in the disposed of Acme shares.
Estimated Taxes
Even though the gain on a disqualifying disposition of an ISO is taxable as ordinary income in Box 1 of the Form W-2, there is no requirement that the employer withhold any income tax with respect to the gain. Thus, the onus falls to the employee to ensure he or she pays the proper amount of federal and state estimated income tax to avoid penalties. The good news is that there is a safe harbor under which employees can avoid underpayment penalties.
For federal income tax purposes, there will not be an underpayment of estimated tax penalty if the employee has paid in at least 90 percent of their current year total tax liability and/or 100 percent of their prior year total tax liability. If current year income is $150,000 or more, 100 percent becomes 110 percent.
Regardless of whether there is a qualifying disposition triggering long term capital gain or a disqualifying disposition triggering ordinary income, the employee should endeavor through a combination of estimated tax payments, additional workplace withholding, and/or additional spousal workplace withholding to ensure that he or she has withheld enough during the year to avoid federal and state underpayment penalties.
Conclusion
ISOs can be a great wealth building tool. But because of the tax rules and at times confusing tax reporting, they present a challenge. Anyone with ISOs (or with clients that own ISOs) should step back and fully understand the tax ramifications of selling them. It is often advisable to work with a professional advisor as you sell ISOs and manage the tax ramifications of the sale.
Further Reading
The IRS provides some tax resources on ISOs starting on page 12 of Publication 525.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial advisor! FI Tax Guy can prepare your tax return! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, legal, and tax matters.
In the financial independence community and beyond, high deductible health plans (“HDHPs”) have received significant criticism. Few downplay the significant tax benefits of their tag-team partner, the health savings account. But some have written that the HSA sweetener is not sufficient to make high deductible health plans desirable.
Below I offer a different perspective. I write regarding the approach of anyone seeking financial independence, but I believe much of what is discussed below applies regardless of whether you are seeking financial independence.
One quick caveat: the below assumes that you are relatively healthy when you select your medical insurance, and that you expect that you will most likely remain so. For those with significant, chronic medical conditions, an HDHP is not likely to be a good medical insurance choice.
HDHP Critiques
High deductible health plans have been criticized by both the national media and by financial independence writers. Several studies have found that those covered by HDHPs tend to delay or forego needed medical assistance when compared with the population at large. This study found that those with HDHP insurance tend not to take advantage of free preventive services. Based on these study findings, there is a concern that the use of HDHPs can cause long term harm and worsen medical and health outcomes.
Financial Independence Mentality
Those actively seeking financial independence (“FIers”) embrace two beliefs. First, they believe they are not constrained by others’ failures. While FIers understand that others’ failures can be indicative of difficulties they themselves might face, FIers believe that with intentional action they can overcome those difficulties.
FI exists because people see what the “average” or “typical” person does (for example, a very low savings rate) and say, “wait a minute, I’m going to do something very different.” FIers acknowledge a societal trend and then pursue a different path with intention.
Second, FIers prioritize valuable purchases over immediate bottom-line results. Being financially independent (or seeking FI) frees you from the tyranny of any particular financial number when considering necessary expenses.
Health Insurance and Behavior
Your medical insurance should not determine whether you seek medical care. Only your current condition should determine whether you seek medical care. Assuming, only for the sake of argument, that the studies’ findings are correct, should those findings deter someone pursuing FI from using an HDHP as their medical insurance? I argue that they should not, for several reasons.
First, the studies probably did not include you. Why would you have a limiting belief about your own future behavior based on studies of other people? Even if you were in one of the studies and delayed or forwent necessary medical treatment, is it not possible that you could change your behavior?
Second, why not simply accept that cost will deter some people from obtaining needed medical assistance, but resolve that you will not act in such a shortsighted fashion. Many FIers seek to obtain financial assets of $1 million, $1.5 million, $2 million or more to fund the rest of their lives. Neither an unanticipated $300 medical expense nor an unanticipated $5,000 medical expense will derail your plans to achieve financial independence.
If you commit to FI, you are committing to acting very differently than most people when it comes to spending and saving. Why then would you believe you will act like the average study subject when it comes to obtaining medical treatment for a medical need?
Third, there is nothing preventing those with HDHPs from taking advantage of free preventive services. Many workers do not take advantage of the employer match to their 401(k). That outcome does not make a 401(k) a bad retirement plan. Rather, it illustrates that in many areas of life, people should be more intentional about taking advantage of what is offered to them. Suboptimal human behavior does not make 401(k)s and HDHPs bad, and others’ mistakes should not limit your insurance choices.
Finally, financial independence exists in part to make personal finances revolve around what needs to happen, and not to have what needs to happen revolve around personal finances. FIers ought to make medical care decisions based on their health, and not based on avoiding a medical bill that is ultimately minor in the grand scheme of things.
The Role of Insurance
What the studies appear to illustrate is a widespread misunderstanding of medical insurance. Insurance does not exist to determine whether you obtain medical assistance. Insurance exists to prevent financial ruin.
Might an unexpected medical situation be expensive if you have an HDHP? Yes, absolutely. But should it be ruinous? It should not be. Your annual out-of-pocket maximum for medical expenses will be high: imagine in your mind’s eye that it is $10,000. In the event of a medical calamity, you will pay $10,000 in expenses annually. Then your finances are protected.
Does an unexpected $10,000 expense hurt? Absolutely. But if your FI plan was to build $1.5 million in assets to fund the rest of your life, is not possible that you instead build $1.51 million in assets? Why would you put off necessary medical care to avoid a very slight increase in the assets you will need to build up to become financially independent? Are you much worse off in this situation than someone with zero-deductible medical insurance? Their “FI number” is $1.5 million; yours is $1.51 million.
You might argue “but might my insurance company deny my claim?” That is a valid concern with insurance. But it is a concern whether you have a gold-plated, zero-deductible insurance plan, an HDHP, or any other type of medical insurance. Thus, the possibility that you might have to fight with your insurance company to get an expense covered is not a reason to avoid HDHPs.
Risk/Reward Trade-off
When you use an HDHP, you assume additional risk. Put simply, you risk paying annual medical expenses up to the higher deductible. Two things should be noted about that risk. First, it is capped, as described above. A capped risk is the sort of risk that those building up assets should usually be willing to take on, as long as there is sufficient benefit to doing so.
Second, you are compensated for taking that risk. While your future annual medical expenses are uncertain, the benefits of using an HDHP are largely certain and immediate. Namely, they are:
Lower insurance premiums
Income and payroll tax savings (if the HSA is properly funded)
Employer contributions to the HSA on your behalf
Tax-deferred or (if withdrawn correctly) tax-free growth of the investments in the HSA
For taking on the risk of medical expenses up to the annual out-of-pocket maximum, there are two or three measurable, guaranteed benefits every pay period for using the HSA/HDHP combination. And while the fourth benefit can vary greatly (depending on the length of tax-free growth, future tax rates, etc.), it too is a significant benefit.
When evaluating an insurance plan, the risk/reward trade-offs and the costs are what should be evaluated. When comparing an HDHP with a lower deductible insurance plan, you must weigh the assumption of a speculative, capped risk in exchange for the benefits listed above. Based on the protection against very high annual medical expenses and the four benefits listed above, an HDHP appears to be, in many cases, a good risk/reward trade-off for those without expensive, chronic medical conditions.
Conclusion
The studies have not found that an HDHP is suboptimal from a risk trade-off perspective. Rather, they have found suboptimal consumer behavior. That’s where FI comes back in. FI is all about turning around suboptimal saving, investing, and consumer behavior and re-ordering financial priorities. Why shouldn’t obtaining necessary medical care be among the highest financial priorities? Why can’t you examine your own healthcare purchasing behavior and improve it?
There can be good reasons not to select an HDHP based upon your particular circumstances. Perhaps you have a chronic condition, you do not like the HDHP’s particular insurance carrier, and/or you do not believe the risk trade-off benefits are sufficient. But don’t eschew an HDHP because of a limiting belief about something under your own control: your behavior as a patient and medical consumer.
FI Tax Guy can be your financial planner! Find out more by visiting mullaneyfinancial.com
This post is for entertainment and educational purposes only. It does not constitute accounting, financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Please consult with your advisor(s) regarding your personal accounting, financial, investment, legal, and tax matters. Please also refer to the Disclaimer & Warning section found here.
