re: Basic math of Roth vs Traditional many get wrong

quote:

---

Correct. There is a strategy for this. You really need three different retirement vehicles to draw from. I realize for a lot of folks this isn’t an option but if you have a 401k, Roth, and HSA for example you are going to be able to have a huge advantage when it comes to to withdrawal strategies.

---

Don't forget taxable account and 0% capital gain tax rate.

A single person with no regular income with $65k in capital gains & std deduction would pay 0% in taxes. A MFJ couple would pay no tax on $131k of capital gains.

I like this this site which lets you see how taxes between income & capital gains affect each other:

https://engaging-data.com/tax-brackets/

I don’t think anyone was argue basic math. Some of us argue your assumptions.

You mentioned IRMAA, that’s a big part of the reason people convert.

Another is not needing their RMD (Roth does not have an RMD)

Another is future tax rates - for many… they will not be at 12.

There are also legacy and estate tax issues. If someone is going to be subject to estate tax, it makes sense to pay the tax on distribution before imposition of the estate tax. And remember some states start estate taxes at relatively low threshold and without portability,

Plus state tax issues. What if I’m working in Nevada but plan to retire in Cali to be close to the grandkids?

I discuss conversions 3-4 times a week with clients. 99 percent of them have $1M plus in trad IRA / 401k money. I always tell them, if anyone tells you everyone should convert, and if anyone tells you no one should convert, ignore both, every situation is fact dependent.

Also effective tax rate is a garbage stat. Why? Because for most people, the lower rates will get eaten up with SS benefits, pension, passive income sources, etc, it’s even worse if you are widowed. Almost all of my clients project to be at 22 or higher before any Ira distributions. Who cares what their effective rate is? What rate am I gonna pay if I take one more dollar of income. That’s what matters.

Right, overall effective tax rate doesnt matter I specifically said effective tax rate of withdrawals.

My only assumption in previous thread was to address your scenario of 22% vs 12% without adding factors you didnt specify. You repeatedly mentioned time value of mpney and my "short sighted strategy" seemingly missing the point that if duration, growth rate, and starting capital are same (constants) only the withdrawal vs contribution tax rate (variable) matters. That's just the basics but we must get it right before figuring out complexities like IRMAA, RMD, legacy plan, widow penalty, LTCG rates etc

I get it, those are reasons I'm strongly leaning to Roth convert up to 22% or 24% despite falling in 12% bracket. If I wait to convert, most will eventually be in those higher brackets anyway and trigger IRMAA, higher LTCG rates, and likely burden heirs in their high earning years.

Indeed. Sean Mullaney's tax planning book hammers this home. Everyone should read it.

Nice link, hadn't seen that one before. Just ran a scenario I will potentially do next year with a Roth conversion of ~$100k(will need to figure out dividend of course) and LTCG of $30k. MFJ, just used the Std ded for now. 0% LTCG and 5.9% effective on the conversion. Nice to see it on the graph and easily calculated.