re: Switch to 100% post tax retirement contributions into a Roth at midpoint of career?

Well the biggest issue is even if you are investing a higher $ amount in the traditional account, that doesn’t mean it’s the better option. If you aren’t taking tax liability into account, you’re not doing a true analysis.

No one knows which is why investing in multiple types of accounts provides optionality and hedges that uncertainty.

I think we’re making the same point.

Invest in the Roth if you can afford to pay the taxes now; unless you have a better opportunity for the $ the IRS will get paid.

If you don’t have $ to pay taxes invest as much as you can afford in a pre tax account.

I have not read all 5 pages of the topic so I probably missed some important points. I was responding to a fairly narrow comment from the first page where someone said people over thought this issue.
And that may be true in one sense but it can get complicated and requires several assumptions to project potential outcomes.

quote:

---

Lol. See this is my whole point and you are the one being ignorant. The IRS is being paid no matter what, you assuming its better to pay the IRS now than in 25+ years is the one being narrow minded. Explain to me why that makes sense at all? Why should anyone pay a bill now instead of in 25 years?

The answer is simple, you ASSUME taxes will go up.

So your recommendation is to over complicate something because of a huge assumption. But yet I'm the one overcomplicating an issue.

---

You really are though. He said multiple times his 401k is maxed and limited to 8k, he will also be maxing out a Roth IRA. So, the contribution amounts would be the exact same if pre or post tax into the 401k, which blows your entire point out of the water. So, with that understanding, you still ask why I'd pay my taxes now instead of later? Because if I pay later, I have to pay on the growth as well. In order to have the same amount in retirement, my tax rate would have to go down significantly.

quote:

---

The OP never asked the question: "Should I max a roth 401k or a trad 401k?" The answer to that is undoubtedly the Roth, its more money.

---

Uh, he asked should he contribute all post tax to his 401k or pre-tax. He also never asked anything close to the arguments you have been making. What you've been arguing were over-complicating it based on the argument that if you could invest $6667 into a traditional 401k, that is always better than being able to invest $5000 into a roth 401k. That in and of itself is a gross oversimplification to the point of being wrong.. At face value, neither of those options is better or worse.

quote:

---

There is absolutely no tangible data that proves a Roth is better, its all an assumption. Again I have a Roth IRA.

There is tangible data a trad 401k is better, you have the ability to save more money dollar for dollar and you delay paying the IRS until you distribute funds out of the account. 2 damn good reasons btw.

---

What the hell are you talking about here? What does this have to do with the OP's question? We aren't debating whether or not you should do a 401k or a Roth IRA. He is doing both. We are debating doing pre-tax or post tax contributions to his 401k. He would then roll them over into the IRA, leaving the employer match and all pre-tax contributions in the 401k to grow.