Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › What are backdoor Roth IRA contributions?
- This topic has 16 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 9 months ago by livinincali.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 28, 2014 at 10:04 PM #20940January 28, 2014 at 10:16 PM #770299CoronitaParticipant
Nevermind.. found the answer i think..
I thought so…
January 29, 2014 at 9:07 AM #770306jeff303ParticipantBogleheads has some good info as well: http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Backdoor_Roth_IRA
January 29, 2014 at 9:23 AM #770307CoronitaParticipant[quote=jeff303]Bogleheads has some good info as well: http://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Backdoor_Roth_IRA%5B/quote%5D
Thanks…It’s pretty retarded rule I think…
If I have roll all my IRA into a 401k, and then contribute $5000 to a non-deductible IRA, then I can roll it over into a Roth without tax consequences.
But… If I have any rollover IRA’s, then I need to pay taxes on all my IRA even if I rollover $5000?
That sucks… I don’t like my 401k plan so I don’t want to roll everything over..
Oh well. at least my employer has a roth 401k….
January 29, 2014 at 9:32 AM #770308SK in CVParticipantSeems like you found the right answer. The “backdoor” Roth is a great vehicle for SOME people. Others, not so much. For those with no IRA accounts of any kind, it’s perfect. If you have any assets in a pre-tax IRA (of any sort, including SEP and SIMPLE IRA’s) it just doesn’t work.
January 29, 2014 at 9:43 AM #770309CoronitaParticipant[quote=SK in CV]Seems like you found the right answer. The “backdoor” Roth is a great vehicle for SOME people. Others, not so much. For those with no IRA accounts of any kind, it’s perfect. If you have any assets in a pre-tax IRA (of any sort, including SEP and SIMPLE IRA’s) it just doesn’t work.[/quote]
So I guess the answer is “backdoor” Roth isn’t illegal in itself. It’s just it’s conditional if you have other IRA accounts or not…
I don’t understand why the IRS would classify IRA differently from a 401k. It just seems a little weird.
I mean, I checked with my employer, and if I wanted to i could rollover all of my IRA’s into my 401k..And then I think I would be fine if I really wanted to do that..
But the reason why I don’t want to is I don’t like my employer’s 401k fund selection….
Makes no sense to me whatsoever….
January 29, 2014 at 11:12 AM #770310UCGalParticipantI’m wondering of the “MyRA” mentioned last night by the POTUS at the SOTU is another way of doing a backdoor roth.
From what I’m reading – you can contribute up to $15k (total) in post-tax money to this MYRA. When it hits $15k, you can/must roll it to a Roth IRA.
Presumably you can rinse and repeat this.
While it’s in the MyRA it’s in the equivalent of the TSP G-fund… which is a great option for fixed income stuff not normally available to non public workers.
I’m hoping I’m reading the tea leaves right on this.
January 29, 2014 at 4:13 PM #770339CoronitaParticipant[quote=UCGal]I’m wondering of the “MyRA” mentioned last night by the POTUS at the SOTU is another way of doing a backdoor roth.
From what I’m reading – you can contribute up to $15k (total) in post-tax money to this MYRA. When it hits $15k, you can/must roll it to a Roth IRA.
Presumably you can rinse and repeat this.
While it’s in the MyRA it’s in the equivalent of the TSP G-fund… which is a great option for fixed income stuff not normally available to non public workers.
I’m hoping I’m reading the tea leaves right on this.[/quote]
I’m actually pretty happy that Obama is doing this. I think anything that encourages savings in this country is a good thing.
MyRA contributions unfortunately aren’t available to everyone though, because I think there are certain income thresholds to from what I read..
ACK!!! acronym overload.. I’m not use to POTUS and SOTU
January 30, 2014 at 9:07 AM #770363UCGalParticipantSince I’m not quite a 1%er I don’t have to worry about the $191k household income cap. π
I’m very curious about the details on the myRA – and will be watching closely. Especially as to whether my “rinse and repeat” scenario will be true.
I can see upper middle income folks like me (under the $191k cap) diverting a lot of money into backdoor roths this way. Maybe not the intention of the program, but it may not be precluded.
January 30, 2014 at 9:15 AM #770364CoronitaParticipant[quote=UCGal]Since I’m not quite a 1%er I don’t have to worry about the $191k household income cap. π
I’m very curious about the details on the myRA – and will be watching closely. Especially as to whether my “rinse and repeat” scenario will be true.
I can see upper middle income folks like me (under the $191k cap) diverting a lot of money into backdoor roths this way. Maybe not the intention of the program, but it may not be precluded.[/quote]
That definitely sounds like a good plan and idea… My understanding is there isn’t a minimum holding requirement period….
January 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM #770366livinincaliParticipant[quote=UCGal]I’m wondering of the “MyRA” mentioned last night by the POTUS at the SOTU is another way of doing a backdoor roth.
From what I’m reading – you can contribute up to $15k (total) in post-tax money to this MYRA. When it hits $15k, you can/must roll it to a Roth IRA.
Presumably you can rinse and repeat this.
While it’s in the MyRA it’s in the equivalent of the TSP G-fund… which is a great option for fixed income stuff not normally available to non public workers.
I’m hoping I’m reading the tea leaves right on this.[/quote]
I not a huge fan of Roth IRAs because I fully expect the government to rescind the tax benefit before most people will receive it. If they can go after government pensions it won’t be hard to go after Roth IRA tax benefits (you’re minority group that has it better than the general population). I prefer the known tax benefit now rather than hopefully getting a tax benefit down the road.
January 30, 2014 at 10:40 AM #770367SK in CVParticipant[quote=livinincali]
I not a huge fan of Roth IRAs because I fully expect the government to rescind the tax benefit before most people will receive it. If they can go after government pensions it won’t be hard to go after Roth IRA tax benefits (you’re minority group that has it better than the general population). I prefer the known tax benefit now rather than hopefully getting a tax benefit down the road.[/quote]Any examples of future tax benefits that have been written into the law and then reversed and repealed? I can’t think of any.
January 30, 2014 at 10:57 AM #770368CoronitaParticipant[quote=SK in CV][quote=livinincali]
I not a huge fan of Roth IRAs because I fully expect the government to rescind the tax benefit before most people will receive it. If they can go after government pensions it won’t be hard to go after Roth IRA tax benefits (you’re minority group that has it better than the general population). I prefer the known tax benefit now rather than hopefully getting a tax benefit down the road.[/quote]Any examples of future tax benefits that have been written into the law and then reversed and repealed? I can’t think of any.[/quote]
Do retroactive taxes count? π
January 30, 2014 at 11:18 AM #770369SK in CVParticipantNot exactly. That’s happened, but not very often.
January 30, 2014 at 11:56 AM #770375livinincaliParticipant[quote=SK in CV]
Any examples of future tax benefits that have been written into the law and then reversed and repealed? I can’t think of any.[/quote]What about the tax act of 1986. It did all of the following things that would seem to be removal of various tax advantages.
[quote]
Moreover, interest on consumer loans such as credit card debt was no longer deductible. An existing provision in the tax code, called Income Averaging, which reduced taxes for those only recently making a much higher salary than before, was eliminated (although later partially reinstated, for farmers in 1997 and for fishermen in 2004). The Act, however, increased the personal exemption and standard deduction.The Individual Retirement Account (IRA) deduction was severely restricted. The IRA had been created as part of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, where employees not covered by a pension plan could contribute the lesser of $1500 or 15% of earned income.[6] The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) removed the pension plan clause and raised the contribution limit to $2000 or 100% of earned income. The 1986 Tax Reform Act retained the $2000 contribution limit, but restricted the deductibility for households that have pension plan coverage and have moderate to high incomes. Non-deductible contributions were allowed.
Depreciation deductions were also curtailed. Prior to ERTA81, depreciation was based on “useful life” calculations provided by the Treasury Department. ERTA81 set up the “accelerated cost recovery system,” or ACRS. This set up a series of useful lives based on 3 years for technical equipment, 5 years for non-technical office equipment, 10 years for industrial equipment, and 15 years for real property. TRA86 lengthened these lives, and lengthened them further for taxpayers covered by the alternative minimum tax (AMT). These latter, longer lives approximate “economic depreciation,” a concept economists have used to determine the actual life of an asset relative to its economic value.
Defined contribution pension contributions were curtailed. The law prior to TRA86 was that DC pension limits were the lesser of 25% of compensation or $30,000. This could be accomplished by any combination of elective deferrals and profit sharing contributions. TRA86 introduced an elective deferral limit of $7000, indexed to inflation. Since the profit sharing percentage must be uniform for all employees, this had the intended result of making more equitable contributions to 401(k)’s and other types of DC pension plans.
[/quote] -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.