tvguy
Question anything the facts don't support.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2003
- Messages
- 46,558
That very well could be. The rules governing all types of IRAs are constantly changing. Seems like when too many people take advantage of a tax break, Congress eliminates it.If you were in a 32% tax bracket you would not have been eligible to contribute to a Roth directly anyway and your IRA would also would most likely not be tax deductible either if you participated in your employer's 401(k).
The 32% tax bracket for income is Over $364,200 but not over $462,500 for married filing jointly or over $182,100 but not over $231,250 for a single filers. The phase out amount is $136,000 for married filing joint or $83,000 for singles to contribute to an IRA and get the tax deferral benefit. If you were in this category, your financial advisor should have had you doing a backdoor roth IRA, so that way it will grow tax free.
I remember sitting in a (traditional) IRA seminar with a Financial Planner back in 1979 and he said......at that time......you could withdraw money from your IRA to pay medical bills, buy a house, buy a car, or fund your child's college education without penalty. Not anymore.
My mom started her RMD in 1993. RMDs are calculated on the account holders life expectancy. Back then you could use your presumably younger beneficiary's age to lower your RMD. With that option gave me the option when my mom passed of either cashing in the IRA, or continuing the same RMD she had been taking. So for the past 10 years I have been getting RMD's from her IRA. Now, beneficiaries must withdraw and pay taxes on the entire IRA amount within 10 years.