The SECURE Act: Is It Good For You Or Bad For You?

Is The SECURE Act Good for You or Bad For You by CPA/Attorney James Lange on Forbes.com

Will you be able to retire safely under the SECURE Act?

 

This blog post is republished with permission from Forbes.com

My previous post introduced the potential consequences of the SECURE Act, which is being promoted as an “enhancement” for IRA and retirement plan owners.  This is because it includes provisions allowing some workers to make higher contributions to their workplace retirement plans. I think it is a stinking pig with a pretty bow, so I wanted to give retirement plan owners the good and bad news about it.

I am a fan of Roth IRAs because they allow you to have far more control over your finances in retirement than you might have otherwise had.  You are not required to take distributions from your Roth IRA, but the good news is that they’re not taxable if you do take them.  These tax benefits can be a critical factor for seniors, especially if you are suddenly faced with costly medical or long term care bills.   Saving money in a Roth account can offer financial flexibility to many older Americans – and one good thing about the SECURE Act is that it can help you achieve that flexibility.  Here’s how.

The Good News About The SECURE Act

Under the current law, you are not allowed to contribute to a Traditional IRA after age 70½.  (You can contribute to a Roth IRA at any age as long as you have taxable compensation, but only if your income is below a certain amount.)  The age limitation for making contributions to Traditional IRAs is bad for older workers – and that’s an important point because the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that about 19 percent of individuals between the ages of 70 and 74 are still in the workforce.  The SECURE Act eliminates that cutoff and allows workers of any age to continue making contributions to both Traditional and Roth IRAs.

That same provision of the SECURE Act offers a hidden bonus – it means that it will also be easier for older high-income Americans to do “back-door” Roth IRA conversions for a longer period of time.  The back-door Roth IRA conversion, currently blessed by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, is a method of bypassing the income limitations for Roth IRA contributions.  The current law prohibits contributions to a Roth IRA if your taxable income exceeds certain amounts.  Those amounts vary depending on your filing status.   But even if you are unable to take a tax deduction for your Traditional IRA contribution, you can still contribute to one because there are no income limitations.  Why bother?  Because, assuming you don’t have any other money in an IRA, you can immediately convert your Traditional IRA to a Roth IRA by doing a back-door conversion.  That’s a good thing because the earnings on the money you contributed can then grow tax-free instead of tax-deferred.

Here’s more good news.  The current law requires Traditional IRA owners to start withdrawing from their accounts by April 1st of the year after they turn 70 ½.  These Required Minimum Distributions (RMDs) can be bad for retirees because the distributions are taxable.  The increase in your taxable income can cause up to 85 percent of your Social Security benefits to be taxed and can also move you into a higher tax bracket.  And once you begin to take RMDs, you are no longer allowed to make additional contributions to your account, even if you are still working.  The SECURE Act increases the RMD age to 72, a change which will allow Traditional IRA owners to save more for their retirements.

There’s a hidden bonus in this change as well.  Increasing the RMD age to 72 will allow retirees more time to make tax-effective Roth IRA conversions.  What does that mean?  Once you are required to take distributions from your Traditional IRA and your taxable income increases, you may find yourself in such a high tax bracket that it may not be favorable to make Roth IRA conversions at all.

The Potentially Dire Consequences to Your Legacy with the “Death of the Stretch” IRA

The Death of the Stretch IRA is rearing its ugly head again.

 

Death of the Stretch Inherited IRAs by James Lange CPA/Attorney in Pittsburgh, PAAs I have written about, this is personal to me. I was hoping that distributions from my Roth IRA and IRA would be “stretched” over the life of my daughter and maybe grandchildren.  It could make a difference of well over a million dollars to my family.

If you have a million dollar or more IRA or retirement plan, this threatened (but as yet not totally defined) legislation could be just as devastating to you and your family.  Once the two houses reconcile their differences (see the above post for the details of the different proposals), established estate plans will likely need to be reevaluated.  This threat increases the merits of Lange’s Cascading Beneficiary Plan or a similar flexible estate plan. It also creates an even greater incentive for IRA owners considering significant Roth IRA conversions.

I wrote two books on this topic based on the proposal that advanced through the Senate Finance Committee beginning in 2016. While the changes to IRA and retirement plan distribution rules weren’t included in the last set of tax changes (much to our surprise), clearly the idea still has a huge bipartisan appeal.

The action points in both books was to reconsider and revisit the idea of converting more of your IRAs to Roth IRAs. This is consistent with my most recent recommendations encouraging higher conversions because of the low income-tax rates we are currently enjoying.  The threat of losing the ability to stretch distributions from IRAs and retirement plans for generations only makes looking into Roth IRA conversions more compelling. If you have an IRA and/or other retirement plan and were hoping to leave it to your heirs with a favorable tax treatment and want to be kept up to date with this information, please call our offices at 412-521-2732.

The Death of the Stretch is Back On Congress’ Agenda

The Death of the Stretch is Back On Congress’ Agenda

This just in.

Stretch IRA James Lange Pittsburgh PennsylvaniaThe House is scheduled to vote on Thursday, May 23, 2019, on the SECURE ACT. Then, it will be in the Senate’s court to vote on RESA. Then the House and Senate will need to reconcile the differences between the bills. Experts, including us, think a compromise will be found and that the “stretch IRA” as we know it, will be gone, dealing a severe blow to IRA and retirement plan owners who were hoping their heirs would be able to continue deferring the distributions on their inherited IRAs and retirement plans for decades.

Here is the story so far.

In mid-April, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., reintroduced their Retirement Enhancement and Savings Act (RESA).

Under this bill, which we’ve been talking about since 2016, the account balance in a defined contribution plan or IRA must be distributed and included in income by the beneficiary five years after the employee’s or IRA owner’s death. Surviving spouses, beneficiaries who are disabled or chronically ill individuals, individuals who are not more than 10 years younger than the employee (or IRA owner), or the child of the employee (or IRA owner) who has not reached the age of maturity are excluded from this rule. Plus, an exception to the five-year distribution deadline is provided for each beneficiary to the extent that the balance of the account they receive from the deceased employee or IRA owner does not exceed $400,000.

Also in April, the House Ways and Means Committee passed a bill known as the Secure Act (Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019). What was remarkable about the Secure Act is that it was fast-tracked and approved with lightning speed, with the intention “To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage retirement saving, and for other purposes.” And while it does include some incentives for people to participate in retirement plans, it also proposes the “death of the stretch IRA.” The House version of the bill differs from RESA in that it proposes a 10-year time limit on holding an inherited IRA or inherited Roth IRA or other defined contribution plan before all of the funds in the account must be distributed.  According to the summary provided by the House Committee on Ways and Means:

Section 401. Modifications to Required Minimum Distribution Rules: The legislation modifies the required minimum distribution rules with respect to defined contribution plan and IRA balances upon the death of the account owner. Under the legislation, distributions to individuals other than the surviving spouse of the employee (or IRA owner), disabled or chronically ill individuals, individuals who are not more than 10 years younger than the employee (or IRA owner), or child of the employee (or IRA owner) who has not reached the age of majority are generally required to be distributed by the end of the tenth calendar year following the year of the employee or IRA owner’s death.

We have been anticipating the death of the stretch IRA for years and wrote two books about its consequences.  We were pretty convinced it was going to be eliminated in the last round of tax law changes, and frankly, we were surprised when the limit on non-spouse heirs stretching distributions from inherited IRAs over their lifetimes was not included. But, it’s back, and once again the devil is in the details which will have to be hashed out between the two houses. In the next post, I will offer some insight into the consequences and preliminary recommendations.

If you have an IRA and/or other retirement plan and were hoping to leave it to your heirs with a favorable tax treatment and want to be kept up to date with this information, please contact our offices at 412-521-2732.

Jim Nabors Saved $4.8 Million in Taxes By Marrying His Husband

How Jim Nabors saved $4.8 Million in taxes by marrying his husband. Courtesy of PayTaxesLater.com

 

Jim Nabors: Actor, Singer, and Comedian

On November 30, 2017, Jim Nabors, perhaps most famous for his role as Gomer Pyle, died at the age of 87.  Jim is survived by his husband Stan Cadwallader, whom he married in 2013. Their marriage came one month after same-sex marriages became legal in Washington State.

It is quite eye-opening to look at the tax consequences of their decision to get married; Mr. Nabors died with a $13M estate.  The terms of his will are not public, but for the sake of argument let’s assume he left his estate to his husband. Because of the marriage, no Federal or Hawaiian estate or inheritance taxes are due at death because of the unlimited marital deduction.

Smart Estate Planning

If Jim and Stan had remained unmarried partners the payout to the Government would have been astronomical. A $3,000,000 payment in federal estate taxes alone is bad enough. A payment of over $1,800,000 in Hawaiian inheritance taxes would add a total of $4,800,000 in total taxes. These numbers don’t include the income taxes that will be saved because of the longer “stretch” a spouse receives on an inherited IRA or retirement plan.

The moral of the story is that for many life-long partners, gay or straight: Get Married for the Money.  Obviously the decision to marry hinges on more than whether marriage is a financially strategic move. But if you are simply avoiding the formalities, it might make sense to think about the long-term tax consequences on your financial security—for both you and your partner. Marriage is usually a big plus for purposes of Social Security, especially if one partner has a much stronger earnings record than the other partner.

More Information Is Always Available

For more information visit www.paytaxeslater.com.To schedule an appointment with Jim Lange, please call his office at 412-521-2732. You can always contact Jim at jim@paytaxeslater.com.

James Lange, CPA/Attorney of Lange Financial Group, LLC, is the author of several books on retirement and estate planning, including Live Gay, Retire Rich.  His books on retirement strategies have been endorsed by Charles Schwab, Larry King, Jane Bryant Quinn, Ed Slott, and many more.  He hosts a weekly financial show on KQV News Radio in Pittsburgh. PA.

 

Structuring Your Estate Plan Around President Trump’s Proposed Tax Reform

What will the impact of President Trump’s tax reform mean for you?

President Trumps Tax Reform Proposal and How it Might Affect You James Lange

You can hardly open a newspaper these days without seeing commentary about President Trump and the Republican Congress.  Whatever political side you’re on is irrelevant; the important thing is to stay on top of what the government is doing with respects to tax reform.  Ultimately, it just might mean more money for your family.

Will President Trump Cut Taxes?

What do we know is going to happen?  Since they were part of President Trump’s campaign platform, decreases in personal income tax rates are likely to be a part of a tax reform proposal. Readers who are old enough to remember President Reagan might recall that, during his first term, he implemented new economic policies that were referred to as Reaganomics.  One of the largest cornerstones of Reaganomics was the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981.  This Act lowered the top marginal personal income tax bracket by a whopping 20 percent, from 70 percent to 50 percent, and the lowest tax bracket from 14 percent to 11 percent.  Sounds good, right?  To the unsuspecting citizen, perhaps, but here’s the catch:  after the Act was passed and personal income tax rates decreased, the Treasury Department’s annual tax revenues did not suffer at all, as one might expect they would.  Tax revenues actually increased during Reagan’s two-term presidency – from 18.1 percent to 18.2 percent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP)!  And the reason that those revenues increased was because the Republican Congress quietly passed other laws that raised other types of taxes!  Uh, oh!

The Effect of the Trump Tax Plan

The non-partisan Tax Policy Center expects that there will be $7 trillion added to the federal deficit over the next decade if President Trump’s plan to restructure the personal income tax brackets is made in to law.  With the country’s debt amounting to over 104 percent of our Gross Domestic Product in 2015, a reduction in the personal income tax rates could have a far-reaching and devastating effect unless they get money from somewhere else.  I’ve been talking a lot about the Death of the Stretch IRA, and this is exactly why I believe that it is imminent.  If the President’s promise to change the personal income tax brackets is made into law and the unsuspecting voters are appeased, he and Congress will be looking for new ways to minimize its effects on the country’s cash flow.  With an estimated $25 trillion being held in previously untaxed retirement plans, it seems likely to me that one of the first things they will consider is accelerating the tax bill that will be owed by individuals who inherit that money.  After all, they still have more money than they did before they received their inheritance, right?  Why complain, even if it is less than they could have had?

Tax Reform and the Death of the Stretch IRA

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – I believe that the Death of the Stretch IRA legislation will be included as part of a major tax reform bill because it provides a way to pay for the personal income tax cuts that our politicians have promised.  And while any personal income tax reform will receive intense coverage by the media, any included legislation that spells the Death of the Stretch IRA will probably be completely overshadowed by news of the latest celebrity wedding in Hollywood.    If you subscribe to this blog, though, you’ll be notified as soon as it happens, so that you can take whatever steps are appropriate for your own situation.

Impact of Tax Reform

Unfortunately, it’s unlikely that those personal income tax decreases will be permanent.  Historically, when one administration reduces taxes, the next administration does the reverse.  President Reagan’s eventual successor, George W. Bush, famously promised Americans “Read my lips, no new taxes!”, but was unable to keep his word because the Democratic-controlled Congress voted to raise them.  So what will the impact of a major tax reform mean for you?  Even if President Trump is successful in pushing a tax reform bill through Congress, they’re not likely to stay as low as what he has proposed.  Could this mean that Roth IRA conversions might suddenly make sense to far more people than in the past?  We’ll have to wait and see just how low these new tax brackets might go!  Stop back soon for more ramblings!

-Jim

For more information on this topic, please visit our Death of the Stretch IRA resource.

 

P.S. Did you miss a video blog post? Here are the past video blog posts in this video series.

Will New Rules for Inherited IRAs Mean the Death of the Stretch IRA?

Are There Any Exceptions to the Death of the Stretch IRA Legislation?

How will your Required Minimum Distributions Work After the Death of the Stretch IRA Legislation?

Can a Charitable Remainder Unitrust (CRUT) Protect your Heirs from the Death of the Stretch IRA?

What Should You Be Doing Now to Protect your Heirs from the Death of the Stretch IRA?

How Does The New DOL Fiduciary Rule Affect You?

Why is the Death of the Stretch IRA legislation likely to pass?

The Exclusions for the Death of the Stretch IRA

Using Gifting and Life Insurance as a Solution to the Death of the Stretch IRA

Using Roth Conversions as a Possible Solution for Death of the Stretch IRA

How Lange’s Cascading Beneficiary Plan can help protect your family against the Death of the Stretch IRA

How Flexible Estate Planning Can be a Solution for Death of the Stretch IRA

President Trump’s Tax Reform Proposal and How it Might Affect You

Trusts as Beneficiaries of Retirement Plans: A Possible Alternative to the Stretch IRA?

trusts james langeIf you’ve read my earlier posts, you know that much of the new edition of Retire Secure! addresses the ramifications of the legislation that, if passed, will kill the Stretch IRA. If this potential change is a concern for your family, then Chapter 17 is a “must-read” for you because it offers a possible alternative that will allow them to continue the tax deferral of your retirement plan for many years.

Trusts may be appropriate in many situations. We use them for young beneficiaries who, by law, cannot inherit money, and for older beneficiaries who can’t be trusted with money. Trusts can also be used to help minimize taxes at death (although this is not as common as in previous years). With more frequency, though, our office is using trusts to replace the benefits of the Stretch IRA. This application started when all of these campaigns to kill the Stretch IRA began, and we began to seek alternatives for our clients. Chapter 17 compares the value of an IRA assuming that the non-spouse beneficiary must withdraw the proceeds within 5 years, to the value of an IRA when it is protected by a specific type of trust. I think you will find the results very surprising.

The rules governing trusts are very complex, and, if you are interested in incorporating them in to your own estate plan, you will need the assistance of a competent professional.

Do you donate to charity? If so, my next post will cover the changes in the laws that affect charitable contributions.

All the best,

Jim

Jim Lange, Retirement and Estate Planning A nationally recognized IRA, Roth IRA conversion, and 401(k) expert, he is a regular speaker to both consumers and professional organizations. Jim is the creator of the Lange Cascading Beneficiary Plan™, a benchmark in retirement planning with the flexibility and control it offers the surviving spouse, and the founder of The Roth IRA Institute, created to train and educate financial advisors.

Jim’s strategies have been endorsed by The Wall Street Journal (33 times), Newsweek, Money Magazine, Smart Money, Reader’s Digest, Bottom Line, and Kiplinger’s. His articles have appeared in Bottom Line, Trusts and Estates Magazine, Financial Planning, The Tax Adviser, Journal of Retirement Planning, and The Pennsylvania Lawyer magazine.

Jim is the best-selling author of Retire Secure! (Wiley, 2006 and 2009), endorsed by Charles Schwab, Larry King, Ed Slott, Jane Bryant Quinn, Roger Ibbotson and The Roth Revolution, Pay Taxes Once and Never Again endorsed by Ed Slott, Natalie Choate and Bob Keebler.

If you’d like to be reminded as to when the book is coming out please fill out the form below.

Save

Life Insurance: Is It Right for Your Estate Plan?

Insurance salesmen are often maligned and are frequently the butt of some pretty bad jokes. At the risk of being categorized with those poor men and women, I’ll tell you that I don’t hesitate to recommend life insurance to many of my own clients after evaluating their estate planning needs. Why? Because when it is appropriate and structured properly, life insurance has a number of benefits that make it an excellent and possibly the best wealth transfer strategy.

If you read the earlier chapters, you learned that legislative changes since 2009 mean that federal estate tax is an issue for far fewer taxpayers than in the past. The IRS wasn’t feeling guilty about charging estate tax on your assets, they just gave more people a reason to worry about a completely different problem called federal income tax. Chapter 12 of Retire Secure! delves into some techniques that show how life insurance can be used to help minimize the damage to the estate caused by income taxes at death. It also discusses how life insurance can be used to provide liquidity for a number of estate settlement needs, and also how it can be used to benefit the estate if there is a disabled beneficiary. While life insurance can be extremely beneficial it is important to remember that in situations where taxes and other estate needs aren’t a concern, the cost of the life insurance – especially for a senior citizen – might not be worth it.
Life Insurance, Retire Secure, James Lange

In earlier chapters, there are several references to the possibility that Congress may eliminate the benefits of the Stretch IRA. Chapter 12 introduces some new ideas regarding the inclusion of a Charitable Remainder Unitrust (CRUT) in certain estate plans. How do you think your children would react if you named a charitable trust as the sole beneficiary of your retirement plan? They might react very favorably when they find out that, in the long run, they could end up with a lot more money.

This is a very complicated estate planning technique that is not appropriate for everyone. Under the right set of circumstances, though, life insurance can be a very effective addition to an estate plan – especially if the owner of the IRA has always supported charities. Would you like to endow a chair at your local university or symphony orchestra, or perhaps provide financial support for your favorite hospital or religious organization long after your death? Read Chapter 12 to learn the basics of this strategy, and how life insurance can play a key role.

Stop back soon for an update on some really big news about the possible death of the Stretch IRA.

Jim

Jim Lange, Retirement and Estate Planning A nationally recognized IRA, Roth IRA conversion, and 401(k) expert, he is a regular speaker to both consumers and professional organizations. Jim is the creator of the Lange Cascading Beneficiary Plan™, a benchmark in retirement planning with the flexibility and control it offers the surviving spouse, and the founder of The Roth IRA Institute, created to train and educate financial advisors.

Jim’s strategies have been endorsed by The Wall Street Journal (33 times), Newsweek, Money Magazine, Smart Money, Reader’s Digest, Bottom Line, and Kiplinger’s. His articles have appeared in Bottom Line, Trusts and Estates Magazine, Financial Planning, The Tax Adviser, Journal of Retirement Planning, and The Pennsylvania Lawyer magazine.

Jim is the best-selling author of Retire Secure! (Wiley, 2006 and 2009), endorsed by Charles Schwab, Larry King, Ed Slott, Jane Bryant Quinn, Roger Ibbotson and The Roth Revolution, Pay Taxes Once and Never Again endorsed by Ed Slott, Natalie Choate and Bob Keebler.

If you’d like to be reminded as to when the book is coming out please fill out the form below.

Save

The Clear Advantage of IRA and Retirement Plan Savings during the Accumulation Stage

If you are working or self-employed, to the extent you can afford to, please contribute the maximum to your retirement plans.

Mr. Pay Taxes Later and Mr. Pay Taxes Now had identical salaries, investment choices, and spending patterns, but there was one big difference. Mr. Pay Taxes Later invested as much as he could afford in his tax-deferred retirement plans—even though his employer did not match his contributions. Mr. Pay Taxes Now contributed nothing to his retirement account at work but invested his “savings” in an account outside of his retirement plan.

Please look at Figure 1. Mr. Pay Taxes Later’s investment is represented by the black curve, and Mr. Pay Taxes Now’s, by the gray curve. Look at the dramatic difference in the accumulations over time—nearly $2 million.

There you have it. Two people in the same tax bracket who earn and spend an identical amount of money and have identical investment rates of return. But, based on the simple application of the “Pay Taxes Later” rule, the difference is poverty in old age versus affluence and a $2 million estate.

Can't see this image - go to https://www.paytaxeslater.com/ and download the book!

Retirement Assests, IRAs vs. After-Tax Accumulations

Retire Secure! Pay Taxes Later – The Key to Making Your Money Last, 2nd Edition, James Lange, page. xxxi  https://www.paytaxeslater.com/

Have you done your year-end tax planning?

“Year-end tax planning is always complicated by the uncertainty that the following year may bring and 2012 is no exception. Indeed, year-end tax planning in 2012 is one of the most challenging in recent memory.

A combination of events – including possible expiration of some or all of the Bush-era tax cuts after 2012, the imposition of new so-called Medicare taxes on investments and wages, doubts about renewal of many tax extenders, and the threat of massive across-the-board federal spending cuts – have many taxpayers asking how can they prepare for 2013 and beyond … and what to do before then.

The short answer is to quickly become familiar with the expiring tax incentives and what may replace them after 2012 … and to plan accordingly. Year-end planning for 2012 requires a combination of multi-layered strategies, taking into account a variety of possible scenarios and outcomes(CCH tax briefing 2013).”

If you have questions or concerns about your tax situation in 2013 and beyond, speak to your advisor and start your planning now.

If we can help, call our office at 412.521.2732.

Take the 10-second test!

Please take the next 10 seconds to complete this survey about your financial future. . . you might rediscover some opportunities for financial growth.

Are you concerned about outliving your income?

Would you like to reduce (possibly eliminate) your quarterly estimated tax payments?

Would you like to see your grandchildren go to college?

Are you concerned about going into a nursing home?

Would you like to earn more competitive interest and preserve the safety of your nest egg?

Are you concerned about the stock market going down?

Would you like to find out how to take money out of your IRA tax free?

Is your house still titled as joint tenancy? (If yes, you are probably making a serious mistake!)

Are you concerned about which option to make regarding your minimum distribution requirements from your IRA at age 70 1/2?

Do you want to get more information on the Inherited IRA that can possibly continue your IRA for 30, 40, 50 years or longer even after you pass away?

Are you concerned about the likelihood that the government will get over 50% of your retirement accounts after you pass away?

If you have answered, Yes, to 3 or more of these questions, you should come in for a complimentary review!  Call 412.521.2732 and ask for Alice.

Remember, what you don’t know can hurt you!