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

Posted on August 19, 2019 by James Lange in Beneficiary Designations, Current Events, Estate Planning, Estate Tax, Government Programs, Income Tax, Inherited IRAs, IRAs, Retirement Plan Options, Retirement Planning, Roth 401(k), Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, Stretch IRA, Traditional IRA and tagged death of the stretch ira, James Lange, Retirement, Retirement Planning, Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversion.

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 1^st 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.

Pages: 1 2

The Hidden Money Grab In The SECURE Act

Posted on July 9, 2019 by James Lange in Current Events, Estate Planning, Inherited IRAs, IRAs, Roth 401(k), Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, Stretch IRA, Traditional IRA and tagged Beneficiaries, death of the stretch ira, James Lange, Roth IRA, Roth IRA Contributions, Roth IRA Conversion.

Capitol Building Washington DC used in Pay Taxes Later Blog Photo Courtesy of Delgado Photos

*Please note this blog post is a repost with permission from Forbes.com

On May 23, 2019, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed the SECURE Act (Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement). A more appropriate name for the bill would be the Extreme Death-Tax for IRA and Retirement Plan Owners Act because it gives the IRS carte blanche to confiscate up to one-third of your IRA and retirement plans. In other words, it’s a money grab.

The SECURE Act is wrapped with all kinds of goodies that are unfortunately of limited benefit to most established IRA and retirement plan owners. But if you have an IRA or a retirement plan that you were hoping you could leave to your children in a tax-efficient manner after you are gone, you need to be concerned about one provision in the fine print that could cost them dearly. Non-spouse beneficiaries of IRAs and retirement plans are required to eventually withdraw the money from its tax-sheltered status, but the current law allows them to minimize the amount of their Required Minimum Distributions by “stretching” them over their own lifetimes. This is called a “Stretch IRA”. Distributions from a Traditional Inherited IRA are taxable, so the longer your beneficiaries can postpone or defer them (and hence the tax), the better off they will be. The bad news is that the government wants their tax money, and they want it sooner than later. The ticking time bomb buried in the SECURE Act is a small provision that changes the rules that currently allow your beneficiaries to take distributions from Traditional IRAs that they have inherited and pay the tax over their lifetimes, virtually cementing “the death of the Stretch IRA.” (The provisions of the SECURE Act also apply to Inherited Roth IRAs, but the distributions from a Roth IRA are not taxable.)

If there is any good news about the SECURE Act, it’s that it does not require your beneficiary to liquidate and pay tax on your entire Traditional IRA immediately after your death. For many people, that would be a costly nightmare because they would likely be bumped into a much higher tax bracket. Under the provisions of the SECURE Act, if you leave a Traditional IRA or retirement plan to a beneficiary other than your spouse, they can defer withdrawals (and taxes) for up to 10 years. (There are some exceptions for minors and children with disabilities etc.) If you leave a Roth IRA to your child, they will still have to withdraw the entire account within 10 years of your death, but again, those distributions will not be taxable. But any way you look at it, the provisions of the SECURE Act are a huge change from the old rules that allow a non-spouse heir to “stretch” the Required Minimum Distributions from a Traditional Inherited IRA over their lifetime and defer the income tax due.

That’s not the end of the bad news. Once your beneficiary withdraws all the money from your retirement account, it will no longer have the tax protection that it currently enjoys. In other words, even if your children inherited a Roth IRA from you and the distributions themselves weren’t taxable, the earnings on the money that they were required to withdraw are another story. Even if they wisely reinvest all the money they withdrew from their Inherited Traditional or Roth IRA into a brokerage account, they’re still going to have to start paying income taxes on the dividends, interest and realized capital gains that the money earns.

I know there are readers out there who are thinking “it can’t be all that bad”. Yes, it is that bad. Here is a graph that demonstrates the difference between you leaving a $1 million IRA to your child under the existing law, and under the SECURE Act:

Child Inherits Stretched IRA Under Existing Law versus Child Inherits 10 Year IRA Under SECURE Act Reprinted with Permission from Forbes.com for Pay Taxes Later website

Child Inherits Stretched IRA Under Existing Law versus Child Inherits 10 Year IRA Under SECURE Act – James Lange

This graph shows the outcome if a $1 million Traditional IRA is inherited by a 45-year old child, and the Minimum Distributions that he is required to take are invested in a brokerage account that pays a 7 percent rate of return. Other assumptions are listed below*. The only difference between these two scenarios is when your child pays taxes! The solid line represents a child who can defer (or “stretch”) the taxes over his lifetime under the existing rules. At roughly age 86, that beneficiary who was subject to the existing law in place still has $2,000,000+. The dashed line represents the same child if he is required to take withdrawals under the provisions of the SECURE Act. At age 86, that same beneficiary has $0. Nothing. Nada. The SECURE Act can mean the difference between your child being financially secure versus being broke, yet Congress is trying to gloss over this provision buried in the fine print. I don’t think so!

The House of Representatives passed the SECURE Act by an overwhelming majority, so the probability that the Senate will pass a version of this legislation is quite good. In 2017, the Senate Finance Committee recommended the Death of the Stretch IRA by proposing the Retirement Enhancement and Savings Act (RESA). In true government fashion, RESA was unbelievably complicated. It allowed your non-spouse beneficiaries to exclude $450,000 of your IRA and stretch that portion over their lifetime – but anything over that amount had to be withdrawn within five years and the taxes paid. And if you had more than one non-spouse beneficiary, the amount that they’d be able to exclude from the accelerated tax would have depended on what percentage of your Traditional IRA they inherited. Imagine trying to plan your estate distribution around those rules!

The Senate is now floating an updated RESA 2019 that seems to say that it will change the original exclusion amount to $400,000. It will be a good change if it is passed. That is because instead of each IRA owner getting a $400,000 exclusion, the new version includes language to allow a $400,000 exclusion per beneficiary. When I first read that provision I thought I had either read it wrong or that it was a typo. That little detail would be extremely valuable (and make estate planning for IRAs and retirement plans far more favorable), especially for families with more than one child. But even in the Senate version, anything over and above that exclusion amount will have to be distributed (and the taxes paid) within five years of your death (instead of ten years like the House version).

Unfortunately, our “peeps” think the House version of the bill (which has a 10-year deferral period, but no exclusion) will be what eventually becomes law. This is particularly troubling because the Senate version would allow room for far more creative planning opportunities (and tax savings, because of the $400,000 per beneficiary exclusion). As of the time of this post, Senator Cruz is attempting to hold up the bill, but his reasons have nothing to do with the fine print that affects Inherited IRAs. The original version of the Act contained provisions about college tuition (Section 529) plans, but those provisions were stripped in the version the House voted on and Senator Cruz wants them restored. Unfortunately, no one is arguing about the biggest issue with the SECURE Act, which is the massive acceleration of distributions and taxes on your IRA after your death. And unless someone in Congress objects to the provision in the SECURE Act about Inherited IRAs, your non-spouse beneficiaries will find out the hard way that their elected officials have quietly arranged to pick your pockets upon your death.

I have been a popular guest on financial talk radio lately. Many of the hosts want to blame one political party or the other. I blame all of Congress. This is one of the few truly bipartisan bills that has potential devasting consequences, at least for my clients and readers, and it is highly likely to pass both sides of Congress. I wonder how many of our legislators in the House actually read this bill or understood what is was they voted for. Did they realize they are effectively—by accelerating income-tax collection on inherited IRAs and other retirement plans—imposing massive taxes on the families of IRA and retirement plans owners – even those with far less than a million dollars? Or perhaps they did understand it and hoped that the American public wouldn’t.

If you can’t tell by my tone, I am upset. I am also motivated to examine every strategy that we can use to legally avoid, or at least mitigate, the looming hammer of taxation on your Traditional IRAs and retirement plans. I’m going to address these strategies in a series of posts, so please read them to see how this proposal could affect someone in your specific situation. Even though the Senate version has a five-year tax acceleration instead of a ten-year, the Senate version could be better for most readers because of the value of the exclusion – especially if you have multiple beneficiaries.

Please check for follow-up posts on this subject. I will show you some strategies to protect your family from the Death of the Stretch IRA and keep more of your hard-earned money in your hands.

James Lange

Assumptions used for Graph

$1 Million Traditional IRA inherited by 45-Year Old Married Beneficiary
7% rate of return on all assets
Beneficiary’s salary $100,000
Beneficiary’s annual expenses $90,000
Beneficiary’s Social Security Income at age 67 $40,000

Roth IRA Conversions Early in 2016 Present Potential Advantages

Posted on February 22, 2016 by James Lange in 401(k), Estate Planning, Retirement Planning, Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, Tax Law, Traditional IRA and tagged Retirement Planning, Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, undo roth ira conversion.

Disclaimer: Please note that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 removed the ability for taxpayers to do any “recharacterizations” of Roth IRA conversions after 12/31/2017. The material below was created and published prior the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.

Let’s face it. The stock market has declined a lot in the past few months.

Many people wonder if they should move to cash and do nothing with their investments. While we do not recommend trying to time the future moves in the stock market, the reality is that it is better to buy low and let it grow more in the future. This is especially true for Roth IRA conversions which result in long-term advantages when the account grows after the conversion. So maybe the time to convert is now.

Lange Roth IRA Money Nest Egg

But, what if the market continues to decline after you convert? One good thing about the current tax law is that you can undo a 2016 conversion as late as April 15, 2017 and perhaps even to October 15, 2017. This gives you a long time, over a year, to see if it grows. If it really dives after you convert, you can even do another conversion at a lower price and undo the first conversion later. The technical term for the undoing of a conversion is a recharacterization, because the Roth IRA is recharacterized as a traditional IRA by moving it back to the original or a different traditional IRA account. Converting early in the year is often recommended as it gives the account more time to grow before a decision must be made on a potential recharacterization.

We have written many articles about Roth IRAs and Roth conversions and included discussions of the extensive advantages they provide. We discuss conversions in our book Retire Secure! and we have written an entire book on Roth IRAs called The Roth Revolution. Both of these books can be purchased on Amazon, but we would be happy to send you a copy for free. To receive a free copy, call us at 412-521-2732, or email admin@paytaxeslater.com and ask for one. Just reference this newsletter offer! These articles and discussions go into much deeper detail on the many strategic ways to do Roth conversions to your advantage, depending on your current situation.

The Roth conversion amount will add to your taxable income, so there are many tax traps to consider when deciding how much to convert, such as …

Higher tax rates and related tax surcharges and phaseouts of deductions first implemented for 2013 could result in extra tax if you convert too much.
For people who are covered by Medicare parts B and/or D, and pay Medicare premiums, converting too much in 2016 can raise the Medicare premiums in 2018.
Also, for medium- or lower-income people who get Social Security income, a conversion can make more of the Social Security subject to tax and also can turn tax-free long-term capital gains and qualified dividends into taxable amounts.

However, paying extra tax can sometimes be worth it in the long run if the Roth IRA account grows a lot after the conversion. These are just some of the things that should be considered in determining the best conversion amount.

Other considerations include the current and future financial and income tax situations of you and your beneficiaries. As we move further into an election year, the possibility of tax law changes looms ahead. Since future tax laws can affect the long-term success of a conversion early in 2016, they should also be considered.

Due to all these considerations and more, we stress the importance of “running the numbers” to be certain that the decisions you are making about Roth IRA conversions are absolutely right for your situation. In general, we like Roth IRA conversions for taxpayers who can make a conversion and stay in the same tax bracket they are currently in, and have the funds to pay for the Roth conversion from outside of the IRA. It is best to run the numbers to determine the most appropriate time and amount for your situation. This is a service that we have provided for hundreds of clients and currently offer free for our assets under management clients. We like to do these number running sessions with the clients in the room. This allows them the opportunity to bring up questions, adjust the scenarios, and feel extremely comfortable with the final decisions.

We usually find many people hesitant to make any changes in their investments when they decline in value. However, you should not pass up the opportunity to do a Roth conversion in a troubled market, as it could provide you and your family more financial security in the long run. Because of the many things to be considered when doing a Roth conversion, we suggest you discuss how much to convert in 2016 with your qualified advisor.

If you are interested about learning about whether a Roth IRA conversion is right for you, please click here and fill out our pre-qualification form. If you qualify, we will contact you to schedule an appointment with either James Lange or one of his tax experts.

Unfortunately, this Free Second Opinion is for qualified Western Pennsylvania residents only.

Save

4 Reasons Why We’re Excited that Retire Secure! is Interactive on the Web!

Posted on October 29, 2015 by James Lange in 401(k), Beneficiary Designations, Economy, Estate Planning, Index Investing, IRAs, Lange’s Cascading Beneficiary Plan, Life Insurance, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Roth 401(k), Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, Social Security, Tax Law, Traditional IRA and tagged 401(k), Asset Management, Beneficiary Designations, Estate Planning, Financial Planning, IRA, James Lange, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Retire Secure, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, Retire Secure! Third Edition, Retirement Planning, Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversion, Roth IRA Conversions, Social Security, Western Pennsylvania.

If you haven’t made your way to www.langeretirementbook.com yet, now is the time!

Here at the Lange Financial Group, LLC, we are very excited to bring you an interactive version of Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most Out of What You’ve Got.

Reason #1 – The entire book is on this website. Yes, all 420 pages of the book, including the front and back covers, all about the best strategies for retirement and estate planning.

Reason #2 – The book is divided into chapters for ease of reading. Meaning, you don’t have to flip through 400-some pages to get to Chapter 11 – The Best Ways to Transfer Wealth and Cut Taxes for the Next Generation.

Reason #3 – We honestly haven’t seen anything like this before. Granted, I’ve read magazines on viewers where you can flip the pages as you read. But not a website for a book that includes a viewer, as well as a forum where readers can engage with each other.

The comments are moderated by the Lange Financial Group, LLC staff and myself. One of us will reply to your comment as soon as we can. To leave a comment, all you need to do is connect with your Amazon, Facebook, or LinkedIn account. This measure is for your protection, as well as ours. We don’t want spammers posting comments or incorrect information about such an important topic.

Reason #4 – We are hoping this interactive website encourages you to purchase the book! Retire Secure! is available from Amazon and JamesLange.com. Once you’ve read the book, feel free to return to LangeRetirementBook.com to ask questions, as well as Amazon and Goodreads to review the book for the benefit of others.

Save

How Advisors Should Handle the IRA and Retirement Plan Beneficiary Form

Posted on August 7, 2015 by James Lange in Beneficiary Designations, Estate Planning, IRAs, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Traditional IRA and tagged Beneficiary Designations, Estate Planning Attorney, James Lange, Lange’s Cascading Beneficiary Plan, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, retirement plan beneficiary form, Retirement Planning, Trusts.

retirement-plan-beneficiary-form-trusts-the-roth-revolution-james-lange The ability to know what to do with an IRA or retirement plan beneficiary form can often be detrimental.

First, know we are on shaky ground. The conservative and proper legal advice is to request the client have their estate attorney fill out the beneficiary designation forms.

There are several advantages of having an estate attorney fill out the forms

Eliminates or drastically reduces your exposure for not filling out the form correctly and consistent with the clients’ wishes
Presumably, the estate attorney has a “big picture” of how the estate will be distributed and the IRA and retirement plan beneficiary designation is an important piece to that entire puzzle

For most traditional clients, I prefer the plan described in chapter 12 of Retire Secure! (Wiley, 2006). The chapter, “The Ideal Beneficiary Designation of Your Retirement Plan” describes what I consider the “master plan”.

Assume that you have a traditional family with children and grandchildren or even the potential to have grandchildren in the future. Let’s also assume that your client and their spouses trust each other completely and the client’s children are by now responsible adults (if not, see the discussion about trusts below).

Primary Beneficiary:

My spouse __________________

Contingent beneficiary

My children______________, ___________, and __________equally, per stirpes

Per stirpes is Latin for by representation. Adding per stirpes is critical. Let’s assume one of your client’s children either predeceases your client or your client’s child wants to disclaim a portion of the inherited IRA to their children, i.e. your client’s grandchildren. Without the words per stirpes, (assuming that the form does not have a box to check to indicate a per stirpes designation), the share of the predeceased or disclaiming child would not go to their children, but rather to their siblings, because the majority of beneficiary forms do not assume a per stirpes distribution unless you specifically state per stirpes in the designation. Presumably, most of your clients do not want to disinherit their grandchildren. Without per stirpes, you could have a grandchild that not only lost their parent, but also lost any inheritance they may have used for support, education, etc.

I also recommend putting current addresses and social security numbers on the IRA or retirement plan beneficiary designation.

Please note, however, that even this solution is only a partial and temporary solution. This solution still allows the possibility of having your client’s grandchild (or child if they are young) drinking $1,000 per bottle champagne to celebrate their purchase of a new Hummer on their 21^st birthday.

So, to do the job right, you should name a well drafted trust, either a dedicated trust or a trust that is currently part of the client’s will or living trust, for the benefit of grandchildren (or children if client’s children are young and/or not sufficiently mature to handle an inheritance). In addition, you need at least one trust for each set of your client’s children’s children. There are lots of variations on these trusts, but for the IRA beneficiary purposes, they must meet 6 specific conditions in order to preserve the “stretch IRA” for the grandchildren.

Therefore, what will be a combination of practical, yet also proper advice is to fill out the forms the way I have suggested and recommend both orally and in writing that your client see a qualified estate planning attorney to properly fill out the IRA and retirement plan beneficiary forms.

-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.

Thank you.

Save

The Ideal Beneficiary for your IRA or Retirement Plan

Posted on June 15, 2015 by James Lange in Beneficiary Designations, Estate Planning, IRAs, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Tax Law, Traditional IRA and tagged Beneficiary Designations, Estate Planning, IRA, James Lange, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, Retirement Planning, Trusts, Wills.

Give Your Heirs as Much Flexibility as Possible

I gave serious thought to changing the title of Chapter 15, which discusses the ideal beneficiary for your retirement plan, to “My Pet Peeve”. This is because of how annoying I find it to see people spend thousands of dollars to create elaborate wills and trusts, only to render them useless because they carelessly listed the wrong beneficiary on their retirement plan. Unfortunately, it’s an all too common mistake.

What follows here is one of the most, if not THE most, important concepts in the book. Your will and trust documents do not control the distribution of your IRA or retirement plans. Any account that has a specific beneficiary designation will be distributed to the individuals listed on that beneficiary form, regardless of what your will or trust says. Why is this important? Well, I’ll tell you about a situation I became aware of recently. A gentleman who had been married and divorced twice prepared a will that left all of his assets to his children from his first marriage. Most of his wealth was in his retirement plan, though. He died unexpectedly, before he could get around to changing the beneficiary designation of that plan from his second ex-wife to his children. After his death, the second ex-wife (who had since remarried) received the very large retirement plan, and his children received the non-retirement assets, which were worth far less than the retirement plan. To add insult to injury, the second ex-wife made sure that his children knew that she had used her inheritance to buy herself and her new spouse very expensive cars – even going so far as to post photos on social media websites as proof! So your beneficiary designations are very, very important – so important that, in fact, if you’re my client I won’t even let you fill them out by yourself!

I like to give my clients as many options as I can. The beneficiary designation that I usually recommend gives your heirs as much flexibility as possible. It allows both your surviving spouse and your adult child, assuming that the child is the contingent beneficiary, to disclaim or refuse the inheritance to his or her own children (your children and/or grandchildren). Under current laws, this allows the children and grandchildren to take minimum distributions based on their own life expectancy. Will I still do this if the law changes? More than likely, yes, but the financial benefits will not be as significant as they were in previous years. If this topic interests you, then you’ll probably want to read Chapter 15 to learn about all the changes.

My next post will continue on the topic of beneficiary designations, and why they are important if your estate plan includes trusts. Stop back soon!

Jim

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.

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

Thank you.

Save

The Death of the Stretch IRA: It’s Time to Review the Retirement Plan Beneficiary Rules

Posted on May 28, 2015 by James Lange in Beneficiary Designations, IRAs, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Roth 401(k), Roth IRA, Traditional IRA and tagged Beneficiary Designations, James Lange, Retire Secure Book, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, Retirement, Retirement Planning, Roth IRA, Tax Law, Trusts.

The Death of the Stretch IRA, James Lange Those of you who have been following me for a while know that that one of my most cherished mantras is “Pay Taxes Later!” An extension of that mantra was my recommendation that, upon your death, your beneficiaries continue to take advantage of the minimum distribution rules to “stretch” your IRA for as long as possible so that they could achieve the maximum tax-deferred growth possible. This used to be a fairly straightforward concept but, with the increase in second and third marriages, as well as non-traditional marriages, it has become much more complicated.

To add to the confusion, there is increasing pressure from Congress to eliminate the Stretch IRA. This would be a very good time to review your retirement plan beneficiary rules, because you might want to change your designations. Non-spousal beneficiaries may soon be required to withdraw and pay taxes on inherited IRAs within five years. This idea was first introduced by Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus in 2013, and was thankfully withdrawn for lack of support. It reappeared in 2013 as part of President Obama’s budget proposals, and again in 2013 as part of a bill to reduce student loan debt. Killing the Stretch IRA, they felt, would provide enough revenue to reduce student loan rates for college tuition for one year. That bill was passed by the House but died in the Senate by only two votes. Then in 2014 and 2015, President Obama’s budget proposals again included a provision to kill the Stretch IRA. It seems clear to me that this measure, or a similar one, may eventually pass.

So who should be named the beneficiary of your retirement plan? Is one option better than another? Chapter 13 answers these questions assuming that the benefits of the Stretch IRA will continue under the current rules, and also presents some options that you can consider if the Stretch IRA is eventually eliminated. This chapter also offers some guidance in naming trusts as beneficiaries. If done properly, this can protect your assets from your child’s creditors, including their former spouses.

Don’t forget to stop back soon for a sneak peek at Chapter 14, which expands on some concepts critical to understanding the benefits of the Stretch IRA!

Jim

P.S. Here’s a video on The Death of the Stretch:

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

Save

Is It a Good Idea to Roll Over Your 401K to a Traditional or Roth IRA?

Posted on April 6, 2015 by James Lange in 401(k), IRAs, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Roth 401(k), Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, Traditional IRA and tagged 401(k), financial advisors, IRA, James Lange, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, Retirement, Retirement Book, roth 401k, Taxes, Western Pennsylvania.

Earlier this year, President Obama announced that he wants to create new rules that give financial advisors a “fiduciary” status under the law. I welcome this wholeheartedly because a fiduciary is required to always put his clients’ interests ahead of his own. This means that a financial advisor cannot make investment recommendations based on the commission they would receive from the investment, and that they must first consider the benefits that would be received by their client. As a fee-based advisor I have always served as a fiduciary to my clients and believe that it is an immensely important role.

I find it sad that we have to pass laws to make sure that the client’s interests are protected, but think that the President is on the right track with this one. More often than not, I hear of financial advisors who are only looking for a commission telling retirees that there’s no reason to not roll their old retirement plans to an IRA. That is simply not true and, in fact, there are circumstances where a retiree will be well served by keeping all or part of his or her retirement money in the original work plan.

These scenariosare discussed in detail in Chapter 6 of the new edition of Retire Secure! If you’ve wondered if rollingyour old 401(k) to an IRA is a good idea, you may very well find that you could save yourself from making a terrible financial decision by weighing all the potential advantages and disadvantages.

Many work plans give employees the opportunity to contribute to both pre-tax and after-tax accounts. If you ultimately decide that rolling your 401(k) to an IRA is the best course of action, you should make sure that you read Chapter 6 to educate yourself about the brand new IRS ruling that applies to your after-tax contributions. This ruling gives retirees an unprecedented opportunity to roll part of your 401(k) to a Roth IRA and, if done properly, the transaction will be completely tax free.

Check back soon for the latest information on Roth conversions!

Thanks for Reading!

Jim

Jim Lange 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.

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

Thank you.

Save

The Optimal Order for Spending Assets: Roth IRA or Traditional IRA First?

Posted on April 2, 2015 by James Lange in IRAs, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Roth 401(k), Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversions, Tax Law, Traditional IRA and tagged assets, IRA, ira withdrawal, James Lange, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, Retirement, Roth IRA, Roth IRA Conversion, Tax Law, Traditional IRA, Western Pennsylvania.

Roth IRA, James Lange, Retire Secure A Guide to Getting the Most Out of What You've Got Those of you who have attended my workshops or read the previous editions of my book may remember a rule of thumb I used to use that said, “Spend your after-tax dollars first, tax-deferred dollars second, and then your Roth IRA”. Well, guess what? The changes in the tax laws now mean that there are no more rules of thumb! My new advice is, “Spend your after-tax dollars first, and then withdraw traditional IRA and Roth IRA dollars strategically to optimize tax results.”

Changes in the tax law that affect capital gains and individual tax brackets, as well as new taxes that are aimed specifically at high income taxpayers mean that the advice I used to give in the past is now far too simplistic. Chapter 4 presents detailed information on how capital gains and other taxes should affect your decision to withdraw money from a traditional versus a Roth IRA account. Would you have thought that your marital status could affect your decision too? Is it possible to minimize the tax on your IRA withdrawals? (Hint: oh, yes!) If you have IRA and Roth IRA money left over when you die, is it better to leave one type of account over another to a child at your death?

Chapter 4 covers many new issues that you did not have to worry about in the past, which should certainly affect these decisions. I’d like to give you one word of caution, though. Each of the scenarios presented in this chapter is based on a specific set of variables. In one scenario, I changed only the account from which the taxpayer made the withdrawal, and the outcome is significantly different. Please don’t assume that your personal circumstances will result in the same outcome shown in these scenarios. Ask us to run the numbers for you!

Be sure to stop back for my next post, which will cover some ideas for managing your Required Minimum Distributions!

Thanks,

Jim

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

Save

Required Minimum Distributions: The Government Wants Their Money!

Posted on March 30, 2015 by James Lange in Income Tax, IRAs, Retire Secure!, Retirement Planning, Tax Law, Traditional IRA and tagged Income Tax, IRA, ira withdrawal, James Lange, Required Minimum Distributions, Retire Secure! A Guide to Getting the Most out of What You've Got, Retirement, RMDs, Taxation, Taxes.

Required Minimum Distributions, The Government Wants Their Money, James Lange - The Roth Revolution Blog Over the years, I’ve met with many clients who have managed to accumulate small fortunes over the course of their working careers – even though their incomes were never even high enough to put them in the top two or three tax brackets. I call these clients my “savers.” These individuals seem to share one trait – mainly that they simply don’t feel the need to spend money if they don’t have to. Instead, they set the money aside for the times when they absolutely must spend and, more often than not, they spend far less than what they could.

It’s these clients who seem to suffer the greatest shock when they turn 70 ½ and are required to start withdrawing money from their qualified retirement plans. They object, “But I don’t need the money! I just want to leave it sit there in case I need it some day!” And I have to tell them that it doesn’t matter if they need the money or not. The money that they squirreled away in their retirement plans for a rainy day has grown all these years without being taxed, and now the government wants their tax money!

There’s no avoiding the Required Minimum Distribution rules on traditional retirement plans. Failure to take a distribution when required, in fact, will cost you a penaly tax of 50% on the amount not withdrawn. Individuals who hate the RMD rules and have a spiteful streak might enjoy an interesting (and legal) tip presented in Chapter 5 that allows them to take advantage of the withholdings on the distribution to wait until the very last minute to pay the IRS their due, while also avoiding a late payment penalty. They can also learn of a possible way to completely avoid tax on their Required Minimum Distributions – and also a general increase in their tax bracket – by sending their RMD direct to a charity. I encourage everyone, though, to read Chapter 5 so that you have a good understanding of the RMD rules. Later chapters address proposed legislative changes to the rules that may not strike you as being significant, and unless you have a good understanding of how they currently work.

My next post will talk about rolling your old retirement plan to an IRA. There have been a lot of changes in the laws about this, so I hope you will stop back to get a summary of what you can expect.

Happy Reading!

Jim

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

Save