Dear Liz: My husband and I disagree over when to use pre-tax monies (e.g., IRAs). He’ll be 69, and I’ll be 67 in the coming year, so we aren’t required to take distributions yet, and he isn’t starting Social Security until 70.
He insists it’s better to use our regular assets to live on and let the IRA monies grow as long as possible. I’d rather save the regular assets (many of which have high capital gains) and leave them to our adult kids after we die.
The pre-tax funds are now $4 million. Now that our kids would have to empty the IRA accounts within 10 years (no more stretch IRAs), doesn’t that make it more reasonable to start using some of those funds now? I’m assuming the IRA balances would still be significant, even after taking required minimum distributions. I’ve gotten most of my IRA funds converted to Roth so we don’t have to take RMDs on that money, but he won’t consider conversions. Is he right about limiting our expenditures to money from the regular brokerage account? Once we start Social Security and RMDs, we’ll have to pay more taxes on any withdrawals compared to now.
Answer: A lot of savers got the message pounded into their heads that retirement accounts should be left to grow tax-deferred as long as possible. The idea was that you’d be in a lower tax bracket when you retired and were finally forced to start withdrawals. You could leave any remaining retirement money to your children and they could continue benefiting from tax deferral by extending distributions over their lifetimes.
As you note, this “stretch IRA” option is no longer available for most non-spouse beneficiaries, who must empty inherited retirement accounts within 10 years. Plus, good savers like you and your husband often face a higher tax bracket, not a lower one, when required minimum distributions begin. That further weakens the argument for delaying withdrawals as long as possible. Also, large-enough RMDs can raise your Medicare premiums and make more of your Social Security income taxable, compounding the overall cost.
From your heirs’ point of view, inheriting your Roth IRA or regular assets is a much better deal than inheriting a pre-tax IRA. Every withdrawal from the pre-tax IRA will be subject to income taxes. Not so the Roth, which offers tax-free withdrawals. Regular assets will get a new, stepped-up value at death so that no capital gains taxes will be due on the appreciation that occurred in the original owner’s lifetime.
You have a few years to make adjustments before you’re locked into RMDs. Roth conversions are one possibility, as are “proactive” withdrawals — starting distributions from your IRAs before they’re required. Additional options to explore include qualified charitable distributions (direct transfers from your IRA to a charity) and qualified longevity annuity contracts, which can provide a lifetime stream of income starting at age 85.
You’d be wise to consult a tax pro who can model different scenarios to figure out the best approach for your situation.