Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

Retirement Savings

Q&A: Is there a way to avoid taxes on RMDs?

By

Dear Liz: I have read advice on how to minimize taxes for people who potentially could have higher incomes and taxes after age 70 when they have pensions, Social Security payments and retirement account RMDs. The most common strategy seems to be doing Roth conversions during the later stages of employment, particularly if one spouse retires before the other so family income decreases.

However, I have not read good advice for older people when this problem has already started (other than noting that one way to avoid paying taxes is to donate the RMD funds). Is there any strategy for people who already have this triple income to reduce paying taxes and high Medicare premiums? We lived below our means for our working lives to save for retirement, but now see our savings dissipate due to the taxes and Medicare premiums.

Answer: Your situation illustrates why it’s so important to get good tax advice years before RMDs start, because you have fewer options after that point.

The alternative you mentioned is called a qualified charitable distribution. QCDs allow you to transfer a certain amount (up to $111,000 per individual in 2026) directly from your IRA to a charity. The transfer can satisfy your RMD requirement, but the amount is not included in your taxable income.

Another option is buying a qualified longevity annuity contract, or QLAC. These deferred income annuities start paying out guaranteed income for life once you’ve reached a certain age (up to age 85). You can use up to a certain lifetime amount of IRA money ($210,000 per individual in 2026) to purchase the contract. That money is excluded from RMD calculations until payouts begin.

As with any annuity, you’ll want to research your options, understand the downsides — including lack of liquidity, because the amount you spend typically can’t be recovered — and seek out fiduciary advice before you proceed.

Q&A: How long should I wait before withdrawing from my IRA?

By

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.

Q&A: Should I tap retirement savings for home repairs?

By

Dear Liz: We had a plan to make our retirement savings last until our mid- to late 80s. Now we have unanticipated house repairs that could amount to tens of thousands of dollars. Should we draw down our retirement savings and pay the associated taxes at a 22% rate, or take out a home equity loan, or some combination of that? Or are there other ideas?

Answer: Obviously, money that you spend can’t generate future returns to help fund your retirement. Liquidate too much of your nest egg, and you could find yourself short of funds long before your retirement ends.

But loans require paying interest, increasing your living costs and causing you to draw down your retirement funds faster than intended. Which is the better option depends on the details of your situation. A fee-only financial advisor or accredited financial counselor could give you personalized advice.

They will also be able to discuss additional options. A reverse mortgage could allow you to tap your home equity without having to repay the loan until you move out, sell the home or die. Or maybe it’s time to sell the house and move to a lower-maintenance living situation, such as a condo or retirement community. There’s no one-size-fits-all solution, but discussing the possibilities will help you clarify which is the best approach for you.

Q&A: Should I convert my IRA to a Roth?

By

Dear Liz: I have $160,000 in a 403(b) retirement plan and I’m 70. I know I have to start taking required minimum distributions (RMDs) at age 73. Should I transfer the funds to a Roth IRA or can I start taking the RMD from the 403(b) and leave the remainder to grow?

Answer: You can take your RMDs from the 403(b). Transferring the money to a Roth IRA would be known as a conversion, and that could make the entire amount taxable.

Late-in-life conversions can make sense if future RMDs will push you into a higher tax bracket than you are now, or if you’re willing to pay the tax bill to provide future tax-free income to your heirs. (Roths don’t have RMDs, so the account can be passed intact to your beneficiaries, who will usually have 10 years to drain the account.) Conversions can have other consequences, such as raising Medicare premiums, so a tax pro’s advice should be sought before proceeding.

Q&A: How to fix a mistaken contribution to an IRA

By

Dear Liz: When I retired, I had a small 401(k) with about $12,000 in it. Instead of rolling that money into an IRA, I took a distribution and paid taxes on it. I had no immediate need for the remaining funds, so eventually I opened a new IRA account and deposited the money.

I now realize I should have put it in a Roth IRA so I wouldn’t face double taxation on the money. This is the stupidest thing I’ve done in recent memory. Is there any legal mechanism I can use to get that money out and into a Roth without paying taxes the second time?

Answer: You made a mistake, but probably not the one you think.

You can’t contribute to an IRA — or a Roth IRA, for that matter — if you don’t have earned income. So if you’ve fully retired, you should contact your IRA administrator and let them know you need to withdraw your “excess contribution” as well as any earnings the contribution has made.

If you contributed this year, you have until your tax filing deadline — typically April 15, 2026 — to remove the funds without penalty. If you contributed in a previous year, you’ll typically face a 6% excise tax for each year the money remained in your account.

Now, a warning about financial mistakes: They tend to become more common as we age. That can be incredibly unsettling, especially to do-it-yourselfers used to handling finances competently on their own. Retirement is a good time to start implementing some guardrails to protect ourselves and our money.

Hiring a tax pro would be a good first step. Anything to do with a retirement fund should be run past this pro first to make sure you’re following the tax rules.

Q&A: RMDs gave me permission to retire

By

Dear Liz: When Roth conversions came along, they were touted as a way to avoid taxable required minimum distributions in retirement. I had built up a solid “traditional” account, and saw no reason to add to my tax bill by converting. I ignored the noise, although I did open and contribute to a Roth account in addition to my traditional IRA.

Now in my 70s, living on Social Security, RMDs and some investment income, I’m grateful I blocked the noise. In fact, I have the RMD income to thank for getting me to realize that I could afford to retire. If I’d converted, I’d probably still be working and afraid to spend my tax-free Roth. And it turns out the tax bite on the RMD isn’t all that bad.

Answer: Thanks for sharing your perspective!