No. of Recommendations: 0
mkraft writes (in part):

Is there any reason to decide to recharacterize a Roth 'conversion' but *not* a Roth 'contribution'?

I reply:

I can think of at least two scenarios where this makes sense. First, the income of taxpayers who are married filing jointly may have unexpectedly exceeded the $100,000 limit for conversions while remaining below the $150,000 start of the phase-our range for contributions. Second, the contributions may be non-deductible if made to a traditional IRA (in which case the Roth is a no-brainer), while the converted funds (perhaps having begun life in a 401(k)) may trigger a large and unwanted tax liability. --Bob
Print the post  


The Retirement Investing Board
This is the board for all discussions related to Investing for and during retirement. To keep the board relevant and Foolish to everyone, please avoid making any posts pertaining to political partisanship. Fool on and Retire on!
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.