Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 0
My wife and I are both 69, with no kids. We have a about $450,000 in Traditional IRAs. Does it make sense to convert now, in 2010, or never?
In addition to the issues listed by TwoCybers, a lot depends on your whole tax picture - the amount and nature of your other income and deductions.

For 2009 you don't have a RMD yet, but you will for 2010 or 2011, depending on your exact birthday.

You don't indicate how much, if anything, you're already withdrawing.
If you're already making annual withdrawals, it's probably because you need the money.

In extreme situation where you converted the whole thing, you'd see 1/3 or more of principal go to taxes, depending on your state. And with that, a subsequent loss of 1/3 of income from the IRA in all future years. Not an appealing option to me.

It's not an asset you're leaving to your kids, so it's for you for your lifetime. Think of it that way. What you draw, you'll pay tax on, and kids aren't an issue. So why pay taxes before you have to?

I'd be inclined, in your situation, to leave it in the Trad. IRA.

Print the post  


In accordance with IRS Circular 230, you cannot use the contents of any post on The Motley Fool's message boards to avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
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.