rhecker posted..."One example of how it should be very clear that a traditional IRA would pay more than a Roth would be to assume that while you are working and making contributions you are in the 15% tax bracket, and when you retire and taking distributions from the IRA you are in the 28% tax bracket.Oops.... I think I got that backwards. It should be contributions at 28% and distributions at 15%. Then a traditional would make more sense. "Back when I was 23 and IRA's 1st appeared the major selling point was that taxes in retirement would be lower than they are when one is working.I guess I knew intuitively that at retirement, I would be making more and spending more and my standard and cost of living would rise and like the other boats in my finances taxes too would rise. Being within 6 to 7 years of potential retirement, I can see (and hope) that I will be paying considerably more in taxes percentage wise than when I was 40.I would have selected Roth if I had the opportunity back when I was in my twenties. It all depends whether one sees their income, standard of living, and taxes increasing over the next 20 to 30 years. If so, the Roth is probably a better choice. If not, then traditional.BGP
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. M