...that is the question.I read Roy Lewis's series on the Roth IRA. Someone argued that his analysis on switching to a Roth is flawed. The decision shouldn't be based on tax savings, but maximum return. I was all set to go Roth, but now I don't have a warm fuzzy.Scenario: I'm 31 and currently contribute to a non-deductible IRA. I have savings now and can save enough later to pay for the taxes owed from converting, without resorting to using money from the IRA to pay. BTW, I'm at 28% tax bracket. Assuming I'm going to be in the same bracket when I retire (a mighty big one at that).Rolling over to a Roth sounds good. Here's my reasoning: The $2000/year contribution I currently make comes out of my *after tax* paycheck. Therefore, whether non-deductible or Roth, I've paid taxes on the $2000. I make too much to have a tax-deductible IRA. Since the Roth will give me tax free distributions in the future, why not go with it?OK, someone punch holes in my analysis. Please be kind. I need to know. Am I missing something? I can't sleep at nights.To sleep, to dreamAye! There's the rub...DT
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. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra