The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing


Subject:  Re: Thanks to TMFPixy & Bob78164 Date:  9/17/1998  10:54 PM
Author:  Rayvt Number:  5494 of 99387

<<?" I had gone back and found the lengthy discussion suggested by Bob and came across someone's statement pointing out that congress 'usually' makes these types of changes prospectively, not retroactively as Pixy also stated. I suppose I'll take the leap and convert.
Thanks again!!!
xxdustyxx >>

Huh??? It sounds like you missed the point.

Try "prospective" as in "...from this point on, all withdrawals from a Roth IRA will be taxed..."

Congress has done this type of thing over and over again. In the 80's they changed the tax rules for real-estate, and decimated the returns of people who had counted on the tax benefits. In the 90's (or was it '86?) they started taxing SS benefits (at the 85% level).

Find somebody who has been paying taxes for 20-30 years. Ask them if they are paying more taxes now, and on more things, than they were 30 years ago. Then ask yourself why the next 30 years will be different from the previous 30 years.

The government can tax a Roth without directly taxing it. And make a reasonable argument for doing so. "Withdrawal from a Roth is not taxed, but the SS benefits paid will be reduced dollar for dollar. (or even 50 cents per dollar)" Coupled with "mandatory annual distribution from a Roth."

Again, there is nothing you can do now to avoid paying a tax later, if they institute it. But you can avoid paying a tax now, by not converting. Note: this applies to the conversion question, not to making new contributions to a Roth.

Copyright 1996-2020 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us