Investing

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
14,340
11,886
I really wish I had looked in to the Roth IRA contribution limits last year before maxing. Had no idea the limits were so bizarrely low for Married filing jointly and extra especially for Married filing separately. Now Turbo Tax is all, "Whoa buddy! Time to pay the penalty for saving!"
 

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
14,340
11,886
Yeah I believe that is the best option, I basically walked away out of frustration. Everyone is limited to the same contribution, it is post tax contribution, why set a limit on income? I'm not seeing the loophole or downside to letting people that make ten billion dollars contribute a measly $5,500 a year.

Rolling the excess in to a traditional IRA is also apparently an option, or just paying the 6% penalty on the excess ($5,500 or the excess >$0) each year (I think?).
 

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,326
43,170
Not being married(and making well under the 114k single limit), I've never looked into the married limits. What is with the "Married/Filing Separately" limit? That shit is retarded. $10,000 and you're disqualified?

Also, doesn't the Roth IRA 5500 count towards the traditional IRA limit as well? How can you roll the extra into it?
 

Burnesto

Molten Core Raider
2,142
126
Married is just double the single limit. Soy is correct as well on the $5,500 as a the total between the two types of IRAs, well $11,000 in Intrinsic's case.
 

Cad

I'm With HER ♀
<Bronze Donator>
24,496
45,438
Must be nice to be able to put funds in a Roth.
rolleyes.png
 

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
14,340
11,886
Yeah, so basically this is the detailed TurboTax instructions. My perspective for all this is what the computer tells me to do, I'm basically the last person in the world that should be offering financial guidance or instructions. And yeah, it isn't smart. With the marriage, house, dual incomes, and kids somewhere on the horizon this may be the year we sit down with someone to explain all this.

TurboTax IRA Recharacterizations_sl said:
Recharacterization is a process by which a contribution to a Roth or traditional IRA, or a conversion from a non-Roth IRA to a Roth IRA, can be reversed or "undone."

There are three possible recharacterization situations. There are detailed examples of recharacterizations here.

First, a regular, annual contribution to a traditional IRA can be recharacterized as a Roth IRA. The recharacterization must be for the same year the contribution was made. Any amount in the traditional IRA that is not a direct result of a regular contribution for the same year cannot be recharacterized (they are converted).

Second, a regular, annual contribution to a Roth IRA can be recharacterized as a traditional IRA contribution. The recharacterization must be for the same year the contribution was made. Any amount in the Roth IRA that is not a direct result of a regular contribution for the same year cannot be recharacterized as a contribution (they are recharacterizations of a conversion).

Third, an amount that was converted from a non-Roth IRA to a Roth IRA can be recharacterized as a non-Roth IRA from which it was converted. The recharacterization must be the direct result of a conversion. Any amounts in the Roth IRA that are not a direct result of a conversion (i.e. they are regular contributions) cannot be recharacterized as a conversion (they are a recharacterization of a contribution).

The recharacterization is effected by doing a trustee-to-trustee transfer of the funds in one IRA to a different type of IRA. The transfer must be a trustee-to-trustee transfer and must be done on or before the due date (with extensions) of the tax return. The transfer must include any earnings or losses on the original contributed or converted amount.

In a recharacterization, there is an amount recharacterized and an amount transferred. It is important to understand the difference. The amount recharacterized represents the original amount contributed or converted and does not include any earnings or losses incurred after the original contribution or conversion. The amount transferred is the amount recharacterized plus any earnings or minus any losses incurred after the original contribution or conversion. Refer to these examples.

The intent of recharacterization was to permit a taxpayer to reverse a contribution to a Roth IRA back to a traditional IRA. If the taxpayer converted a traditional IRA to a Roth IRA and then determined that the conversion was not advantageous, he or she could recharacterize the converted amount back to a traditional IRA. In such a case, the original conversion is essentially a rollover from the original traditional IRA to the resulting traditional IRA (although it is not considered a rollover for the "one rollover per year" rule.) The conversion to the Roth IRA is considered to have never happened.

Regular, annual contributions (not converted contributions) to a Roth IRA may also be recharacterized. A taxpayer might contribute $4,000 to a Roth IRA and then discover that the contribution is limited due to modified AGI. He or she can then recharacterize any or all of the $4,000 to a traditional IRA. In this case, the recharacterized amount is considered to have been made to the traditional IRA and the contribution to the Roth IRA is considered to have never been made.

Annual contributions to a traditional IRA may also be recharacterized. A taxpayer might contribute $4,000 to a traditional IRA and then discover that the contribution is non deductible. He or she can then recharacterize any or all of the $4,000 to a Roth IRA. In this case, the recharacterized amount is considered to have been made to the Roth IRA and the contribution to the traditional IRA is considered to have never been made.

A person can do a recharacterization even if the entire contribution was allowed.

If the original contribution or converted amount has experienced net losses at the time of the recharacterization, the transfer of the remaining amount will generally constitute a transfer of the original amount. For example, a $4,000 contribution to a new Roth IRA made in March is only worth $3,400 in August. The $3,400 (the entire amount of the account) is transferred in a trustee-to-trustee transfer to a traditional IRA. This is the recharacterization of the entire $4,000 originally contributed although only $3,400 was transferred.

For each recharacterization transaction, a 2013 Form 1099-R will be issued showing the amount transferred in box 1 and code "N" or code "R" in box 7. Code "N" is for a contribution or conversion that was made for 2013 and was recharacterized in 2013. Code "R" is for a contribution or conversion that was made for 2012 and was recharacterized in 2013. These Forms 1099-R are reported on the tax return for the years to which the recharacterization applies, not in the year the recharacterization actually took place. Form 1099-R with a code "N" is reported on a 2013 tax return. Form 1099-R with a code "R" need not be reported on a 2012 or 2013 tax return, although the recharacterization itself must be reported.

Most recharacterizations will occur in 2014 for contributions or conversions done in 2013. As a result, the recharacterizations will be reported on a 2014 Form 1099-R with a code "R" and may not be received until January of 2015. The recharacterization needs to be reported on the 2013 tax return, but the Form 1099-R with code "R" does not need to be reported separately on the 2013 or 2014 tax return.

Bolded one of the parts that seem applicable here. Guess I'll just call Scottrade and see what their process for doing a recharacterization requires.

Must be nice to be able to put funds in a Roth.
rolleyes.png
Apparently I wouldn't know anymore!
 

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,326
43,170

Cad

I'm With HER ♀
<Bronze Donator>
24,496
45,438
Yeah, I feel so bad for those who don't qualify...
Well you should. Its not like $180k family income is rich or anything. Obviously not hurting for spending cash but it's not models and bottles on the yacht in the south of France or some shit.
 

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,326
43,170
Well you should. Its not like $180k family income is rich or anything. Obviously not hurting for spending cash but it's not models and bottles on the yacht in the south of France or some shit.
Of course it's not rich, but it's far above the average income and you can get along just fine without the Roth IRA at that point.
 

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
14,340
11,886
Of course it's not rich, but it's far above the average income and you can get along just fine without the Roth IRA at that point.
But this is what I don't understand Soy, and I'll just add that it was never my intent for this to tangent off in this direction, what does "get along fine without the Roth IRA" mean? What advantage is there at a certain income level (presumably the ones defined by the law) that would prohibit an individual or couple from investing $5,500 or $11,000 a year? Or what disadvantage is imposed on people that do meet the income requirements by allowing those that don't to continue to contribute.

Is the tax advantage so great during retirement that the feeling is if you make enough you should invest it in other areas that can be taxed more? And saving less than 5% of your income a year ($5,500 @ $129,000 --edit: err don't do math on conference calls) is not some magic road map to retiring a billionaire.

It is my fault for trying to understand the rules and question why they are in place, heh.
 

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,326
43,170
"Get along fine..." means you're making more money than a vast majority of the country and you still have several other investment/retirement options to choose from. The government decided that the Roth IRA was to help with a certain set of citizens based on their income. It is what it is, I guess is what I'm saying. Look at the bright side, maybe the tax rates will be lower in 30 years and all these people maxing out their Roth will be on the losing end! Maybe.
 

Cad

I'm With HER ♀
<Bronze Donator>
24,496
45,438
If you start maxing your Roth every year in your 20's it adds up to some pretty significant tax savings over time. Lots of tax breaks only apply to those who make less, this is just one of them.

I always have to tread lightly around people I know who ask me about my Roth and make sure I'm doing it, and I have to be like "yea, of course!". Luckily you peasants don't know me so I can just go, fuck its gay that I can't contribute to a Roth
smile.png
 

Soriak_sl

shitlord
783
0
Deductions for retirement savings are extremely costly in terms of lost tax revenue. Hence why they're targeted. If you make $180k+/yr, you don't need a tax break for investments to be attractive.
 

Fedor

<Banned>
17,346
47,327
You can always contribute to a Roth IRA as long as you have that amount in earned income, the maximum income limits mean nothing.

Backdoor Roth IRA - Bogleheads

You'll only run into problems if you have deductible Traditional IRA balances while you're doing the conversion but even then you can still do it.
 

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
You can always contribute to a Roth IRA as long as you have that amount in earned income, the maximum income limits mean nothing.

Backdoor Roth IRA - Bogleheads

You'll only run into problems if you have deductible Traditional IRA balances while you're doing the conversion but even then you can still do it.
Maybe I'm not reading this right but what's the catch? This just seems so easy, so why isn't everybody doing it? I was only able to contribute to my Roth for a few years after moving to the US before my income exceeded the limit, so I've just got a paltry 10k or so sitting in my Roth. Reading this article, am I right in thinking I can take 20K cash from my savings account, open a traditional IRA, fund the 20K, and then the next day just flip the funds into my Roth and only pay taxes on whatever value increase occurred over the course of 24 hrs?
 

Intrinsic

Person of Whiteness
<Gold Donor>
14,340
11,886
You still have the max $5,500 contribution limit per year, so couldn't so the whole $20k in one tax year. I met with Scottrade to do a reversal on the contribution I made this year so I wouldn't get hit with the penalty and may look in to this method this year or just find an alternative.
 

Frenzied Wombat

Potato del Grande
14,730
31,802
You still have the max $5,500 contribution limit per year, so couldn't so the whole $20k in one tax year. I met with Scottrade to do a reversal on the contribution I made this year so I wouldn't get hit with the penalty and may look in to this method this year or just find an alternative.
Gotcha. Considering the "back door" is so easy to exploit, I'm surprised the IRS hasn't patched it up or just removed the Roth restrictions entirely.
 

Fedor

<Banned>
17,346
47,327
Gotcha. Considering the "back door" is so easy to exploit, I'm surprised the IRS hasn't patched it up or just removed the Roth restrictions entirely.
The IRS created the backdoor to increase tax revenue. When you do a backdoor Roth you need to pay taxes on a portion of your traditional IRA balances and also convert them to a Roth. If you don't have any though then it's meaningless.