• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Evergreen Small Business

Actionable Insights from Small Business CPAs

  • Home
  • Small Business FAQ
  • Monographs
    • Business Planning Workbook
    • Download Your Free Copy of the Thirteen Word Retirement Plan
    • Five Minute Payroll Monograph (2019 Edition)
    • LLC Operating Agreement
    • Maximizing PPP Loan Forgiveness
    • Maximizing Sec. 199A Deductions Monograph
    • Preparing Form 3115 for the Tangible Property Regulations
    • Preparing U.S. Tax Returns for International Taxpayers
    • Real Estate Tax Loopholes & Secrets
    • Red Portfolio Black Portfolio FAQ and Download
    • Sample Corporate Bylaws
    • Setting Low Salaries for S Corporations
    • Small Business Tax Deduction Secrets
    • Small Businesses and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)
    • Joining Our Affiliate Program
  • Our Bloggers
  • Free LLC Formation Kits
    • Alabama LLC
    • Alaska LLC
    • Arizona LLC
    • Arkansas LLC
    • California LLC
    • Colorado LLC
    • Connecticut LLC
    • Delaware LLC
    • Florida LLC
    • Georgia LLC
    • Hawaii LLC
    • Idaho LLC
    • Illinois LLC
    • Indiana LLC
    • Iowa LLC
    • Kansas LLC
    • Kentucky LLC
    • Louisiana LLC
    • Maine LLC
    • Maryland LLC
    • Massachusetts LLC
    • Michigan LLC
    • Minnesota LLC
    • Mississippi LLC
    • Missouri LLC
    • Montana LLC
    • Nebraska LLC
    • Nevada LLC
    • New Hampshire LLC
    • New Jersey LLC
    • New Mexico LLC
    • New York LLC
    • North Carolina LLC
    • North Dakota LLC
    • Ohio LLC
    • Oklahoma LLC
    • Oregon LLC
    • Pennsylvania LLC
    • Rhode Island LLC
    • South Carolina LLC
    • South Dakota LLC
    • Tennessee LLC
    • Texas LLC
    • Utah LLC
    • Vermont LLC
    • Virginia LLC
    • Washington LLC
    • West Virginia LLC
    • Wisconsin LLC
    • Wyoming LLC
  • S Corporation Kits
    • Alabama S Corporation
    • Alaska S Corporation
    • Arizona S Corporation
    • Arkansas S Corporation
    • California S Corporation
    • Colorado S Corporation
    • Connecticut S Corporation
    • Delaware S Corporation
    • Florida S Corporation
    • Georgia S Corporation
    • Hawaii S Corporation
    • Idaho S Corporation
    • Illinois S Corporation
    • Indiana S Corporation
    • Iowa S Corporation
    • Kansas S Corporation
    • Kentucky S Corporation
    • Louisiana S Corporation
    • Maine S Corporation
    • Maryland S Corporation
    • Massachusetts S Corporation
    • Michigan S Corporation
    • Minnesota S Corporation
    • Mississippi S Corporation
    • Missouri S Corporation
    • Montana S Corporation
    • Nebraska S Corporation
    • Nevada S Corporation
    • New Hampshire S Corporation
    • New Jersey S Corporation
    • New Mexico S Corporation
    • New York S Corporation
    • North Carolina S Corporation
    • North Dakota S Corporation
    • Ohio S Corporation
    • Oklahoma S Corporation
    • Oregon S Corporation
    • Pennsylvania S Corporation
    • Rhode Island S Corporation
    • South Carolina S Corporation
    • South Dakota S Corporation
    • Tennessee S Corporation
    • Texas S Corporation
    • Utah S Corporation
    • Vermont S Corporation
    • Virginia S Corporation
    • Washington S Corporation
    • West Virgina S Corporation
    • Wisconsin S Corporation
    • Wyoming S Corporation
  • Contact Nelson CPA
You are here: Home / personal finance / The Only Times You Should use a Roth-style Account

The Only Times You Should use a Roth-style Account

June 2, 2014 By Stephen Nelson CPA

Picture of man standing in front of sign advertising Blue Moon brand beer
You probably don’t want to use a Roth-style account. Except in once-in-a-blue-moon type situations.

In a couple of recent blog posts (see here and here), I’ve trash-talked the option of using Roth-IRA and Roth-401(k) accounts.

And that trash-talking seems fair given the general inappropriateness of Roth-style accounts for most people.

However, in three or four situations taxpayers probably should use a Roth-style account rather than a traditional 401(k) or traditional IRA account. To be fair, then, let me identify and describe these situations.

People Who Don’t Currently Pay Any (or Much) Income Tax

If someone doesn’t pay income taxes or doesn’t pay much income tax, a Roth-style account probably makes good sense.

The reasoning goes like this: If such a person uses a traditional IRA or 401(k), they don’t get any or much tax savings anyway because they don’t pay any or much tax. And the Roth-style account could save them taxes in the future.

For example, anyone with a below-median-income, a mortgage and children probably doesn’t pay any federal income tax and very possibly doesn’t pay state income tax. This investor should, given the choice, use a Roth-style account rather than a traditional IRA or 401(k).

Another example: If you have school-age children or grandchildren with part-time jobs, because they don’t pay any income taxes typically, a Roth-IRA often makes good sense for them, too. (I’m thinking here that you as a parent or grandparent might want to gift them money which they would use for the Roth account contributions.)

Again, note the logic: If a traditional IRA or 401(k) doesn’t save taxes and in the future a Roth-style account might save taxes, heck, go with the Roth.

That makes sense, right?

People Who Will Probably Always Pay the Top Tax Rate

Okay, so remember that the optimal choice when picking between Roth-style and traditional retirement accounts comes down to the marginal tax rates. And what someone wants to do is “pay the fiddler” when the tax rate is lowest. Usually that’s during retirement.

However if you’re someone who will always pay at the top tax rate, you may as well pay your taxes now by using a Roth-style account. You don’t know for sure that you’ll save income taxes by doing this.

But you will by doing this “lock in” your tax rate in effect, thereby protecting yourself against future tax rate increases. You will also reduce or eliminate the need to take required minimum distributions from your retirement accounts.

Caution: If a flattened tax rate structure ever occurs—and legislators regularly propose this—you do not want to convert or to have already converted to a Roth-style account. Rather, you want to wait for the flattened rates–and then convert.

By the way, you probably don’t need to start thinking you’ll always be in the top tax rate until you have something in excess of $10,000,000 in investments producing investment income something in excess of $500,000 annually.

People Who Want to Tax-diversify

Okay, this is maybe a little far-fetched, but you will sometimes hear pretty smart people talk about using Roth-IRAs and Roth-401(k)s as a way to diversify the tax risks connected to your investments.

As a tax accountant, I am not a fan of trying to guess what Congress will do.

But that said, this tax diversification angle is probably a good idea for people with larger balances. (Say over $2,000,000?)

Who knows what Congress might do in the future with regard to retirement accounts (including both traditional IRA and 401(k) accounts and also Roth-style accounts).

But very possibly, Roth-style accounts might be treated differently in any re-writing of pension tax laws. And if that were the case, you might benefit from having your money sprinkled among a few different types of retirement accounts.

For example, decades ago, tax law levied an excise tax on large six-figure distributions from retirement accounts. If Congress ever reinstituted this excise tax, past implicit political promises to the electorate might stop Congress from applying such a tax to Roth accounts.

People With a Decimated Portfolio—Maybe

So one final category of investor may want to consider using a Roth-style account: someone with a massively beat-up IRA account balance and money outside of tax-deferred accounts to pay for a conversion.

But let me explain with an example.

Suppose that you have a growing $1,000,000 IRA balance and that you also know by the time you retire this money will have doubled. Or even quadrupled.

Further suppose that (perhaps due to some financial system meltdown like the one recently experienced) that the IRA balance declines by half. So, boom, the $1,000,000 balance becomes a $500,000 balance.

In this situation, it’s probably not crazy to consider converting the $500,000 IRA to a Roth-IRA. Yes, you’ll pay a hefty tax rate on this conversion. Perhaps 40% of the $500,000, so $200,000?

But assuming the IRA balance rebounds to $1,000,000 and that it then continues to grow, you may (in effect) lock in your tax bill at a low level due to the temporarily depressed account balance.

Note: People who did this during the Great Recession triggered bear market ended up really well obviously… and though risky what they were betting implicitly was that their 401(k) and IRA accounts really had not been halved in value no matter what the statements from the mutual fund company or their investor adviser said… Rather, these people assumed that the craziness in the capital markets only made it seem that way.

Filed Under: personal finance

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Steve says

    June 9, 2014 at 11:49 pm

    Are there any calculations (and assumptions) behind your $10,000,000, $500,000, and $2000,000 numbers/rules of thumb? Or are they just off the cuff guesses?

    • Steve says

      June 10, 2014 at 6:22 pm

      Fair questions. So let me share my perhaps shoot-from-the-hip but still sort of quantitative logic.

      With regard to the $10,000,000 investment portfolio threshold, what I roughly figure is that at this portfolio size, with a 5% return, a taxpayer is looking at a minimum of $500,000 a year in investment income. And that’s enough investment income to put the taxpayer into today’s top marginal bracket and also (I’m guessing here) future top marginal tax brackets. At $500,000 of investment income, for example, the person is probably into and maybe even well into the top 39.6% federal bracket ($450,000 of taxable income for married filing joint taxpayers). Furthermore, the taxpayer will be paying the Medicare surtax or net investment income tax (that kicks in at $250,000 for married filing joint taxpayers). Note too that the personal exemptions phaseout for a married filing joint taxpayer is complete at $422,500 of adjusted gross income. And then the itemized deductions phaseout (which starts at $300,000 adjusted gross income) is pretty far along too. These are 2013 values BTW…

      Note: People using head of household, single or married filing separate filing statuses would move into the top marginal bracket at lower income levels. That lower income level would mean, following my logic, that they should use a lower threshold for going with a Roth.

      The $2,000,000 threshold for justifying thinking about tax diversification was even rougher. But here’s my thinking: With a $1,000,000 or less of traditional retirement savings (and the resulting perhaps $50,000 distrbution) you’re probably not paying that much income tax and so don’t need to worry that much about diversifying tax-style risks. At double that amount, or $2,000,000, you are paying or starting to pay pretty heavy income taxes. And so thinking about tax diversification makes sense.

      • SJ says

        June 11, 2014 at 11:51 pm

        Basic question: Assuming the investor is being prudent taxwise, living off the yield and not realizing capital gains on a yearly basis, how would he/she generate 5% income? I see 3.1% yield on VTIAX, 1.8% on VTSAX and 2.6% on VBLTX. Thanks.

        • Steve says

          June 16, 2014 at 4:59 pm

          Maybe the five percent figure is too generous… but if you have (per our hypothetical example) $10,000,000, I would argue (in a friendly way!) that you probably can spend $500,000 a year.

          You’ll be getting some dividends. You’ll have some interest income. And you can realize and then spend some capital gains.

          BTW, I use David Swensen’s formula as described in more detail here and I think that formula averages a little over five percent if you’re talking not any specific year but decades.

Primary Sidebar

Welcome

Nelson CPA publishes this blog to help and encourage small business owners. Click here to learn more about our firm.

S corporation Tools

Use our S corporation tax savings calculator to make a quick estimate of the annual tax savings per owner.

Use our S corporation reasonable compensation calculator to estimate appropriate shareholder-employee salaries.

Featured Posts

Changing your Washington state residency may be a tax planning gambit you need to consider

Changing Your Washington State Residency

Okay, first point, if you want to change your residency or domicile from Washington state to some other state? That’s a question you answer with the … [Read More...] about Changing Your Washington State Residency

Washington state's estate tax hits income in respect of a decedent particularly hard. Especially when an estate pays federal estate taxes.

The Washington Estate Tax Income in Respect of Decedent Problem

Washington state’s estate tax hits only a small percentage of the state’s decedents. (The threshold for paying tax is $3,000,000, and though the data … [Read More...] about The Washington Estate Tax Income in Respect of Decedent Problem

Washington state estate tax pushes wealthy residents to consider estate planning options.

Planning for the 35% Washington State Estate Tax

Washington state levies an estate tax of up to 35% on estates of decedents dying on or after July 1 2025. That new rate is by far the highest estate … [Read More...] about Planning for the 35% Washington State Estate Tax

International tax issues?

Preparing US tax returns for international taxpayers

Maximize S corporation tax savings

Setting Low S Corporation Salaries

Updated for 2019 tax year changes and now available in print from Amazon!!

Maximizing Sec. 199A Deductions

Free retirement planning help

Picture of Thirteen Word Retirement Plan book

Need to help clients with their PPP loan forgiveness applications?

Recent Comments

  • Planning for the 35% Washington State Estate Tax - Evergreen Small Business on Washington’s Qualified Family-Owned Business Interest Estate Tax Deduction: Updated for 2025
  • Stephen Nelson CPA on Washington State Professional Services Sales Tax
  • Mark Freeman on Washington State Professional Services Sales Tax
  • Washington State Professional Services Sales Tax - Evergreen Small Business on Washington’s Qualified Family-Owned Business Interest Estate Tax Deduction: Updated for 2025
  • The New Big Beautiful Section 199A Deduction - Evergreen Small Business on Big Beautiful Section 199A Calculator

Archives

Copyright © 2025 Stephen L. Nelson, Inc. · News Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress