Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

nitpicker

(7,153 posts)
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 11:46 AM Feb 2020

If you have an IRA, 401K, or other deferred compensation retirement account- LISTEN UP

If you have an IRA, 401K, or other deferred compensation retirement account- LISTEN UP


Your beneficiaries may have to take out all the money (and pay taxes on it) within 10 years of your death.

I didn’t know about this until an association e-mailed me that there would be a speaker on ”Securing your Wealth under The SECURE Act”.

I Googled it, and found “SETTING EVERY COMMUNITY UP FOR RETIREMENT ENHANCEMENT” had been incorporated into the provisions of HR 1865, aka Public Law 116-94.

The text https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1865/text?format=txt contains (Division O, near the end) various provisions about retirement accounts.

DUers previously noted https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212826849 certain benefits of those provisions (1. If you hadn’t reached 70 ½ yet by 31 Dec 2019, the deadline for starting required minimum distributions is now 1 Apr the year after the year you reach 72; 2. You can contribute to a traditional IRA if you are working past 70 ½).

HOWEVER, Congress decided to raise revenues.

If somebody died before 1 Jan 2020, the rules didn’t change. BUT the rules changed for many of those who are, or will become, beneficiaries of those who died after 31 Dec 2019. There are exceptions for surviving spouses, beneficiaries (e,g, parents, siblings, cousins, others) no more than 10 years younger than the account owner, disabled and chronically ill persons, and minor children (not grandchildren). However, once minor children reach maturity, whatever is left has to be distributed within 10 years.

For the other beneficiaries of those who have/will die after 31 Dec 2019, one analyst said https://www.myfederalretirement.com/inherit-iras/ the new rules of those beneficiaries having to withdraw within 10 years of death apply not just to Traditional IRAs, but also to Roth IRAs, regular 401Ks, TSPs that get rolled over into “inherited” IRAs, and other deferred compensation retirement accounts. ((TSP is officially still considering if the SECURE Act does apply to it, and TSPs that don’t get rolled over into IRAs must be withdrawn within 5 years.))

These other beneficiaries NO LONGER have the option to stretch payments (and taxes) over their lifetime. Instead, the money has to be distributed to them within 10 years. (There IS the option to have a lump sum at the end of 10 years, but someone suggests this only be done if it’s a Roth IRA or Roth inherited IRA.)

Impact: Granny dies after 31 Dec 2019 and her 60-year-old kid is the beneficiary of $25,000 traditional IRA/401K/etc.

In the first year, under the old rules, this non-exempt beneficiary would have had to take distributions of (at least) $1000 (numbers rounded) and pay income tax on it. Assuming single in a decent job, that’s 22% tax due on it, or $220 on $1000.

If the beneficiary wanted to evenly spread the distribution over the 10 years under the new rules, the annual withdrawal would be $2500. That raises tax due on that to $550.

((plus state taxes))

Double the account amount? Double the federal tax due (on $5000 withdrawn evenly each year) to $1100. The IRS becomes VERY Interested it people fall behind on timely paying of taxes by $1000 or more. The beneficiary should either (1) have the “IRA Custodian” (e.g. bank) withhold the tax due on the distribution, or (2) pay the IRS, via estimated taxes, the applicable tax due no later than the 15th of the month after the calendar year quarter in which the distribution was made.

Let’s not forget the impact on Social Security taxation. Taxable IRA/401k/etc. benefits are counted as income. Unless the beneficiary already has a pension so generous that a full 85% of SS benefits is already taxable, the IRA/etc amount distributed in a year can increase the amount of taxable SS benefits.

Example: The elderly account owner leaves a $250,000 balance in a regular 401k. A non-exempt beneficiary spreading it out over 10 years will have to take distributions averaging $25,000 a year. This will almost certainly cause some (or all) of any SS benefits received to become more-taxable (again unless the other pension/income is so generous that 85% of SS is already taxable). Plus there will be federal income tax due (on a distribution of $25,000 at 22%= $5,500).

In short:

1. It usually doesn’t work anymore to choose a much younger beneficiary ((e.g. adult grandkid)) versus their parent;
2. If you are an account owner, you may want to find some way to ensure beneficiaries can pay distribution taxes;
3. If you are/will be a non-exempt beneficiary, plan on how to handle the accelerated distributions and taxes.

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If you have an IRA, 401K, or other deferred compensation retirement account- LISTEN UP (Original Post) nitpicker Feb 2020 OP
They got rid of the estate tax for the rich but created this tax for the middle class. Beakybird Feb 2020 #1
That's certainly good advice. I never had an IRA or 401K that I didn't spend due to necessity. abqtommy Feb 2020 #2
I'm betting no one turns down Grandma's IRA because they have to pay some taxes. Hoyt Feb 2020 #3
Thinking about it... nitpicker Feb 2020 #6
college financial aid could definitely be impacted genxlib Feb 2020 #9
I planning on spending all the money myself with in 10 years underpants Feb 2020 #4
On your recommendation number 2 genxlib Feb 2020 #5
A disaster MIGHT occur nitpicker Feb 2020 #7
All true genxlib Feb 2020 #8
So is it better to take the one time hit and just withdrawal everything Buckeyeblue Feb 2020 #10

abqtommy

(14,118 posts)
2. That's certainly good advice. I never had an IRA or 401K that I didn't spend due to necessity.
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 11:49 AM
Feb 2020

At least the last few times I cashed out I was over 59 and didn't have to pay penalties, something I
had to remind my financial institution about.

nitpicker

(7,153 posts)
6. Thinking about it...
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 12:27 PM
Feb 2020

It all depends.

If the parents are in a much higher tax bracket than the ((non-kiddietaxed)) kid, it MIGHT make sense to have the kid be the beneficiary. But what if this affects college scholarships/grants/other financial aid?

I am not a financial planner or advisor. Please talk to one of them if you need advice.

I was merely noting "many post-2019 beneficiaries won't be able to stretch out distributions anymore".

genxlib

(5,524 posts)
9. college financial aid could definitely be impacted
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 12:56 PM
Feb 2020

We are in the midst of that right now and the calculation definitely assumes that the students will spend a much higher percentage of their money than the parents.

underpants

(182,736 posts)
4. I planning on spending all the money myself with in 10 years
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 11:53 AM
Feb 2020


Once I get established with a good hut being a beach bum should be pretty cheap.

genxlib

(5,524 posts)
5. On your recommendation number 2
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 12:27 PM
Feb 2020

Am I missing something or is this all a net benefit to the beneficiaries.

If they get $25000 in any given year and have to pay $5500 presumably they would have the cash available with that $25000 to pay it.

Yeah, I think it is a consideration but should we actually have to be concerned about the ability to pay those taxes?

Overall, I don't think this is all that terrible. After all, they are simply tax deferred values. The people who put the funds away didn't pay taxes on them so it is not additional taxation. All in all, it is still a better deal than getting a traditional inheritance that has already been taxed.

Or am I missing something.

nitpicker

(7,153 posts)
7. A disaster MIGHT occur
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 12:31 PM
Feb 2020

And the money from the distribution goes to pay expenses.

My point is to have people prepare for the tax-man bite, ideally by having the IRA institution withhold taxes from the distribution (so people aren't tempted to spend all of the gross distribution).

genxlib

(5,524 posts)
8. All true
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 12:52 PM
Feb 2020

And withholding is always preferable to keep the money segregated and ready to pay.

My point was that the taxes would come out of "found money" and not out of their regular budget. In your scenario of a disaster, they are still better off with the extra 80% of the distribution. In reality, they would likely be seeking a taxable distribution even if it wasn't mandatory if personal circumstances demanded it.

In general, I would prefer that there be no mandatory distribution on the heirs. It would be much better to see that as generational seed money to stay in the heir's own personal retirement accounts. It is hard enough for people to set aside retirement savings without purposefully pushing people out of them.

Even so, smart money (far too rare) would find a way to balance the problem elsewhere. For instance, if I inherited the proverbial $2500 mandatory disbursement, I would be looking to ramp up my own 401k and IRA set asides as an offset. It wouldn't work for everyone based on what retirement plans they have access to though.

Buckeyeblue

(5,499 posts)
10. So is it better to take the one time hit and just withdrawal everything
Sun Feb 23, 2020, 01:24 PM
Feb 2020

Say you are a beneficiary on an IRA with $200K in it. Seems like it might be better to take the $180K (minus what you'll pay in taxes) and reinvest that amount. Might get more out of it than slowly pulling the funds out over 10 years.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If you have an IRA, 401K,...