Connect with us

Accounting

Financial advisors are torn over this RMD tax strategy

Published

on

Required minimum distributions can be a touchy subject for retirees and their financial advisors, requiring them to liquidate assets that they may prefer to keep in the market. Frustration around RMDs is often compounded by the tax consequences they present, but advisors say one little-known strategy could help ease the burden — especially as investors wait for stocks to fully recover from a tariff-driven downturn.

The strategy hinges on the unique flexibility of tax withholdings on retirement account distributions

The idea of withholding income taxes from a retirement account distribution isn’t new. Retirees often withhold a set percentage, say 20%, of a distribution for taxes. For example, a retiree can say, “Distribute $20,000 from my IRA, withhold 20% for taxes and send the net $16,000 to me.” But what many advisors miss is the ability to delay tax payments until the end of the year, according to Keith Fenstad, vice president and director of wealth planning at Tanglewood Total Wealth Management in Houston, Texas.

READ MORE: Using tax-aware long-short vehicles to track down alpha

Through this strategy, retirees can take smaller monthly or quarterly distributions without any tax withholding and then make a much larger tax withholding on a distribution toward the end of the year. Thanks to flexible RMD tax payment rules, end-of-year tax withholdings can cover distributions that were made much earlier in the same year.

“Even if that request is made in December, the $4,000 of taxes withheld is spread across the previous quarterly tax payment periods,” Fenstad said.

Kicking the tax can down the road

Delaying tax payments on RMDs can offer a few key advantages, according to Fenstad. For some clients who simply don’t want the headache of making multiple tax payments throughout the year, delaying tax withholdings on RMDs can simplify the process.

“We have clients who might withhold 60%, 70% of their RMD just to cover all their taxes,” Fenstad said. That way, “They don’t have to fool with quarterly estimates.”

This approach can also help address a potential underpayment penalty resulting from a previously missed estimated tax payment, he said. Delaying tax withholdings on RMDs could be an especially useful strategy for certain clients who expect their investments to continue to recover from April’s market low, Fenstad said.

READ MORE: HSA limits to get a modest bump

Mark Stancato, founder and lead advisor at VIP Wealth Advisors in Decatur, Georgia, described the strategy as a “calculated risk.”

“Delaying the timing of an RMD until later in the year can be an effective way to improve tax efficiency during a market downturn — but the details matter. The key question to ask is where the tax payment is coming from,” he said. “If taxes are withheld directly from the RMD distribution, delaying until year-end may reduce the number of shares that need to be sold — especially if the market recovers. That can help clients avoid locking in unnecessary losses. But if the market declines further, they could end up selling even more at lower prices.”

Other advisors say that delaying tax withholdings can be a helpful strategy regardless of how the market is performing.

“Waiting to sell shares to pay the tax because of a belief that the market will rise is a market timing decision,” said Sammy Grant, principal at Homrich Berg in Sandy Springs, Georgia. “But even if a client or advisor believes the market will experience further declines, waiting to pay the tax due on early-year distributions until year-end is a wise decision. This more pessimistic client can liquidate enough to pay the tax today while leaving the proceeds in a money market inside the IRA, earning 4%-plus for the remainder of the year.”

Not all advisors are on board

Tim Witham, founder of Balanced Life Planning in Villa Hills, Kentucky, said that delaying RMD tax withholdings is a common strategy among some advisors. However, he explained that this approach is often not ideal for many high net worth clients, as they are typically required to take larger distributions than they need for their living expenses. Instead, Witham and other advisors suggest using in-kind withdrawals from a retirement account to a brokerage account to limit a client’s tax liability.

“In a down market, rather than selling funds for IRA distributions, I have coached clients to push securities out of their IRAs in-kind to a brokerage account,” Witham said. “For example, if a small-cap fund in your IRA is down 20%, you can take that fund from an IRA to a brokerage account. … When the fund rebounds, it will do so outside of the IRA, where, if held over a year, the gain would be eligible for long-term capital gains treatment, rather than ordinary income that would occur as a result of an IRA distribution.”

READ MORE: Forget retirement buckets. Advisors prefer these withdrawal strategies

“This strategy puts control with the client and advisor in a down market, rather than hoping for a market rebound by year-end,” he added. “As we all know, hope is not a strategy.”

Other advisors say that navigating a down market through such strategies simply isn’t necessary if a client is invested properly in their retirement accounts. 

“We advise our clients who have reached the magical age of required minimum distributions that there should be a minimum of five years’ worth of distributions invested in liquid high-quality short-term fixed income,” said Michael DeMassa, founder of Forza Wealth in Sarasota, Florida. “In other terms, at least 20% of the IRA should be accessible for required minimum distributions and not subject to stock market volatility. During times of market stress, we can make distributions from the fixed income allocation and not be forced to sell equities at the wrong time.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Accounting

FASAB mulls accounting impact of federal reorganization

Published

on

The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board is asking for input on emerging accounting issues and questions related to reporting entity reorganizations and abolishments as the federal government endures wide-ranging layoffs and reductions in force, including the elimination of entire agencies by the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency.

“Federal agencies and their functions, from time to time, have been reorganized and abolished,” said FASAB in its request for information and comment

Reorganization refers to a transfer, consolidation, coordination, authorization or abolition of one (or more) agency or agencies or a part of their functions. Abolition is a type of reorganization and refers to the whole or part of an agency that does not have, upon the effective date of the reorganization, any functions.

The Trump administration has recently moved to all but eliminate parts of the federal government such as the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and earlier this month, Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee passed a bill that would transfer the responsibilities of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

FASAB issues federal financial accounting standards and provides timely guidance. Practitioner responses to the request for information will support its efforts to identify, research and respond to emerging accounting and reporting issues related to reorganization and abolishment activities, such as transfers of assets and liabilities among federal reporting entities. The input will be used to help inform any potential staff recommendations and alternatives for FASAB to consider regarding short- and long-term actions and updates to federal accounting standards and guidance in this area.

The questions include:

  1. Have any recent or ongoing reorganization activities or events affected the scope of functions, assets, liabilities, net position, revenues, and expenses assigned to your reporting entity (or, for auditors, your auditees)? If so, please describe.
  2. What accounting issues have you (or your auditees) encountered (or do you anticipate) in connection with recent or potential reorganization activities and events?
  3. Please describe the sources of standards and guidance that you (or your auditees) are applying to recent, ongoing, or pending reorganization activities and events.
  4. Have you experienced any difficulties or identified gaps in the accounting and disclosure standards for reorganization activities and events? What potential improvements would you recommend, if any?

FASAB is asking for responses by July 15, 2025, but acknowledged that late or follow-up submissions may be necessary given the provisional nature of the request. Responses should be emailed to [email protected] with “RERA RFI response” on the subject line.

Continue Reading

Accounting

ACCA report shows accounting is considered a gateway to entrepreneurship

Published

on

Over half of accountants see the profession as a gateway for entrepreneurship, according to a new study.

The latest edition of an annual report by the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants found that 54% of North American respondents say they have career ambitions to be entrepreneurs, including 78% of Gen Z respondents. The ACCA surveyed over 10,000 accounting and finance professionals from 175 countries on topics including career ambitions, hybrid working, inclusivity practices, upskilling, mental health and employability issues. 

acca-office.jpg
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants office

Courtesy of ACCA

“Our 2025 data continues to show a workplace in transition, but one of the exciting themes emerging this year is how accountancy training can be a brilliant early career pathway for building entrepreneurial skills,” Jamie Lyon, global head of skills, sectors and technology at the ACCA, said in a statement. “There’s no doubt this in part reflects how career ambitions continue to transform at work.”

Two-thirds of respondents are interested in pursuing accounting careers focused on environmental issues, and 79% agree that reputation on social and humans rights issues would be a key factor in deciding whether to work at an organization.

Employability confidence is high among respondents, with 68% wanting to move roles in the next two years, and 43% expecting their next career role to be outside their current organization. Respondents also favor hybrid work (71%), while only 12% say they want to be in the office full time. Thirty-five percent report their office is fully office-based, up from 23% in 2024. 

Cost of living is the top concern for 41% of respondents — with 56% being dissatisfied with their current wages — followed by the effects of a potential economic downturn (35%). And 39% of respondents reported concern over rising socioeconomic barriers, doubled from 19% in 2024.

Additionally, 46% of respondents say their mental health suffers due to work pressures, and 56% want more support in this area. And the proportion of respondents from North America (52%) who want to move internationally has doubled since 2024 (28%).

Continue Reading

Accounting

SALT, tips and auto loans: A guide to the House GOP tax bill

Published

on

House Republicans’ release of the tax provisions in their massive fiscal bill provides a crucial initial reading of what party leaders think could pass, culminating weeks of intense negotiations among fractious GOP lawmakers. 

But the bill still may change as leaders strike more deals to secure passage in the House. And Senate Republicans are likely to follow their own path, requiring more compromises. 

Business lobbyists notched many of the top tax breaks they were seeking, while avoiding levy increases that were instead targeted at renewable energy projects, immigrants, foundations and colleges. The bill is officially scored as losing $3.7 trillion in revenue, within the $4.5 trillion limit lawmakers set for themselves.

Here’s a rundown of the tax bill’s main provisions impacting individuals and businesses: 

No millionaire tax

House Republicans rejected the so-called “millionaire tax” floated by President Donald Trump, which would have set a higher income tax rate for individuals making more than $2.5 million in a year.

The draft would permanently set the top tax rate for individuals at 37%, extending the rate set by President Donald Trump’s 2017 tax bill. Without new legislation, the top rate is set to expire and would revert back to 39.6%. 

$30,000 SALT limit

The limit on state and local tax deductions would rise to $30,000 – a slight increase from the existing SALT cap, but likely not enough to appease Republicans from high-tax states like California and New York. The proposed SALT cap would be $30,000 for individual filers or married couples filing joint returns but $15,000 for married individuals filing separate returns. 

The bill also would place a new income test on eligibility for the tax deduction, phasing it out for individuals earning more than $200,000, or married couples earning more than $400,000. 

At least five Republican lawmakers rejected the new limit in advance as too low. They could stop the entire tax bill if they stick to their guns. 

Business lobbyists meanwhile beat back an attempt to limit the ability of companies to claim a SALT deduction.

Tips, overtime and autos

Tips and overtime pay would be exempt from income tax through 2028, the end of Trump’s second term, fulfilling — at least for four years — a Trump campaign promise. The GOP bill would also make interest on auto loans deductible through 2028, addressing another Trump campaign promise. All three provisions would be retroactive to the beginning of this year.

Interest expensing

Private equity and other heavily indebted business sectors won a major fight in the tax bill on interest expensing. The bill adds depreciation and amortization when determining the tax deductibility of a company’s debt payments. The maximum amount any company can get in such tax write-offs is calculated as a percentage of earnings. That’s why using EBITDA – which is typically bigger than EBIT — in this process would generate heftier tax deductions.

Carried interest

The bill does not make any changes to the tax treatment of carried interest after a massive lobbying campaign by affected industries. Trump has pushed Republicans to tax carried interest as ordinary income, raising taxes on private equity, venture capitalists and real estate investors.

University endowment tax

Some private universities would face a dramatic tax increase on investment income generated by their endowments, posing a serious penalty to some of the nation’s wealthiest schools.

The provision would create a tiered system of taxation so that wealthy colleges and universities that meet a threshold based on the number of students would pay more. Under Trump’s 2017 tax law, some colleges with the most well-funded endowments currently pay a 1.4% tax on their net investment income. The levy would rise to as high as 21% on institutions with the largest endowments based on their student population.

The provision is a major escalation in Trump’s fight with Harvard and other elite colleges and universities, which he has sought to strong-arm into making curriculum and cultural changes that he favors. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton and MIT would face the maximum 21% tax rate, based on the size of their endowments in 2024, according to data from the NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments.

Private foundation tax

Private foundations also would face an escalating tax based on their size: 2.78% for private foundations with assets between $50 million and $250 million, 5% for entities with assets between $250 million and $5 billion; and 10% for foundations with assets of at least $5 billion, such as the Gates Foundation, a longtime target for Republicans.

Sports teams

The bill would limit write-offs for professional football, basketball, baseball, hockey and soccer franchises that claim deductions connected to the team’s intangible assets, including copyright, patents or designs.

Electric vehicles

A popular consumer tax credit of up to $7,500 for the purchase of an electric vehicle would be fully eliminated by the end of 2026, and only manufacturers that have sold fewer than 200,000 electric vehicles by the end of this year would be eligible to receive it in 2026. Tax incentives for the purchase of commercial electric vehicles and used electric vehicles would also be repealed.

Renewable tax credits

Popular production and investment tax credits for clean electricity would be phased out by the end of 2031 and new requirements against using materials from certain foreign nations would be added. Those credits weren’t set to expire until the later part of 2032 or until carbon emissions from the U.S. electricity sector decline to at least 75% below 2022 levels. A tax credit for the production of nuclear energy would also be phased out by 2031.

Bonus for elderly

Americans aged 65 and older who don’t itemize their taxes would get a $4,000 bonus added to their standard deduction through 2028. That benefit would phase out for individuals making more than $75,000 and couples making more than $150,000. It would be retroactive to the beginning of this year.

Trump had campaigned on ending taxes on Social Security benefits, but that proposal would have run afoul of a special procedure Republicans are using to push through the tax law changes without any Democratic votes. The higher standard deduction is an alternative way of targeting a benefit to the elderly.

Targeting immigrants

Immigrant communities would face a new 5% tax on remittances sent to foreign nations. Many immigrants send a portion of their earnings abroad to support family members in their home countries. Tax credits would be available to reimburse U.S. citizens who send payments abroad.

Multinational corporations benefit

Multinational companies would get an extension of current lower rates on foreign profits, marking a win for corporate America.

Factory incentives

The bill does not include Trump’s call for a lower corporate tax rate for domestic producers, but instead allows 100% depreciation for any new “qualified production property,” like a factory, if construction begins during Trump’s term — beginning on Jan. 20, 2025, and before Jan. 1, 2029, and becomes operational before 2033. That would be a major incentive for new facilities as Trump wields tariffs to drive production to the U.S.

Child tax credit

The maximum child tax credit would rise from $2,000 to $2,500 through 2028 and then drop to $2,000 in subsequent years. 

‘MAGA’ accounts

The bill would create new tax-exempt investment accounts to benefit children, dubbed “MAGA” accounts, referring to his Make America Great Again campaign slogan. The accounts would allow $5,000 in contributions per year and adult children would be able to use the funds for purchasing homes or starting small businesses, in addition to educational expenses. The bill would authorize one-time $1,000 government payments into accounts for children born from 2025 through 2028.

Pass-through deduction

Owners of pass-through businesses would be allowed to exclude 23% of their business income when calculating their taxes, a 3% increase from the current rate. The increase is a win for pass-through firms — partnerships, sole proprietorships and S corporations — which make up the vast majority of businesses in the U.S.  

Research and development

The draft would temporarily reinstate a tax deduction for research and development, a top priority for manufacturers and the tech industry. The deduction will last through the end of 2029.

Continue Reading

Trending