Personal Finance

How high earners can use a backdoor Roth IRA

Published

9 months ago

September 5, 2024

IRA access, tax breaks can phase out for high earners

IRAs have a $7,000 annual contribution limit for 2024. Investors age 50 or older can save an extra $1,000, or $8,000 total this year.

Investors who save in a pretax IRA typically get a tax deduction on their contributions. However, they generally pay income tax later on earnings and withdrawals. Roth contributions don’t get the same upfront tax break: Investors fund Roth IRAs with after-tax money, but generally don’t pay income taxes on earnings or withdrawals in retirement.

Maximizing your Social Security benefits

Many high earners can’t make the most of these tax-advantaged accounts, though.

For example, married couples who file a joint tax return can’t contribute to a Roth IRA in 2024 if their modified adjusted gross income is $240,000 or more. The income threshold for single filers is $161,000. (Eligibility starts to phase out even before these dollar thresholds, reducing how much investors can contribute.)

Likewise, there are income limits on deductibility for pretax (also known as “traditional”) IRAs, for those who also have access to a workplace retirement plan like a 401(k).

For example, single filers with income of $87,000 or more in 2024 don’t get a tax deduction for contributions to a traditional IRA, if they are covered by a retirement plan at work.

The same holds true for married couples filing jointly. For example, if your spouse participates in a 401(k) plan at work, you don’t get a deduction on IRA contributions if your joint income is $240,000 or more. If you are the one who participates in workplace 401(k), the limit is $143,000. (Again, you may only get a partial deduction below these dollar thresholds due to income phaseouts.)

The ‘only reason’ to save in a nondeductible IRA

Lordhenrivoton | E+ | Getty Images

High earners can contribute to a so-called nondeductible IRA, however.

This is a traditional IRA, but investors don’t get a tax deduction for their contributions; they fund the accounts with after-tax money. Investors owe income taxes on growth later, upon withdrawal.

The ability to use the backdoor Roth IRA is a major benefit of these accounts, tax experts said.

It only applies to investors who make too much money to contribute directly to a Roth IRA or make a tax-deductible contribution to a traditional IRA, Slott said.

Here’s the basic strategy: A high-income investor would make a nondeductible contribution to their traditional IRA and then quickly convert the funds to their Roth IRA.

The idea that you could work longer if you didn’t save enough is just not true: Teresa Ghilarducci

“The only reason you’d do [a nondeductible IRA] is if the intention was to do a backdoor Roth,” Slott said.

After making the nondeductible contribution, Slott recommends waiting about a month before converting the funds to a Roth IRA. This ensures your IRA statement reflects the nondeductible contribution, in case the IRS should ever require proof, he said.

Some investors may also be able to take advantage of a similar strategy in their 401(k) plan, the so-called mega backdoor Roth conversion. This entails shifting after-tax 401(k) contributions to a Roth account. However, the strategy isn’t available to everyone.

“All high wage earners should consider looking at both a backdoor Roth IRA and a mega backdoor Roth IRA if they can’t set up a Roth IRA,” said Ted Jenkin, a certified financial planner and founder of oXYGen Financial, based in Atlanta. He’s also a member of the CNBC Financial Advisor Council.

When a nondeductible IRA doesn’t make sense

A nondeductible IRA likely doesn’t make sense for investors who don’t intend to utilize the backdoor Roth strategy, according to financial advisors. In such cases, the investor would just let contributions stay in the nondeductible IRA.

For one, nondeductible IRA contributions carry potentially burdensome administrative and recordkeeping requirements, Slott said.

“It’s a life sentence,” he said.

Taxpayers have to file a Form 8606 to the IRS every year to keep track of their after-tax contributions to a nondeductible IRA, according to Arnold & Mote Wealth Management, based in Hiawatha, Iowa. Withdrawals “add more complexity” to that administrative lift, it added.

Why taxable brokerage accounts ‘are probably better’

Momo Productions | Digitalvision | Getty Images

Without a backdoor Roth in play, most investors would be better suited by saving in a taxable brokerage account rather than a nondeductible IRA, advisors said. That’s because investors using the former will likely end up paying less in tax on their profits over the long term.

Taxable brokerage accounts “are probably better in most aspects,” Slott said.

Investors who hold assets like stocks in a taxable brokerage account for more than a year generally pay a favorable rate on their profits relative to other income taxes.

These “long term” capital gains tax rates — which only apply in the year investors sell their asset — are as high as 20% at the federal level. (High earners may also owe a 3.8% “Medicare surtax” on profits.)

By comparison, the top marginal income tax rate is 37%. Investors in nondeductible IRAs are subject to these generally higher rates on earnings upon withdrawal.

While taxable brokerage account investors pay taxes each year on dividend income, such taxes are generally not enough to negate the relative tax benefits of such accounts, advisors said.

“The tax deferral of non-deductible IRAs can be an advantage for some,” according to Arnold & Mote Wealth Management. “However, we find that this is quite rare.”

Additionally, investors in taxable brokerage accounts can generally access their funds anytime without penalty, whereas IRAs generally carry tax penalties when earnings are tapped before age 59½. (There are some IRA exceptions, however.)

Taxable accounts have no required minimum distributions while the account holder is alive, unlike traditional and nondeductible IRAs.

“A taxable account provides the flexibility to add money and take money out with few limits, penalties, or restrictions,” Judith Ward, a certified financial planner at T. Rowe Price, an asset manager, wrote recently.

Personal Finance

How appealing property taxes can benefit new homeowners

Published

19 hours ago

May 24, 2025

Business Finance News

If you just bought a house, it may be a good time to check the accuracy of your property tax assessment, experts say.

Your property tax assessment is the way officials determine the value of your property for tax purposes. Inaccuracies about your home that factor into that formula could mean that you’re overpaying.

If it’s inaccurate, you likely have most of the essential documents you need to appeal, as part of your recent home purchase, according to Sal Cataldo, a real estate lawyer and partner at O’Doherty & Cataldo in Sayville, New York.

The title report, for instance, is going to tell you the age of the house, Cataldo said. You might have a home inspection report on hand that details the property’s flaws, as well as an appraisal and your mortgage, which show the value of the house and the comparable value in the neighborhood.

“You’ve gotten a wealth of information about your house, whether you realize it or not,” Cataldo said.

A home sale will typically trigger a property tax reassessment because the property is changing hands, with the new market value applied to the assessment. But the specific rules of when the new value is applied and the frequency of reassessments will depend on your area.

Here’s why it may be valuable to add reviewing your property tax assessment to your to-do list as a newly minted homeowner:

Property taxes on the rise

In addition to your mortgage payment, home insurance and maintenance costs, property taxes are another factor to consider as you assess your housing expenses.

In recent years, property taxes have climbed because of rising home values and tax rates.

The median property tax bill in the U.S. in 2024 was $3,500, up 2.8% from $3,349 in 2023, according to an April report by Realtor.

Home affordability plummets: Here's what's needed to balance the market

How much you pay varies widely depending on where you live, and some areas see higher bills and price hikes.

As of 2023, the median property tax for homeowners in New York City was $9,937, LendingTree found in a recent report. The city ranks first among the metropolitan areas with the highest median property taxes. Rounding out the top three are San Jose, California and San Francisco, where homeowners paid a median $9,554 and $8,156, respectively.

Inaccuracies may be costing you

It’s not uncommon for properties to be over-assessed, meaning you end up paying more taxes than you should be, said Pete Sepp, president of the National Taxpayers Union Foundation: “It pays to check.”

Sometimes it’s because details in your assessment were never corrected over the years, such as an incorrect square footage of livable space or the amount of bathrooms that are actually in your home.

NTUF estimates 30% to 60% of taxable property in the U.S. is over-assessed, based on reports from individual state tax assessors.

Success in the appeal can lead to savings for several years as the change becomes the basis for the next assessment, said Sepp. While some state or local governments reassess annually, others have less-frequent cycles with gaps of several years. Some have no set schedule at all.

Over 40% of homeowners across the U.S. could potentially save $100 or more per year by protesting their assessment value, with median savings of $539 a year, per Realtor.com estimates.

Personal Finance

Deferred capital gains tax on mutual funds: Lawmakers pitch rule change

Published

1 day ago

May 23, 2025

Business Finance News

Artistgndphotography | E+ | Getty Images

If you own mutual funds, year-end payouts can trigger a surprise tax bill — even when you haven’t sold the underlying investment. But some lawmakers want to change that.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, this week introduced a bill, known as the Generate Retirement Ownership Through Long-Term Holding, or GROWTH, Act. If enacted, the bill would defer reinvested mutual fund capital gains taxes until investors sell their shares.

Bipartisan House lawmakers introduced a similar bill in March.

Why mutual funds incur capital gains tax

When you own mutual funds in a pre-tax 401(k) or individual retirement account, growth is tax-deferred. But if you hold assets in a brokerage account, capital gains distributions and dividends incur yearly taxes.

Depending on performance, some mutual funds can spit off substantial gains during the fourth quarter. In 2024, some paid double-digit distributions, Morningstar estimated.

These payouts are subject to long-term capital gains taxes of 0%, 15% or 20%, depending on your taxable income. Some higher earners also pay an extra 3.8% surcharge on investment earnings.

About $7 trillion of long-term mutual fund assets held outside of retirement accounts could be impacted by the legislation, according to the Investment Company Institute, which represents the asset management industry.

Bill would ‘provide parity’ for mutual funds

In a statement Wednesday, Cornyn described the mutual fund proposal as a “no-brainer” that would “help provide parity with other investment options.”

If enacted, the proposal would “incentivize Americans to save and invest for their long-term goals” without the stress of an “unexpected tax bill,” Eric Pan, president and CEO of the Investment Company Institute, said in a statement following the bill’s introduction.

However, it’s unclear whether the bill will advance amid competing priorities. Lawmakers are wrestling over President Donald Trump‘s multi-trillion-dollar tax and spending package, which passed in the House on Thursday, and could face hurdles in the Senate.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has also asked Congress to raise the debt ceiling before August to avert a government shutdown.

Switch to exchange-traded funds

While deferring yearly taxes could benefit some investors, you could also make portfolio changes, financial experts say.

You can avoid mutual fund payouts by switching to similar exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, which typically disburse less income, Tommy Lucas, a certified financial planner and enrolled agent at Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo in Orlando, Florida, previously told CNBC.

Of course, the trade could also trigger taxes if the mutual fund has embedded gains, which may require some planning, he said.

Alternatively, investors could opt to keep mutual funds in tax-deferred accounts, such as pre-tax 401(k)s or IRAs.

House advances President Trump's tax & spending bill

Personal Finance

What Medicaid, SNAP cuts in House Republican bill mean for benefits

Published

2 days ago

May 23, 2025

Business Finance News

A “Save Medicaid” sign is affixed to the podium for the House Democrats’ press event to oppose the Republicans’ budget on the House steps of the Capitol on Tuesday, February 25, 2024.

Bill Clark | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

The multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday includes historic spending cuts to Medicaid health coverage and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Now, it is up to the Senate to consider the changes — and to perhaps propose its own.

As it stands, the legislation — called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — would slash Medicaid spending by roughly $700 billion and SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, by about $300 billion.

“Bottom line is, a lot of people will lose benefits, including people who are entitled to these benefits and who are not the target population of this bill,” said Jennifer Wagner, director of Medicaid eligibility enrollment at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The cuts to Medicaid and SNAP — the largest in the programs’ histories — come as the reconciliation bill would add roughly $3 trillion to the nation’s debt including interest over the next decade, estimates the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

To help pay for a variety of tax perks included in the bill, House Republicans have targeted Medicaid and SNAP for savings.

“We don’t want any waste, fraud or abuse,” President Donald Trump said Tuesday on Newsmax when asked about prospective Medicaid changes. “Other than that, we’re leaving it.”

Likewise, some Republican leaders have pointed to rooting out abuse of SNAP benefits.

One way House Republicans are seeking to curb the programs’ spending is through new work requirements.

New Medicaid work requirements to get earlier date

Under the House proposal, new Medicaid work requirements will apply to people who are covered through the Affordable Care Act expansion. To be eligible, those individuals will need to participate in qualifying activities for at least 80 hours per month unless they can prove they have an approved exemption, according to Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of KFF’s Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured.

In last-minute negotiations, House Republicans moved the date for implementing those work requirements to no later than Dec. 31, 2026, up from a previously proposed effective date of Jan. 1, 2029 — around two years earlier than the original version, CBPP’s Wagner noted.

Notably, it also gives states permission to start implementing the work requirements earlier than that date.

“On the Medicaid side, the work requirement is arguably the harshest provision,” Wagner said. “It will lead to the greatest cuts of enrollment in Medicaid.”

Rep. Chip Roy on House tax bill: Hope the Senate addresses issues around deficit and Medicaid

The new accelerated timeline also doesn’t allow time for rulemaking, a process by which the public can submit comments, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may respond to those submissions, Wagner noted. Instead, the legislative proposal calls for guidance to be issued by the end of 2025, which she said is a “big deal” because it eliminates the opportunity for adjustments to be made in response to public comments.

Moving up the effective date also limits the ability to conduct public outreach to notify individuals of the coming changes, said Tolbert of KFF. States will also have less time to adjust their systems to track whether individuals are working the required number of hours or engaging in other necessary activities, she said.

CMS Administrator Dr. Oz: Major goal in Medicaid is to align the federal government with the states

Within the work requirements, the House also moved to limit the discretion to determine other medical conditions that may make someone exempt that had been in the original version, Wagner said.

Notably, the proposal also calls for states to conduct more frequent eligibility redeterminations for adults who are eligible for Medicaid through Affordable Care Act expansions. Starting Dec. 31, 2026, states will be required to conduct redeterminations every six months, compared to current requirements that require eligibility reviews within 12 months of changes in a beneficiary’s circumstances, according to KFF.

The increased frequency of the redeterminations are “likely to have a big impact,” Tolbert said.

Ultimately, the work requirements may make it difficult for people to access the health coverage they need, she said.

“What this may end up doing is having the opposite of the intended effect,” Tolbert said. “They may lose access to the very treatments and services that are enabling them to work.”

SNAP work requirements would be expanded

Under the House Republican bill, work requirements would also be expanded for SNAP benefits.

Individuals ages 18 to 54 who have no dependents and are able to work are already face SNAP benefit limitations based on 80-hour per month work requirements.

The proposal would extend those requirements to individuals ages 55 to 64, as well as households with children, unless they are under age seven. In addition, states would also be limited in the flexibility they may provide with waivers of the work requirements or discretionary exemptions, according to the Urban Institute.

In addition, federal funding cuts would make it so states would have to contribute more toward benefits and administration of the program.

Ultimately, those changes could take away food assistance for millions, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.